What does the age of a criminal have to do with the heinous crime they have committed? While it is understandable to treat a child who has not yet fully grasped the sense of what is ethically right or wrong with a less severe punishment than someone who is matured to a point of being aware of their actions. Teens and even those who are mature enough to see that the crimes they are doing are wrong, but regardless still go through with such an act should not be shown mercy for a crimes that are as serious as intentionally hurting someone or even in the most serious cases murder. The age of a criminal should not be the main or only factor when deciding to let someone who is under the age of 18 off easy on their actions. It should almost always …show more content…
The reason behind these teens killing are never justified let alone should be treated as if they were lesser than that. Not only is there cases in which a teen has killed just one individual there has been incidents where they have caused multiple injuries and casualties. Surely actions as horrifying as these could not be excused due to one 's age their would be no justice for those who were affected by these actions especially those whose lives were taken. In an article written by Jennifer Jenkins “On punishment and Teen Killers” she writes on the death of her younger sister her unborn child and husband at the hands of a teen killer. The criminal called it a “thrill kill” he just wanted to feel the sensation of taking someone 's life. Actions like these should never be shown mercy regardless of age it is a horrifying image to imagine someone being brutally murdered for the sake of someone else 's pleasure as someone who is practically the same age as the offender this is incredibly difficult to stomach even more so to comprehend why anyone would think this action deserves a punishment
This case is important because the kids that commit crimes are not being killed they are just sentenced to jail for life, but you don't see on the news minors killing and robbing people. No because kids or teenagers are not going around being charged with burglary, kidnapping, stealing and murder in the first degree. The case has not been replaced by any other but it has helped some cases and it has been helped by cases. My opinion on this case is odd, teens should not be wanting to kill people and if they have they should have to pay for it they did kill an innocent person. I understand that he was a minor and because he was it was cruel and unusual to put him to death but at the same time i feel that, it isn't fair that a innocent human being died and he gets to live.
Imagine being the “chosen one” on a kill list made by your friends. One of the many teen cases in juvenile justice was the disgraceful murder of a 16 year old student, Cassie Stoddart, murdered by her two friends, Torey Adamcik and Brian Draper on September 22, 2006. Both Torey and Brian were found guilty of First Degree Murder, charged as adults, and given life in prison with no possibility of parole plus 30 years for committing. I believe their punishment is deemed fair and right. Background on victim Cassie Stoddart was a bright, young, responsible, and popular student; She was always told she had the perfect life, perfect grades, and was always praised by many in her community.
I believe that each crime or murder should be looked at independently. That then mere fact that a person is under eighteen should not exclude them from the potential of a death sentence. Each crime should to be examined for premeditation and the heinousness of the
On Punishment and Teen killers In the fiction article “ On Punishment and Teen Killers” Jennifer Jenkins argues and reviews the position that the author has according debate about teens and crimes. She believes that a lot of teenager committed have serious crime. She’s also, argues that development brain are not reason for crime. She is also against advocates that are against the JLWOP.which means Juvenile Life Without Parole, At the beginning of the article she was youngest sister and her husband murdered in Chicago, offender who testified at his trial “ thrill kill” that he just want to “ see what it would feel like to shoot someone”.
Should a twelve year old like Nathaniel Brazill who killed his teacher when he made him angry be locked up in prison for the rest of his life? I do not agree with the statement that teenagers that commit a murder should get life without parole in prison. I do not agree with this because it is unfair to everybody not just the victim. Obviously if someone commits a murder the rightful thing to do would be to pay for their mistakes, but in most cases like in Nathaniel Brazil’s the victim did not deserve to be murdered, but the murder had no self control either. Everybody should be more considering about people because you never know what they go through at home, it’s not an excuse for what they have done, but to understand why.
The article “On Punishment and Teen Killers” written by Jennifer Jenkins is an article with very weak ethos. The author argues that teens who commit heinous crimes should receive life without the possibility of parole and that the victims rights should be considered. The author is a victim of a crime committed by a teen, her pregnant sister was brutally murdered by a teen gunman who wanted to “see what it felt like to shoot someone” (2). By bringing her sister into the paper the author lowers her credibility because she is emotionally connected to the case and has an obvious biased opinion. This leads to the readers to question her reliability on an unbiased opinion in the article.
