Juvenile Death Penalty: Cruel Or Unusual?

Is the Juvenile Death Penalty really ‘cruel and unusual’? Teen crime in the United States has been on a rise, going from doing illegal drugs to even the extent of murder. Often times, many people argue that killing a minor is wrong, and should be continue to have the age limit of the death penalty at 18. On the other hand, some say that the juveniles should be able to be completely responsible for their own actions. For me, I think that the age limit should be put at the age of 15, or to an extent of the case. If a juvenile is a harm to society after committing homicide then I think they should be executed. Many times, the juvenile will exclaim that they were not sure of what they were doing. The death penalty today is currently allowed in only 38 states. In fact, 19 of those states have since allowed juveniles the age of 16 and 17 to be executed for their crimes. In court, Justice John Paul Stevens acknowledged that children and adults have different rights. For instance, minors can’t vote and cannot buy alcohol or cigarettes. Similarly, The court exclaimed that the average 15 year old would not be able to assume the same responsibilities as an adult, due to less experience, intelligence, and education. Parricide is knows as killing a close family member, or in

Robert Kinsercherff said “juveniles who kill usually fit into one of three categories.” The 3 categories Kinsercherff notes was that 90% of the juveniles committing the crime were severely abused or maltreated, and the remaining were extremely ill or were manipulative. He then also explains that many times the child feels isolated and thinks that there is no help, and usually there is substance abuse in the families. Additionally, they exclaim that teens act more impulsively and often make poor judgements because they don’t think about the