Many people believe that just because a child is not technically an adult in the eyes of the law this makes it ok for them to commit heinous crimes and not receive the same and rightful punishment as adults who commit the same crimes. Although there is a basis for this argument it a

slightly skewed one that places much too much emphasis on the fact that these children are not “adults”, meaning the have not reached the age looked on by our law as being legally of age. This technicality is an unfortunate part of our justice system that can allow young criminals freedom based solely because they are under a certain age. I consider this a travesty of justice and something that needs to be more case sensitive. If the situation calls for a severe punishment then this is what must be done regardless of age.

Underage criminals do not possess the same level of awareness as adults, this is true, and the law does compensate for this to a certain extent. Children have a smaller mental capacity and less life experience to draw off then adults. Therefore it is necessary to give them a certain amount of leeway in the acts they commit. Serious crimes though deserve serious repercussions or the violence can be repeated and more innocent lives can be harmed or taken. Juveniles need to be treated according to their respective crimes, and receive punishment that reflects this way of thinking. If children are allowed to run wild committing crimes and receiving only slaps on the wrists then they will grow up to commit more horrifying crimes or they won’t even wait and commit them now.

1 - STEVE BREWER Copyright 2001 Houston Chronicle

Some topics in this essay:
, Houston Chronicle, Eakin Jurors, Adam Bollenbacks, Lopez Jr, juvenile court, Deputy Constable, BREWER Copyright, Robinson Nov, able view violence, grant motion transfer, adult court, grant motion, physical injury, underage criminals, crimes receive, serious physical injury, committing crimes, serious physical, motion transfer, prime example,