Should Juveniles be Tried As Adults? (yes)
Juvenile crime has been a problem throughout history. How to deal with those juveniles who commit crimes has been an issue for just as long. Punishment and rehabilitation are both logical answers to this problem, but time and effort has shown that it is very difficult to punish and rehabilitate juvenile offenders sufficiently enough to keep them out of trouble. Between 1985 and 1994 the rate of violent juvenile crime doubled, making the issue of juvenile crime a big problem. The Congress of the United States of America in 1994 passed the Violent Crime and Law Enforcement Act which enhanced the ability of prosecutors to convict juveniles as adults. As a result, throughout the United States, nearly every state also passed laws making juveniles more likely to be punished as an adult would (Kelleher 137-141). But the question comes up, when is a juvenile old enough to be held legally responsible for their actions? Many juveniles under the age of eighteen have been given life in prison or even the death penalty, but when is the juvenile too young to be given a large sentence? As a national standard, all children under the age of seven have been acquitted from legal responsibility for their actions, alt
Another issue amongst dealing with trying juveniles as adults is a very serious one; the death penalty. It has been around in the United States since before the American Revolution when there were only Thirteen Colonies. In 1642, the first known execution of a minor in the “United States” was given to a sixteen year old boy for having sex with a horse and a cow, a serious offense due to the fact that animals were livestock. Just over two hundred years later, a young boy of only ten years old named James Arcene was found guilty of murder and robbery in 1885. Again, in 1927, Fortune Ferguson Jr was executed as an adult for a crime he committed when he was a juvenile, the rape of an eight year old girl when he was only thirteen (Kelleher 144). Since 1990 there has been only nineteen juveniles put to death across the entire world in six different countries; The United States of America, Iran, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Yemen. The United States of America accounts for ten of these executions. On January 10th, just ten days after the turn of the millennium, Douglas Christopher Thomas of Commonwealth, Virgina was sentenced to death , followed by Steven Roach three days later. On January 25th, Texas executed Glenn McGinnis. Texas has executed eight juvenile offenders since 1973, making them the highest in executions of juveniles. In the case of Stanford versus Kentucky, the courts ruled that the execution of juveniles age sixteen and seventeen was not morally or socially wrong according to the Eighth Amendment, which states that it is wrong to give out any form of cruel or unusual punishment (Vasudevan 114-120). The fact is, if you commit a very serious and deadly crime, you are going to face severe legal consequences. However, the death penalty should not be given to juveniles, and really should not be given to adults either. The death penalty is given out too randomly. It shows no real signs of consistency. Many violent murderers are sentenced much of their life in prison and are then released. There are incidents in which people have practically proven that people who were given the death penalty were innocent. But when speaking of juveniles, there does need to be some type of rehabilitation involved in the punishment of them. To end a juveniles life for a crime they have committed is in no way whatsoever giving them a second chance. A life sentence is more practical and far less immoral. Giving a juvenile a life sentence will give them punishment for what they have done, rather than just ending their life and that being the end of it. committed that same crime. If the purpose of the juvenile court is to provide a separate system for punishment and rehabilitation, then the adult prison should be taken 3) The alleged delinquent act is a) aggravated or heinous in nature, or b) part of a pattern of repeated delinquent acts 4) There is probable cause to believe that the juvenile committed acts that are to be the subject of the adult criminal proceeding if waiver and transfer are approved 5) The juvenile is not amendable, by virtue of maturity, criminal sophistication, or past experience in the juvenile court system, to services provided through the family court 6) The juvenile has been given a waiver and transfer hearing that comports with due process. The Kent versus United States criteria should be the minimum specific criteria on which these decisions are based. All of these guidelines for transfer to the adult court are felonies. Any one of these crimes have obvious moral and legal implications in them, and anyone who commits one of these crimes is aware that they are breaking the law. The Task Force on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention of the National Advisory Committee on Criminal Justice Standards set more conditions and standards for the transfer of a juvenile into the adult courts:
Some topics in this essay:
Institute California,
Justice Standards,
United Morris,
Enforcement Act,
Gerard McCra,
Eighth Amendment,
Federal Constitution,
Chicago Illinois,
,
Robert Jeffrey,
juvenile crime,
adult prison,
juvenile court,
adult court,
court system,
life prison,
found guilty,
juvenile adult,
death penalty,
violent juvenile crime,
crime committed,
sentenced life prison,
juvenile court system,
held legally responsible,
transfer juvenile adult,
Join now to see the rest of the essay!
Approximate Word count = 3215
Approximate Pages = 13 (250 words per page double spaced)
More Essays on Should Juveniles be Tried As Adults? (yes) Professional Papers: |
CUSTOMER SERVICES
|
|
Saved Papers
You haven't saved any papers.
|