According to reports on any given day, 10,000 minors are arrested and “held in adult prisons, and jails.” However, more recently legislators and government workers have began to see how this might be detrimental rather than beneficial. Critics argue that the system is already too lenient. In their opinion, the decision is rather obvious; anyone, whether they’re a juvenile or adult, who commits a crime should be incarcerated. In my opinion, I believe critics are wrong. Juvenile delinquents should be handled as minors not adults. Sending criminals to facilities with other ruthless adults is one thing, but abandoning naive teens and minors in jail is too severe of a punishment. Many juvenile delinquents haven’t even had the chance to distinguish …show more content…
Inevitably, teens who were “immersed in drugs and gangs,” from a young age are more susceptible to epidemics of drugs and crime. This breaches the question of who’s fault is it really? Is it the parents who failed to establish the shaky line between right and wrong, the delinquent, or the cops who never fail to throw anyone suspicious in jail without a second glance? Instead of torturing young individuals who have their whole lives ahead of them, we should expose them to a life without violence and drugs. Perhaps young delinquents don’t fully understand a life where violence isn’t a defense mechanism. Coming from rough neighborhoods, can cause residents to have a “survival of the fittest,” mindset, which I believe we can change. Incarcerating young criminals will only further develop this innate feeling. Furthermore, many minors are incapable of making appropriate decisions because, “the areas of the brain that deal with decision making, impulsiveness, and consequences are often not fully developed until people are in their 20s,” according to several studies. Therefore, we can assume that adults are fully conscious of the crime which they are committing, while teens are perhaps acting out of anger or
The adult system’s shifts leaked into the juvenile system, causing an increase in incarcerations even when delinquency rates were declining at the time. Juvenile reform legislations prompted more compulsory sentencing and more determinate sentences for juveniles, lowering of the upper age of juvenile jurisdiction, considerable ease in obtaining waivers to adult court for juvenile prosecution, and made it easier to gain access to juvenile records as well. Furthermore, it led to greater preoccupation with chronic, violent offenders, which in turn led to a redirection of resources for their confinement. Thereby, the absence of reliable criteria for identifying such offenders tends to stereotype all delinquents and is more likely to raise the level of precautionary confinements. These three major shifts in juvenile justice policy demonstrate the power and depth of traditional beliefs about the causes and cures of crimes in U.S. society. It also shows how the system can bend for a time in the direction of new approaches to prevention and control. Today, we are presently in a time of conservative responses where the prevailing views about crime express beliefs about prevention, retribution, and incapacitation that are profoundly rooted in our
The sentencing of underage criminals has remained a logistical and moral issue in the world for a very long time. The issue is brought to our perspective in the documentary Making a Murderer and the audio podcast Serial. When trying to overcome this issue, we ask ourselves, “When should juveniles receive life sentences?” or “Should young inmates be housed with adults?” or “Was the Supreme Court right to make it illegal to sentence a minor to death?”. There are multiple answers to these questions, and it’s necessary to either take a moral or logical approach to the problem.
Studies and anecdotes have shown that our modern approach, however, is ill-equipped to reduce crime or deal with chronic delinquents while at the same time protecting their due liberties. We now stand on the precipice of decision: How can we strike an appropriate balance in the juvenile justice system? Should we even retain a separate system for children at all? The answers are usually difficult, sometimes subtle, but always possible to attain.
Rather than robbing them of the chance to grow and become better human beings, though, the government has the ultimate responsibility to help transform these troubled youths into upstanding citizens—even if it is within the walls of a prison rather than a classroom or office building. Executing minors does nothing but remind us of America’s stubbornness to do what may take time but in the end is right.
Day after day in this country there is a debate going on about the death penalty and whether we as people have the right to decide the fate of another persons life. When we examine this issue we usually consider those we are arguing about to be older men and women who are more than likely hardened criminals with rap sheets longer than the height we stand (Farley & Willwerth, 1998). They have made a career of crime, committing it rather than studying it, and somewhere along the line a jury of their peers decided enough was enough. They were handed down the most severe and most final punishment of them all, death. Behind all of the controversy that this issue raises lies a different group of people that are not so often brought into the lime light, juveniles.
Juvenile Justice Juvenile justice is the decision whether or not to charge a juvenile as an adult. When a juvenile is charged as an adult, they are sentenced to long prison terms and sometimes life. In 2012 two groups of judges came together, one group believes that Juveniles should be allowed to be sentenced to life in prison and the other group believes that Juveniles should not be allowed to be sentenced to life in prison. I agree with the group of judges that believe that juveniles should not be sentenced to life in prison. Age is a factor in why juveniles should not be sentenced to life in prison.
Having to grow up in a prison, especially one where they do not care about your feelings, really impacts him cognitively. I think juveniles should not be trialed as adults because there is harsher punishment. According to PBS, "Most leniently parents who kill their children but most harshly child in who kill their parents". During adolescent development decision making is weak, which comes from the brain being so vulnerable. I think in the special case of juveniles they are not harden criminals. In the cases of Jacob Ind and Nathan Ybanez I feel as if the teenagers had a build up of bottled emotions, and couldn't handle it anymore. With the brain being so vulnerable and decision making being so weak I think the teens snapped. After years of abuse and sadness I think the teens thought as if there was no other way out. Either the parents die or they do. Instead of being trialed as adults and spending life in prison, I think adolescents who commit crime should have an alternative that will not negatively impact their brain development. I think the problem derives from the adolescents seeking the wrong coping mechanism. If the adolescents could experience help from adults and professional rather than channeling it through violence and drugs, less crime from adolescents would
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...