In the article “On Punishment and Teen Killers” published by the Juvenile Justice Information Exchange on Aug 2,2011 the author, Jennifer Jenkins, points out how teen killers should be tried as adults for crimes committed at an adult level. Jenkins states that “... I understand how hard it is to accept the reality that a 16 or 17 year old is capable of forming such requisite criminal intent.” If a the teen intended to kill someone then they should be locked up, but if that was not the intention then they should get the help necessary instead of being locked
What if your loved one was savagely killed by a teenager with no remorse? Juveniles should be convicted as adults for ferocious crimes because even though they are “kids” they kill innocent people and should get punished for the crime they committed. Teenagers commit gruesome crimes like murder and knowing what they are makes the situation far worse. In the article “Kids are Kids-Until They Commit Crimes” the author Jennifer Jenkins talks about the teenagers that committed gory murders against innocent people that didn’t deserve to die like a road animal. For example, a 13 year old shot to death an english teacher.
The article “Juveniles Don’t Deserve Life Sentences” argues that children in prison need to be given a chance to mature and be rehabilitated (Garinger 9). Because these killers likely committed these crimes on impulse, they would often realize after the fact that they were wrong to do such an action. Therefore, when they are released, they will be more careful and think about their actions before committing. If they are given a life sentence, they will never be given this chance to fix their life. Older people who commit murders are less likely to learn from their mistakes since they put more thought into the killing than adolescents
The criminal justice system was created in order to punish people who choose to break the law. Some people believe they are above the law and decided to do whatever they like regardless of the consequences. Children and adults are both responsible for the actions they commit. The criminal justice should tried children as adults for committing felonies because a crime is a crime regardless of the age of the individual. This can be fulfilled by punishing juvelives with the correct sentence, by seeing that they know their actions lead to consequence and they have the proper process for a teen to be tried as adult.
When people commit crimes, there should be disciplined no matter what. Juveniles need to learn that their behaviors have consequences. Why should kids be given any less of a punishment for committing the same crime? According to one author, “Taking a life is murder regardless of the age of the offender, and the penalties to be imposed must not discriminate. After all, the victim’s life will never be returned, and the family will permanently lose their loved one” (“7 Top Pros and Cons of Juveniles Being Tried As Adults”).
In our society, crimes are being committed not only by adults but by juveniles as well. By law as soon as a person turns 18 they are considered to be an adult. So what if an adult and a juvenile were to commit the same crime yet were sentenced differently simply based on the fact that one is a child and one is an adult? Juveniles are committing violent crimes just as adults and should be given the equal treatment and sentencing as adults receive. Juveniles aren’t completely ignorant as everyone seems to think.
Killing another seems very unjustifiable, which might be the case but when someone takes another 's life and sent to prison, death row or capital punishment is needed to put that person were they belong. People like that deserve to die because of their mistake of killing another and it deters other people to not kill others, showing them what would happen. In the case of Capital Punishment, Hunting for Sport, or George and Lennie, killing is a justifiable act. In the case of capital punishment killing is justified and needs to be done. For example, “Some crimes are so inherently evil they demand strict penalties up to and including death”(McClatchy).
Juvenile Justice Should juveniles get treated as adults that’s one of the biggest controversy in our nation now days, with many juveniles committing crimes that are inconceivable according to their age. Judges have the last word on how to treat this young people. Many people argue that “the teens that are under eighteen are only kids, they won’t count them as young adults, not until they commit crimes. And the bigger the crime, the more eager this people are to call them adults” (Lundstrom 87). This is why people can’t come to a decision as how these young people should be treated like.
Juveniles Justice Juveniles who are criminals being sentenced to life without parole can be shocking to some people. I believe if a juvenile is able to commit a crime, then they are able to do the time. The article “Startling finds on Teenage Brains” talks about how the brain can be different from the time you are teens to the time you are an adult. After, considering both sides on juvenile justice it is clear that juveniles should face life without parole because they did the crime so they can do the time. Also I believe the juvenile’s age should not influence the sentence and the punishment give.