The majority of Supreme Court cases that result in the death penalty are mostly to protect people from these people who can go out into the world and hurt others because they have been released instead of kept in prison. Most of the children who are sentenced to these life sentences have committed murder that we would normally not believe a child their age could do. The children who commit these crimes are well aware of what is wrong and what is right or else a lot more kids would be committing crimes. The children who are sentenced to shorter sentences run the risk of being the same without having some sort of counseling, they could grow up to be criminals, and the children could influence others to do similar crimes if they are released. …show more content…
In the article “On Punishment and Teen Killers” by Jennifer Jenkins the author explains the murder of her younger sister and how “She begged for the life of her unborn child as he shot her.” The killer of her sister showed no remorse while committing murder and that is something seen in psychopathic killers, whom never change their ways. Calling a child a psychopath is a giant claim that serves to show how a child that has already committed a crime this severe is not likely to change. In the same article Jenkins goes on to explain how she says “As a high school teacher, I have worked lovingly with teens all my life and 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.” Jenkins has worked with and knows that even they are capable of committing these harsh crimes at their age. The reality of this is that kids are capable of doing things that adults do not believe they do. This all goes to prove how these kids should not be let out into the world with the mental stability they have since they may as well go out and convince others to join
Being on death row often prolongs the pain for the inmate. They spend their time in prison fearing the inevitable which for them is death. Today, we live in a society that is very divided on this issue. There are many in support of the death penalty, suggesting that it acts as a positive deterrent against future crime. There are also many
When someone who commits a crime is determined to be mentally inadequate to be held accountable for the crimes they have committed, there are things that we do to charge them, but in a lesser way because of their mental capacity. Which begs the question, why are we allowing children to be sentenced to life, when their brains aren’t fully developed? When a child commits a crime we look over that, and stop seeing them as children. We shouldn’t sentence children to a life in prison when their brains are not only underdeveloped, but also missing a good portion of gray matter.
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.
They should be the ones receiving a long term sentences, not children. A life sentence is an awful thing give to a child whose brain is not developed fully in the right and wrong thinking area. In the article “Juveniles Dont Deserve Life Sentences” by Gail Garinger, she states that “young people are biologically different from adults”. The difference between an adults brina and a teens brain is that at the age of twenty-five an adults rain is considered to be fully developed whereas a teens
In the article “On Punishment and Teen Killers” by Jennifer Jenkins, the author shares her thoughts on teen killers and their lives after committing crimes. Throughout the article she also goes through the analysis of the punishment. To summarize, Jenkins starts off by sharing a quote that also shares her opinion on how people act on their own whether they’re influenced or not. As the article goes on she includes her personal experience on how a teen killer murdered her family where she also reveals that she is biased. With research that she might’ve done she implied and backed up the idea that crimes aren’t on impulse sometimes.
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 children have been convinced so much that they don’t even know what they’re doing is wrong. Also, in the article “Child Soldiers: Victims or Perpetrators?” it says “More often than not children have no say in whether they enlist or not and once recruited the children become brainwashed through the use of drugs and alcohol. The drugs and alcohol make the children become more compliant enabling them to commit
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
Although many people view kids as a symbol of innocence and purity, many of their actions signify otherwise. The age of 18, which by law states people as adults, is more like a guideline when it comes to everyday activities. When a heinous crime is committed by one of these underaged citizens, the same punishment should definitely be applied, taking into consideration the seriousness of the crime and the victim. Thompson states that kids should not be tried as adults because their brain is not developed as an adult’s brain is. That study does not specifically explain why juveniles act the way they do.
But this actually disproves juvenile advocates reliance on the “underdeveloped brain” argument. If brain development were the reason, then teens would kill at roughly the same rates all over the world(Jenkins 91). This is something that doesn’t happens, you won’t be seeing teens around the world murdering people. Brain development is just something people don’t understand how it really works and use this argument to try to lower criminals culpability.
The children in the army are not responsible for their actions. The adults control their every move and make sure they are doing everything right. They give the poor kids drugs and alcohol to make them more enable to commit acts. I feel like the kids didn’t have a choice or option for this.
The Death Penalty, loss of life due to previous crimes and actions, is believed by some to be extremely costly, inhumane, and cruel unlike some others whom believe it is just, right, and provides closure. The Death Penalty is not a quick and easy process. Most who get sentenced to deaths row wait years for their ultimate punishment of death. Some believe that it is not right to punish and kill a human for actions they have done because, they believe that the inmate should have another chance. Then others believe that it is right to punish someone for their actions especially if their actions involve killing another or multiple humans.
In “On Punishment and Teen Killers”, by Jennifer Jenkins, she reveals how she was a victim of a teen murderer and believes that actual science supporting teenage brains does not negate criminal culpability. She argues, “If brain development were the reason, then teens would kill at roughly the same rates all over the world”, (Par 6). Jenkins believes that supporting evidence on teenage brains does not serve as an excuse to not sentence juveniles to life without parole. She also believes that some teens will never change and find redemption for their actions. Her point is valid in that juveniles cannot be excused for their crimes, however Jenkins lacks the insight that much like how the brain changes through age, a teenager can transition from immaturity to maturity.
The death penalty has many different alternatives, but the one that makes the most sense is life in prison with no chance at parole. Most people have the misconception that if the criminal is not sentenced if the death penalty, then they will be releases when years. I think everyone can age that they don 't want a vengeful serial killer roaming the streets. That is why a life sentence without parole is the best option a more criminal instead of the death penalty. With no parole, as an option will cost a lot less than
Juvenile should be given charges equal to adults when it come to certain crimes, like murder. Whether a juvenile or an adult, a person has a full understanding of their actions, unless their mentally disturb but that 's not the subject. Young teens and children committing heinous crimes with full awareness. “Some persons will shin crime even if we do nothing to deter them, while others will seek it out even if we do everything to reform them. Wicked people exist.