“… cases, ‘juvenile offenders cannot with reliability be classified among the worst offenders’… they remain unformed, it is impossible to assume that they will always present an unacceptable risk to public safety” (Garinger, paragraph 6). This quote proves that juveniles are different and can change their way. They can choose to no longer be seen as a threat but as another normal juvenile. As I said in the beginning, juveniles do not deserve life sentences, they are biologically different from adults and can change with the right help. Their brain’s are still developing and they see life differently from adults.
Many people have disregarded the fact that children too can commit despicable crimes; crimes that not even adults would think about committing. Juveniles have had their era in in being able to manipulating courts to give them a lighter sentences for their so-called “mistakes”. These juveniles have made puerile excuses to try and exonerate their actions by blaming their impulses, rather than taking accountability for them. Juveniles should be tried as adults due to being aware of their crimes and having an intention to kill, however, brain development and maturity can play a role into the reason why teens kill. With being tried as an adult juveniles should be granted the opportunity of freedom pending on their rehabilitation status and if requirements
If an adult or elderly must use a diaper because of a condition that they have then it does not consider them a child therefore, a child that commits a violent crime does not consider them an adult. When children realize the violent crimes that have been committed by them it makes the adolescent feel guilty and horrid for what has been done. In some cases, the adolescents are curious and sometimes do not know what wrong has been committed. There should be a punishment for the violent act, but having the child tried as an adult is not the solution; that is why juvenile facilities exist around the world. Children that are tried as an adult and receive a guilty sentence will put the adolescent at risk, the child will not have a punishment limit, and the hopes of the child will be corrupted.
In “Strain and Juvenile Delinquency: A Critical Review of Agnew’s General Strain Theory,” written by Giacinto Froggio, he states that “some individuals are drawn to crime when they are prevented from achieving cultural goals such as monetary success” (2). Because children don’t have the same monetary resources as adults, they are pressured to engage in criminal activities to get the things they want. A juvenile is more prone to partake in criminal activities when they come from a low income family. When a juvenile comes from a financially unstable family, the desire to own things they don’t have is even higher than their peers who can come from a financially stable middle-class family. Juveniles who don’t receive much from their parents due to monetary issues, ultimately take the matter into their own hands to take anything they don’t yet have.
A child will always fear coporal punishment because it is painful and nothing will change that. The next myth is that “Spanking is Harmless” Straus claims through research that spanking increases delinquicy, criminal behavior and many other violent actions. In my opinion spanking is not a direct cause for increased risk in these actions but rather it is more likely that spanking occurs in areas where kids grow up to be more deliqeunt and have criminal behavior like poor neighborhoods. The last myth I will be discussing is the myth that “If you don 't spank, your children will be spoiled or run wild”. With this myth Strauss argues that spanked children are more likely to be running wild than non spanked children.
In the article, “On Punishment and Teen Killers,” Jenkins tells us that teens don’t have their brain well developed, so they need to act in a mature matter in a way they don’t cause any more trouble. The quote states, “But this actually disproves juvenile advocates’ reliance on the “underdeveloped brain” argument. If brain development were the reason, the teens would kill at roughly the same rates all over the world. They do not. Advocates often repeat, but truly misunderstand brain research on this issue”(Jenkins).
This often causes the boys to think that this is the correct way to act towards other people and to act out as they seen their fathers act this way and commit crime often leaving an image of a role model for the boys which is an incorrect image of what a man should be. Children don’t belong in adult prisons as a lot of the inmates would cause trouble for them in the long term. It would also be unhealthy for a child to grow up in a prison as their minds would never fully develop out of the violent nature they have as children. They would grow up around criminals believing that being a criminal is the correct way to act inside and outside of prison. There is almost more of a chance for children to end up in a gang or becoming violent criminals outside of jail.
Youth and/or children are always known to be human beings who most likely act without thinking about the consequences. Authorities don’t understand how putting a child in jail can affect them emotionally and can even affect what type of adults they will become in the future. They don’t know the scientific evidence for how a juvenile delinquent’s brain is not fully developed. Putting children in jail for that much amount of time is inhumane and just plain unfair.
They said, “The Juveniles Law protect criminals more than victims.” However, they are also victims of bad neighbors and environment. About the California’s proposition 21 results, it was very counterproductive. Juveniles who serve time with adults has a higher recidivism rates than those who serve with other juveniles, and they are abused in the jail sexually and physically by adult prisoners (97). Even though they committed crimes, this society should not allow let juvenile criminals to be abused by adult prisoners. Psychologically juveniles have uncomplete identities and they are influenced by society where they belonged.
Juveniles this age don’t even have a fully developed brain and also can’t fully understand the circumstances they’re in. Juveniles can be good kids inside and out, but if they somehow manage to be involved in a heinous crime, they suffer the chance of being incarcerated for up to life. With that being said, courts should not be given the power to grant juveniles with adult sentences because the environment around adult prisons are far too violent for people under the age of 18, therefore, proposition 21 of 2000 and other sentence enhancements should be abolished to lessen the severity of juveniles’ punishments and instead give them a bigger chance at rehabilitation. When juveniles receive such harsh sentences, such as sentences adding up to the majority of their life in prison or their life as a whole, more often than not they tend to lose hope. They really don’t have much to look forward to.
It opens doors for them to become unresponsive to necessary treatment. This leads to a bigger problem. Keeping them with their peers gives them a better chance of being rehabilitated. Influence plays a major part in juvenile’s rehabilitation. Sending a teen to adult jail is not the answer.
The arrest and intake is also quite a complicated procedure, which becomes particularly difficult when a juvenile offender is involved. In fact, law enforcement agencies have limited opportunities to arrest a juvenile and hold him or her in jail as is the case of adult offenders. The main point is to put juvenile offenders under the control, whereas adult offenders are often restricted in their freedom being under arrest and intake. In fact, the main difference in the arrest and intake procedure between juvenile offenders and adults is that juvenile offenders are unlikely to go to jail, whereas adult offenders can be detained and kept intake, if they represent a threat to the public