Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Should juvenile penalties be different from adults
Differences and similarities between juvenile and adult criminal systems
Differences and similarities between juvenile and adult criminal systems
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Should juvenile penalties be different from adults
Every year, in the U.S alone, approximately over five hundred thousand violent crimes are committed. In 2008, seventy-three thousand of these violent crimes were committed by juveniles. When you hear about murderers, rapists, and other criminals, automatically, your mind set wants these criminals sentenced to prison for a very long time. There is no second guessing when it comes to these extreme criminals, they should be punished for the severe crimes committed. Now, lets say the criminal was a fifteen year old, suddenly people begin to question if giving them the same sentencing as an “adult” would be appropriate. Many will say it is wrong to try a juvenile as an adult for various reasons, but by committing these violent crimes they stopped being children and should be tried as adults. Regardless of the age, criminals are criminals and they should all be tried the same, age does not define adulthood. Juvenile crimes are no different from adult crimes, teens know the difference between wrong and right, ignorance and foolishness are two different things, if the criminal has the ability to plan out the crime then they will be prepared to do the time. Children as young as thirteen years old are being tried as adults and sentenced to die in prison. You may ask, “Doesn't that seem a bit too extreme?” Nevertheless, the sentencing does is not nearly as extreme when compared to the crime committed. In one case three of five Florida teenagers, Denver Jarvis (15), Michael Bent (15) and Jesus Mendez (16), were accused of setting Michael Brewer (15) on fire over a $40 video game debt. The boys left young Brewer with severe burns over, what reporters claim to be, 65 percent of his body. These three boys attempted a harsh felony, second degr... ... middle of paper ... ...uveniles once they decide to make adult choices and act as one. To sum up, we can not accurately put a label on someone and call them an adult. Many people assume that because these ‘kids’ are under 18 they deserve special treatments. Wrong, do not let age blind you from the crime which was committed. These juveniles deserve the punishment which is thrown at them, they do not deserve an opportunity to get away with it and be happy, while the victim and or family is left to suffer. Think of it this way, your 14 year old son was murdered by two other 14 year old boys because your son would not let them borrow his homework. Yeah, tables changed now have they not? Adulthood can not be defined by a number, it should be based upon actions the individual takes. Juveniles should most definitely be tried as adults regardless of the age, the crime committed speaks for itself.
Many people say that the systems first priority should be to protect the public from the juvenile criminals that are a danger to others. Once the juveniles enter the system there is however, arguments on what should be done with them. Especially for those deemed too dangerous to be released back to their parents. Some want them locked away for as long as possible without rehabilitation, thinking that it will halt their criminal actions. One way to do this they argue would be to send them into an adult court. This has been a large way to reform the juvenile system, by lowering the age limits. I believe in certain cases this is the best method for unforgiving juveniles convicted of murder, as in the case of Ronald Duncan, who got away with a much lesser sentence due to his age. However another juvenile, Geri Vance, was old enough to be sent into the adult court, which caused him t...
Supreme Court ruling Graham v. Florida (2010) banned the use of life without parole for juveniles who committed non-homicide crimes, and Roper v. Simmons (2005) abolished the use of the death penalty for juvenile offenders. They both argued that these sentences violated the 8th Amendment, which prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. While these landmark cases made great strides for the rights of minors passing through the criminal justice system, they are just the first steps in creating a juvenile justice system that takes into consideration the vast differences between adolescents and adults. Using sociological (Butler, 2010) and legal (Harvard Law Review, 2010) documents, this essay will explicate why the next such step to be taken is entirely eliminating the use of the life without parole sentence for juveniles, regardless of the nature of the crime being charged.
Every year, children as young as thirteen and fourteen are sentenced to die in prison in the United States. Judges rule these sentences without considering factors such as age and life circumstances. According to studies, there are about 2000 children serving juvenile sentences in the United States (Nellis 30). Further, Studies indicated that 25 percent of the young individuals serving life without parole were convicted accomplice liability, meaning they may not have committed the crime or may not know the primary perpetrators of the crime (Steinberg and Scott 54). All this happens despite the global consensus that children should not handle the same way as adults. This paper explores juvenile life sentencing as a social issue that is affecting
Although some would argue that juveniles undergo a series of brain development in which they lose brain cells that control their impulses, risk taking, and self-control (Thompson 46). However this lost during development does not excuse juvenile from their accountability, instead they should acquire special attention, proper nurturing and guidance during development in order to help them make better decisions. Thus teenagers accused of violent crimes should be tried and sentenced justly, regardless of age, to ensure the law's equality and educate juveniles regarding the potential severity of their actions' consequences. That is how we'll be able prevent future acts of violence and crimes from occurring in society.
Juveniles are more than just kids. They are capable of doing anything an adult is capable of doing. One has probably heard the saying, “If you want to be treated like an adult, then act like an adult.” If they’re going to do crimes that “only” adults are capable of doing, then they should treated like an adult and be tried and sentenced like one. Imagine being close to a murder victim, wouldn’t you want them to feel hell? “How would you feel if you never got to see your child alive again while their killer served only a short sentence before being released from jail?” (hchs1259). This quote hits hard. One can only imagine being in the position of a parent whose child was murdered.