In today's society juveniles are being tried in adult courts, given the death penalty, and sent to prison. Should fourteen-year olds accused of murder or rape automatically be tried as adults? Should six-teen year olds and seven-teen year olds tried in adult courts be forced to serve time in adult prisons, where they are more likely to be sexually assaulted and to become repeat offenders. How much discretion should a judge have in deciding the fate of a juvenile accused of a crime - serious, violent, or otherwise? The juvenile crime rate that was so alarming a few years ago has begun to fall - juvenile felony arrest rates in California have declined by more than forty percent in the last twenty years. While California's juvenile population rose by a half a million since the middle and late 1970's, juveniles made up less than fifth-teen percent of California's felony arrests in 1998, compared to thirty percent in 1978; according to the Justice Policy Institute. The juvenile arrests have dropped back, even as the population of kids between ages of ten and eight-teen has continued to grow, and the number of kids confined in the California Youth Authority (CYA) has fallen. With all the progress our society has made in cutting back in juvenile crimes there is still a very serious problem. But if locking kids up is the best way to address it, how do we explain a drop in crime when there are more teens in California and fewer in custody? First we must look at the economy around us. With so many job opportunities available more and more teenagers find honest ways to keep busy and make money. Our generation has a brighter future than the generation a decade ago. Next we look at successful crime prevention efforts: after-school programs, mentoring, teen outreach programs, truancy abatement, anti-gang programs, family resource centers. There is evidence that these programs are beginning to pay off. Sending more, and younger teens through the adult court system has been a trend across the country in reaction to crimes, such as school shootings and violent rapes. Yet evidence shows that treating youth as adults does not reduce crime. In Florida, where probability wise more kids are tried as adults then in any other state, studies found that youth sent through the adult court system are twice as likely to commit more crimes when they're release...
The quagmire of placing juveniles in adult facilities is the risk factors juveniles may experience while incarcerated. Being that juveniles are young and smaller to the adult offenders, they may be seen as a prey or easy target for rape, assault, mental issues which eventually leads to suicide. We must keep in mind that juveniles are youth meaning they are still a child, not an adult and should not be exposed to adult incarceration environment. Although it is cost saving to place juveniles and adults under one facility, it is unethical because they are not built and yet mentally ready and prepared to experience adult facilities. Alternative strategies are available to assist juvenile detainees such as healthcare, education, recreation, and work experience. The Juvenile Court Act of 1899 gave leniency to youth under the age of 16. Placing youth detainees with adult offenders will result in the reduction of rehabilitation services for youth, while increasing the rate of being a victim as a potential prey o...
Nowadays, the topic of the Juvenile law system is a very controversial as well as difficult discussion to have. For every court case, trial, and scenario, there are many different circumstances that may affect the outcome. Due to the seriousness of their crimes or even their past offenses, juvenile criminals can sometimes be tried as adults. Personally, in the beginning of this assignment, I could see both sides of the argument. There are many reasons why children under the age of 18 should be tried as children, however, there are more proficient reasons as to why we should do away with juvenile court. Many of my peers do not think this, however, they are keen on keeping children tried as children. I truly cannot fathom the “good” that this is doing though. I believe that juvenile offenders should be trialed as adults because they were mature enough to make the decision to commit a crime, they need to be held responsible for their destructive actions, and statistics have shown that when given the chance, juvenile criminals do not complete the rehabilitation needed to enter back into society. The main reason most of my peers want children tried as children is for their safety. I have a simple solution for this though. If they are convicted, they should be brought to a juvenile housing block. This block should be inside an adult penitentiary but should be separate from adult offenders. This is primarily for the safety of those who may not be able to defend themselves against the larger adult inmates. An example of this type of jail is the Wabash Valley Correctional Facility located in Terre Haute, Indiana. This correctional facility is one that keeps its juvenile and adult inmates in separate buildings. This allows the juvenile i...
There has always been controversies as to whether juvenile criminals should be tried as adults or not. Over the years more and more teenagers have been involved in committing crimes. In some cases the juries have been too rough on the teens. Trying teens as adults can have a both positive and negative views. For example, teens that are detained can provide information about other crimes, can have an impact in social conditions, and serve as experience; however, it can be negative because teens are still not mature enough for that experience, they are exposed to adult criminals; and they will lose out on getting an education.
Much controversy exists on the question of whether a juvenile criminal should be punished to the same extent as an adult. Those who commit capitol crimes, including adolescents, should be penalized according to the law. Age should not be a factor in the case of serious crimes. Many people claim that the child did not know any better, or that he was brought up with the conception that this behavior is acceptable. Although there is some truth to these allegations, the reality of this social issue is far more complex. Therefore we ask the question, "Should childhood offenders of capitols crimes be treated as adults?"
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.
Many Americans agree that juvenile’s that commit highly crimes should be trial as an adult, and pay their consequences. “Juveniles fourteen years of age or older charged with committing certain types of murder or a series sex offense, under Prop 21, are generally no longer eligible for juvenile court and prosecutors are allowed to directly file charges against juvenile offenders in adult court...” (California Proposition 21). Under many circumstances juvenile at a very young age are committing certain types of crimes, and should be trial as an adult just because their teenagers committing crimes does not mean they did not know what they did. Many young teen are being let away for the crime they commit and should not be that way just because their loosing brain tissue does not mean they do not realize what they are doing that moment. “Under Prop 21, probation departments do not have the discretion to determine if juveniles arrested for any one of more than 30 specific serious or violent crimes should be released or detained; rather, Prop 21 makes detention mandatory under those defined...