The Boot Camp Debate
In any of today's society no matter where you look there will be some evidence of crime present. This statement derives from a sociologist theory that says no society can exists without crime. The government is constantly looking for new ways to deal with these reoccurring problems. The focus has been placed upon the government to look into young offenders and the style used to punish them. Weapons possession is quite common among the youth, at least in urban Canada, between one-third and one quarter of students surveyed indicated that they had carried some form of weapon at school over the previous year. Data drawn from Statistics Canada has revealed that the number of reported incidents of violent crimes by males aged 12-17 have risen 64% and more than doubled for females during the decade beginning in 1989 and ending in 1999. A study conducted in Southern Ontario, exploring student perceptions of violence in schools, revealed significant levels of fear relating to possible victimisation. It is these more serious crimes involving young offenders that the government has been forced to deal with. Many suggestions have been made and many bills have been voted on but still no "sure fire" solution to the problem exists. The latest idea brewing in Parliament is the use of boot camps to punish young offenders; however others believe sending young offenders to boot camp is not the answer and there are more efficient ways to correct their negative behaviour.
The newest "brain-storm" that politicians have dwelled upon is sending young offenders that commit serious offences to boot camp. The first question that comes to mind is what is a boot camp? A boot camp is an alternative place to send youths between the ages of 12-17 who commit serious criminal offences. Boot camps have five basic goals: (1) incapacitation, (2) deterrence, (3) rehabilitation, (4) reduction of prison costs and crowding, and (5) punishment (Colledge & Gerber, 1998). These facilities are designed to resocialize the "bad-boys" and "bad-girls" into citizens that will be accepted back into society. The plan is to use a military style to punish the kids and in return teach them discipline and transform them back to law abiding citizens . "Punishment ranges from rigorous exercise - running extra laps...
... middle of paper ...
...he rehabilitation of young offenders rather than shipping them off to prison or boot camps. The boot camps and prisons do not offer the youths the proper treatment needed to transform a person from a criminal back to a normal citizen of society. Places such as Custody Centers offer a more controlled and logical process of programs developed especially for the special kids sent to these places. It is believed that a program such as the P.G.Y.C.C. will ultimately be more effective in correcting the behaviour of young offenders and in conjunction lower the rate of youth crime around the country.
References
Colledge, D. and Gerbert, J. (1998, June). Rethinking the assumptions about boot camps.
Federal Probation, vol. 62, issue 1, p.54.
Honywill, B. (1996, Nov. 20). Boot camps not answer: panel: Must discourage
conditions leading to youth crime. The Hamilton Spectator, p. N1.
Simpson, L. (1996, Oct. 5). Academy targets troublesome teens: Military-style school
for boys costs $20,400 a year. The Hamilton Spectator, p. A1.
Prince George Youth Custody Center. [WWW document]. (n.d./ 2000, Mar. 22).
Available: <http://members.pgonline.com/~pgycc/
Anderson, E. (1998). The social ecology of youth violence. Crime and Justice, 24(Youth Violence), 65-104. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1147583
When thinking about youth crime do you envision a country with a high rate of young offenders, gang activity and re-offending? Or do you envision a country with a significant increase of young offenders either being successfully reintegrated into society, or helped by a community when seeking forgiveness for a minor offence that they have committed? Since the passing of Bill C-7 or the Youth Criminal Justice Act on February 4, 2002 by the House of Commons, many significant improvements have been made in Canada’s youth criminal justice system on how to handle and care for young offenders. Some of the reasons why Bill C-7 was passed in Canada was because the bill before it, Young Offenders Act, had many problems and suffered large amounts scrutiny by Canadian Citizens. It’s because of these reasons that Bill C-7 had been revised multiple times before being passed, having previously been called Bill C-68, March of 1999 and Bill C-3, in October 1999. With this all being said, many Canadian citizens are still left to ponder a question of if there is even significant improvement in our Youth Criminal justice system when comparing the Youth Criminal Justice Act to the Young Offenders Act? In my opinion, there are many significant improvements that have been made in the Youth Criminal Justice Act which have aided our justice system. By addressing the weaknesses of the Young Offenders Act, the Youth Criminal Justice Act has helped Canada improve in the field of youth criminal justice by implementing better Extrajudicial Measures, ensuring effective reintegration of a young person once released from custody and providing much more clarification on sentencing options.
The inappropriate or unnecessary use of incarceration is “expensive, ineffective, and inhumane,” and initiates a “cycle of juvenile reoffending” (Bala et. al, 2009). A study conducted by Mann (2014) exemplifies this cycle of youth reoffending. The youth interviewed demonstrated that despite a stay in sentenced custody, the threat of future punishment was not enough to deter from future offences. Cook and Roesch (2012) demonstrate that youth have developmental limitations that can impair their involvement in the justice system; for example, not understanding their sentencing options properly or their competence to stand trial. Therefore, deterrence as a justification for youth incarceration is ineffective, as incarceration proves to be not a strong enough deterrent. Alternative methods such as extrajudicial measures and community-based sanctions were considered more effective (Cook & Roesch,
“Our youths now love luxury, they have bad manners, they have disrespect for authority, disrespect for older people…” Ancient Greek philosopher Socrates acknowledges the escalation of delinquency among youth in the early age’s .The rise of young offenders furthers the Canadian government to record juvenile offenders, in addition, devise an act to better control the epidemic of young delinquents. The topic of proposal is the effectiveness of the youth justice system in its response to crime. Firstly, in order to determine the effectiveness of the youth justice system, one must grasp the premise that is a delinquency, in particular a young delinquents. Under the Juvenile Delinquents Act, the first act imposed in regards to young offenders,
...ing with young minds and punishing them in juvenile courts may be of advantage to the young people and at the same time reduce propagating them into developing a violent future in criminal activities. Correctional facilities that address and cater for the juveniles are the way forward to streamlining the youths (Kristin, page4).