A crime is a crime regardless of age. If they did the crime, they should do the time. Juveniles try to push the law to the limits due to their age. They are unaware and don’t realize their criminal history will follow them all their lives. Juvenile offenders should be tried and punished as adults based on the crime, criminal history of the individual, and the personality of the offender.
Today?s court system is left with many difficult decisions. One of the most controversial being whether to try juveniles as adults or not. With the number of children in adult prisons and jails rising rapidly, questions are being asked as to why children have been committing such heinous crimes and how will they be stopped. The fact of the matter is that it is not always the children's fault for their poor choices and actions; they are merely a victim of their environment or their parents. Another question asked is how young is too young. Children who are too young to see an R rated film unaccompanied are being sent to adult prisons. The only boundaries that seem to matter when it comes to being an adult are laws that restrain kids from things such as alcohol, pornography, and other materials seen as unethical. Children that are sent to adult prison are going to be subjected to even more unprincipled ideas and scenes. When children can be sent to jail for something as minor as a smash and grab burglary, the judicial system has errors. The laws that send juveniles to adult prisons are inhumane, immoral, and unjust. Kids are often incompetent, which leads to unfair trials. Adult prisons are also very dangerous for minors, and in many cases this leads to more juvenile crimes.
Like the saying says with age comes wisdom, because of there more experiences they should know better. In the article, “Rethinking Juvenile Justice” Schwartz argues that juveniles should be treated like minors because sentencing them as adults cause more harm than good. Also sentencing them life sentences aren’t fair because it won’t help rehabilitate them but make them more accessible to crime. Instead of making them law binding citizens they will think there life has little value and commit more crimes and develop the mind of a criminal .Schwartz states, “But juvenile justice experts say that locking up young people with hardened adult criminals did more harm than good. That realization, along with a sharp drop in violent crime and new scientific research showing that teenagers ' brains are not fully developed, began turning the tide away from this get-tough approach”. Schwartz implies that young criminals should not be compared to adult criminals who were more aware of their crimes. He believes that they still have a chance to do their part in society. They still have a chance to become law abiding
In conclusion, blameworthy teenagers should be fully responsible of their actions and be tried as adults. This will serve our country and others for the better and avoid future acts of crime from these delinquents. There have been various occasions in which young adolescents commit adult crimes and have been let off, it is time that they begin being tried as adults and given the requisite sentences. No teen should be let off to have another chance at committing another crime.
Every day in the news there are stories about children killing other children. An eight year old finds his parents gun, shoots and kills his little sister. The boy will not be charged with murder because he is too young to be held accountable. A teenage girl breaks up with her sixteen-year-old boyfriend. He does not want to break up so he rapes and slits her throat. If he cannot have her, no one will. The sixteen year old is charged with aggravated first-degree murder and sentenced to life without parole in prison. He will go straight to an adult facility. His family is fighting to have him moved to a juvenile facility until he turns seventeen. Juvenile offenders that commit heinous crimes should be sent to adult facilities.
Teens who commit violent crimes should be tried as an adult. Anybody who aims a weapon at a minor or an adult without a logical reasoning are dangerous. People don’t have the potential to know what the threatening individual will be like in 5, 10, or 15 years. Minors are able to understand what the consequences are if they commit a violent crime.
As human being we all do things that can lead us to great consequences. Our media has created a big picture of criminals, as a big horrible factor that would lead to destruction. The media have come to a conclusion, that just because we do things that are against the law, we are the bad people and need to lock away. Many people have discussed this very important topic, but I certainly believe Juvenile offenders should not be tried as an adult.
In the contemporary days where we have witnessed humans under the age of the legal adult limit of 18 have been prone to commit horrendous crimes that one would consider a minor wouldn't possibly do. The reality in modern times with the heavy influences of society the developing minds of young human beings have been subject to dealing with heavy emotions that some have fallen into doing damage to someone or to something. After the damage has been done, one must ask themselves, how should we handle the juvenile criminals? In the past some children as young as 14 have been sentenced to life in prison without parole. This means they will never
Age does not make any crime less serious, homicide at the age of 15 is a homicide at the age of 19, they would never bring back the person they kill, and they would never restore the family that they destroyed. They should be tried as adults, because if they are allowed to break the law and commit crimes they have to be responsible and face up to what they did, and learn from their mistakes and understand that their actions and their behavior have consequences. If a juvenile is mature enough to commit an adult crime they have to be punishment according to the adult law. The system does not have to be fair with a criminal, they have to be severe because each criminal have to be sentence with the magnitude of their crimes and the age does not have to contribute with the decision. Is time for people to change what they think juveniles are not kids they know, and understand what are they doing, and then they have to face
Juveniles who have committed heinous crimes should be punished severely despite their age. According to Elena Kagan, “‘Mandatory life without parole for a juvenile precludes consideration of his chronological age and failure to appreciate risks and consequences. I think what she was trying to show us is to believe that those who committed a crime should accept their failure and come to an understanding of the consequences of such crimes. I think this is too harsh for teens because most teens doesn’t fully understand the consequences of the crime and teens isn’t considered an adult yet. They are young who deserve more guidance and explanations about the risks and consequences to their wrong doing. Kagan argued that juvenile who committed crime are immature and eager to perform an awful act.