The Importance Of Heinous Crimes

In 2012, the Supreme Court ruled that it is immoral to give juveniles life sentences, even if they commit a crime as serious as murder, because it is a cruel and unusual punishment. This has been an issue in America as teenagers are often treated as adults in court due to a belief that their crimes warrant a harsh punishment. Many believe that these kids should not be given such major sentences because they are still immature and do not have the self control that adults do. I agree that juveniles do not deserve life sentences because they put less thought and planning into these crimes and they often are less malicious than adults. The article “Startling Finds on Teenage Brains” explains that the teenagers lose brain tissue that is responsible for self control and impulses (Thompson 7).

Should teenagers be sentenced to life without the possibility of parole? Many believe that teens should spend life in prison based on the severity of their crime. Others argue that LWOP does not rehabilitate, but punishes teens. Looking at the documentary, When Kids Get Life, I believe that teens should not receive life without parole due to the fact that a teen’s brain is not yet fully formed, causing teens to struggle with decision-making and have an impulse control. Teens should be given a second chance to change in society.

In the article it states, “The court said that minors who commit terrible crimes are less responsible than adults: They are less mature, more susceptible to peer pressure, and their personalities are not yet fully formed.” In this quote the author is reasoning against life without parole because they are less mature and not fully developed. Although all crimes deserve proper punishment, juveniles should not receive life without parole because they are still developing and this punishment leaves no room for a second chance

There are certain instances of juveniles being tried as adults and sometimes ending up getting a life sentence without a chance of parole. I find that pretty harsh because there have been some cases where the juvenile meant no harm, they were either confused or brought along by gang members and they end up being charged along with the gang members for just being with them when a crime goes down. I believe that juveniles do not deserve to be given a life sentence because for one they are still maturing, they can learn from their mistakes and make amends, we still have to combat crimes like intended murder committed by a juvenile with extreme punishments especially if they are well over the age of 16. In the article published by the New York Times on March 14, 2012 “Juveniles Don’t Deserve Life Sentences”, Garinger discusses that juveniles deserve a second chance since their brains are still developing.

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”).

The Supreme Court prohibits juveniles to be executed if they are under the age of 18 when they commit a crime. The Supreme Court uses the cases of Thompson v Oklahoma and Stanford v Kentucky to support the issue that it is immoral and inhumane to give the death penalty to juveniles. Atkins v Virginia allows the Court to look at the evolution of the standard of decency on the issue of juveniles of the death penalty and what kind of people are excluded from receiving the death sentences. Juveniles also should not be given the death penalty because the neural connections and functioning for tasks such as decision-making, judgment, and impulse control in the brain has not yet fully developed and therefore, juveniles commit certain acts and are less aware of the

Many have argued that teens should not be tried as adults because of having an immaturity to them and an underdeveloped brain in which influences the rational thinking of a teen. Although these arguments are very reasonable, to say that teens are not aware of their crimes, would only invalidate their statements. Juveniles are aware of their wrongdoings and they choose to commit foul play on innocent lives. These perpetrators had an intent to kill someone, they did so to feel satisfaction or to perhaps seek approval of someone. Furthermore, if teen killers are tried as adults, they should also be given the opportunity of liberation once they turn of age.

The Supreme Court of the United States of America in 2012 ruled that juveniles couldn’t be tried as juveniles and be sentenced to life without the possibility of bail, no matter how harsh the nature of the crime committed. Justice Elena Kagan argues that juveniles who commit crimes typically have a rough upbringing or unfortunate circumstances which cannot be controlled by the juvenile. She argues that if they are serving a life in prison without a chance of parole, it causes damage to them psychologically due to the lack of experiences. They will miss the most important moments in life that define who they are as an individual.

Juvenile Justice The supreme court's ruling on life in prison for juveniles is too easy. Juveniles who commit murder should be sentenced to life in prison. It's only fair that if a juvenile takes a life then they deserve life. I don't agree that they should abolish mandatory life in prison for juveniles.

If an “undeveloped brain” was the case then teens would kill at roughly the same rates all over the world, which is not. Some of these teens think they can get away with some of these crimes which leads to commit more. In Jennifer's article she explains one of her case with a serial killer. His parents will fix everything whenever he got in trouble. After series of other

In Gail Garinger’s, “Juveniles Don’t Deserve Life Sentences,” she argues that juveniles have great potential in being able to change their lives for the better. Garinger starts off with the superpredator theory which involves kids who will commit crimes in groups, and in response, laws were made to easily try kids as adults in court. Even with the superpredator prediction never coming true, the laws that were made still exist. Garinger then moves on to describing how teens are different than adults in many different aspects. Garinger states, “As a former juvenile court judge, I have seen first hand the enormous capacity of children to change and turn themselves around” (Garinger par.

Based on strong textual evidence and corresponding research it is clear that mandatory life sentence for juveniles who commit murder is unfair because juveniles are immature, cannot remove themselves from a toxic home environment, and is

In spite of them being able to commit the crime their brains are not fully developed. Juveniles should be charged as adults in murder cases. Most of the time teenagers who commit crimes such as murder get a much shorter time in jail just because of their age. It's not right that they have less time for something as big as murder. By giving them a shorter time they don't learn anything and will most likely go back and do it again.

The Juveniles are kids not adults and that they don’t have the same brain development as adults do. In the article, “Starting finds on Teenage Brains” by Paul Thompson saying that during this time of period in teenagers be having massive loss of brain tissue. It is believed that the massive brain loss tissue supports all teens thinking and emotions. It also says, “Brain cells and connections are only being lost in areas controlling impulses, risk taking and self control.”

Teens in particular, should not be convicted life sentences. This is because the teen may have not known what they were doing. “Children are not adults”(Ferriss) that statement is saying that children should not be sentenced like adults. That is correct because when it comes down to the science a teen does not know right from wrong yet so they should not be sentenced for life. “The rational part of a teen’s brain isn’t fully developed and won’t be until age 25 or so”(Sather and Shelat).