Boot camp programs operate under a military-like routine wherein young offenders convicted of less serious, nonviolent crimes are confined for a short period of time, typically from 3 to 6 months (Parent, 1989). They are given close supervision while being exposed to a demanding regimen of strict discipline, physical training, drill, inspections, and physical labor. All the programs also incorporate some degree of military structure and discipline. They follow new strict rules that they are not use to which include the following: (1) Basic training program inmates shall not enter the rooms of other inmates.
... crime and should adopt policies that compliment better socialization of youths. The seriousness of youth crime trends must be addressed with punishments that pay retribution to society. It is equally important that youths are not excluded from society by a legal system that does not recognize their special needs. Rehabilitation measures must address the socialization problems that children are facing with their families, schools, and media pressures. Children will be given alternatives to their delinquent behaviours that may not have been obvious or initially appealing. These changes will result in the prevention and decline of youth gang related crime. Youth gangs are not inevitable. Some social reorganization backed by government policies will eliminate the youth perception that youth gangs are socially acceptable. The Youth Criminal Justice Act (2002) adopts socially focused policies that will better address the social disorientation of youth that lead them into youth gangs. Its implementation is a positive step towards effectively dealing with the changed social forces affecting Canadian youths. Better socialization of youths is paramount to eliminating youth gangs in Canada.
Youth and juvenile crime is a common and serious issue in current society, and people, especially parents and educators, are pretty worried about the trend of this problem. According to Bala and Roberts, around 17% of criminals were youths, compared to 8% of the Canadian population ranging from 12 to 18 years of age between 2003 and 2004 (2006, p37). As a big federal country, Canada has taken a series of actions since 1908. So far, there are three justice acts in the history of the Canadian juvenile justice system, the 1908 Juvenile Delinquents Act, the 1982 Young Offenders Act, and the 2003 Youth Criminal Justice Act. In Canada, the judicial system and the principles of these laws have been debated for a long time.
General Statistics show that between 1986 and 1998, the number of Canadian teens charged with violent offences has t...
Juvenile crime in the United States is ballooning out of control along with adult crimes, and politicians and law enforcement officials don’t seem to be able to do anything about it. Despite tougher sentencing laws, longer probation terms, and all other efforts of lawmakers, the crime and recidivism rates in our country can’t be reduced. The failure of these recent measures along with new research and studies by county juvenile delinquency programs point to the only real cure to the U.S.’s crime problem: prevention programs. The rising crime rates in the United States are of much worry to most of the U.S.’s citizens, and seems to be gaining a sense of urgency. Crime ranks highest in nationwide polls as Americans’ biggest concern (Daltry 22). For good reason- twice as many people have been victims of crimes in the 1990s as in the 1970s (Betts 36). Four times as many people under the age of eighteen were arrested for homicide with a handgun in 1993 than in 1983 (Schiraldi 11A). These problems don’t have a quick fix solution, or even an answer that everyone can agree on. A study by the Campaign for an Effective Crime Policy has found no deterrent effects of the “Three Strikes and You’re Out” law recently put into effect by politicians (Feinsilber 1A). It has been agreed however that there is not much hope of rehabilitating criminals once started on a life of crime. Criminologist David Kuzmeski sums up this feeling by saying, “If society wants to protect itself from violent criminals, the best way it can do it is lock them up until they are over thirty years of age.... I am not aware of any treatment that has been particularly successful.” The problem with his plan is that our country simply doesn’t have the jail space, or money to ...
Over the years many laws and policies have been created and altered. As a result many activities have become illegal. With so many laws in place now, juvenile crime is also on the rise. More and more juveniles are being sent to prison than ever before. The goal of the juvenile justice system was to rehabilitate but now it is more focused on punishment. However, many rehabilitation programs are still in place to help delinquent juveniles get back on the path to becoming successful productive members of society. One program that comes to mind is the restorative justice program.
Juvenile delinquents who have committed crimes from low risk to high risk offenders are often sent to Military style boot camps as opposed to prison. Being in the Military myself, I know exactly how a boot camp is ran. Judges, the public, and politicians promote boot camps as opposed to prison. However, research has shown that boot camps are not successful in keeping juvenile delinquents out of handcuffs. Military based boot camps for juveniles are not effective in reducing recidivism because boot camps model aggressive behavior, bond delinquents together, target unnecessary needs, and the juveniles are forced to attend.
Very few youth of today have respect for teachers, elders, or each other. Everyday more and more instances of violent crime are committed by our nation’s youth and children. Shocking accounts of children bringing guns to school as a means of solving problems with a teacher or a fellow student are becoming increasingly frequent. Children are committing crime, which were one thought only committed by adults such as rape, robbery, and murder.
The dilemma of juvenile incarceration is a problem that thankfully has been declining, but still continues to be an ethical issue. The de-incarceration trend has coincided with a decrease in crime. It is hopeful that our nation is changing the approach to the treatment of juveniles in the criminal justice system. It means we know what to do and what is working, now just to follow through and continue the change to creating a juvenile justice system that is truly rehabilitative and gives youth tools to be able to be positive members of
Pirruzia, T (2011).Review of the Roots of Youth Violence: Literature Reviews. (n.d.). Chapter 1: Biosocial Theory. Retrieved May 1, 2014, from http://www.children.gov.on.ca/htdocs/English/topics/youthandthelaw/roots/volume5/chapter01_biosocial_theory.aspx