Equal Punishment for Adults and Juveniles As more minors are committing violent crimes, the question of whether they should be tried as adults has arisen. Children as young as 13 or 14 are committing violent crimes such as murder, rape, and armed robbery. Some of these children are being tried as adults while others are being tried as juveniles and receiving milder punishments. A juvenile offender may receive a few years in a juvenile detention facility and possibly probation following his release at age eighteen. An adult committing the same violent crime will receive a much harsher penalty, often years in jail, possibly a life sentence, with little or no chance of parole.
Recently, they have come to the conclusion that children between the ages of 16 and 18 who commit adult crimes should be tried and sentenced as adults. After researching information and cases of minors being tried as adults, I have concluded that if minor offenders were punished in the same degree as adult offenders are, the number of minors committing crimes might be reduced significantly. While it is not appropriate for these individuals to be placed in the same facilities as adult offenders, they should receive the same degree of punishment in a younger environment. These perpetrators are protected by a lenient and highly outdated juvenile system and violent youths have taken advantage of this system. In some jurisdictions, a child may have to commit 10 to 15 serious crimes before anything is actually done.
Should we tried juveniles as adults if the criminal act is severe enough? What impact does it have on the juveniles? Would juveniles being tried as adults than being tried as juveniles yield a better outcome? Is there a benefit from juveniles being tried as adults? Controversy arose in 1998, about the definition of who was considered as a minor or an adult or what the average appropriate behavior was (Brown, M. (1998).
Alexus Ellis English 11 Mrs. Murphy 12 February 2014 Should Juveniles be tried as an adult? In some states “Juvenile” is the age of seventeen and younger. All states are different juveniles can also be an adult anywhere between 15 or 18 (Merrefield). If any juvenile commits a crime that an adult would get charged for and get served prison time a juvenile should as well. If the juvenile has committed crimes such as murder, possessing any illegal drugs, or maybe did something to get fined, they should pay the amount of money like an adult.
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. This proposes a problem entangled with another; if we do decide to carry out death sentences, what is the minimum age limit? Can we electrocute, lethally inject, or gas any one who commits a crime that is considered capital? In this paper the issue of capital punishment for juveniles will be discussed, basically laying out a comprehensive look at the matter. First we will briefly look at the history of both juvenile justice and the history of the death penalty in regards to juveniles.
The Sentencing of Juveniles Today, we live in a society faced with many problems, including crime and the fear that it creates. In the modern era, juveniles have become a part of society to be feared, not rehabilitated. The basis of the early juvenile justice system was to rehabilitate and create safe havens for wayward youth. This is not the current philosophy, although the U.S. is one of the few remaining countries to execute juveniles. Presently, our nation is under a presidential administration that strongly advocates the death penalty, including the execution of juveniles.
Due to the facts and evidence that United States have done on juvenile, in addition juveniles should be trial as an adult and do their time for the crime they committed. 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.
The off duty officer shouts for William's attacker to stop. The hooded man panics and opens fire on the officer. William watches the officer take three bullets to his chest and fall to the ground. The hooded man then jumps into William's car, slams on the accelerator and races straight into the busy intersection. The next sound that William hears is burning rubber, crushing metal to metal, and shattering glass.
Espejo reports that, “According to the FBI, ‘Youth between the ages of 12 and 17 are most at risk of committing violent acts and being victims between 2 p.m. and 8 p.m.” These are times outside the range of curfew laws (23). According to McKinny, a curfew’s purpose is to protect youth from crime (Time.com). The times of frequent youth criminal activities do not match up with the times of curfew ordinances, thus proving that the curfews are ineffective in reducing juvenile crime.
Should juveniles be sentenced to prison for life? Should juveniles be trial as an adult after committing a heinous crime and sentenced to life? As a teenager, this question if far complicated to answer due that I am a teenager yet in my opinion, I believe that the juvenile should not be sentenced to life. I believe that there 's other way to punish them for their crimes. The last execution was in 2006 in California.