Abolish Mandatory Life Sentences To Juveniles

501 Words3 Pages

Every year in the United States, children as young as 13 are sentenced to spend the rest of their lives in prison without any chance for release. Approximately 2,500 children have been sentenced to juvenile life without parole (JLWOP) in the United States. Although the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in June 2012 that juveniles convicted of murder cannot be subject to a mandatory sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. I also completely disagree with the majority of U.S Supreme Court ruling that argued to abolish mandatory life sentences to juveniles who commit murder, because if an immature teenager is able to carry out a murder and complete it, that teenager under the age of 18 or not they should suffer the consequence for the crime committed. Also no matter the age of the murderer, the law was still broken when the crime was committed. …show more content…

They shouldn’t do that because if the person was an adult, the judge will put them to prison for life, I really disagree with the court and judges, everything should be fair in the cases. In the article by jennifer Jenkins it says teens are being tried as adults and sentenced to prison I agree, but they talk about how the brain is not developing, but they took someone’s life away either way they should get punished no matter what it don’t matter what age you are. So basically what I am trying to say even if you 're young it doesn’t matter everyone should get the same sentence as an adult they don’t get nothing off easy period. Also here are the quotes of Jennifer Jenkins punishment and Teen Killers 16 and 17 year olds, are ‘thrill kill’ and ‘see what it would feel like to shoot someone” and The teens are being tried as adults and sentenced to prison and I don’t agree with that, But that’s what the court does. Judges should be fair and not feel bad for the

Open Document