Should Teenage Criminals Be Tried As Adults Essay

By repealing the juvenile justice system we can put in a new system that will work. Nothing beneficial is coming from it and juveniles do not gain the understanding that actions have a consequence. If juveniles who commit crimes began to face trial adults, receiving life sentences or several years, crime would begin to decrease. These minors feel they can do anything because they are young. Our society needs to come forward to teach our children a better way of living.

Juveniles should be convicted as adults for violent crimes because it is not fair for juveniles to commit big crimes and get away with it so easily. If they want to act like adults, they should be treated. Some teens commit crimes and don't have a really good excuse on why they do it. In the article “On Punishment and Teen Killers” by Jennifer Jenkins she explains how the teenager that killed her sister, husband and her unborn child excuse of killing them was that he just wanted to “see what it would feel like to shoot someone”, which is no good excuse for what he did to this family. Another example from Jennifer's Jenkins article she states how “undeveloped brain” has nothing to do with teens committing these crimes.

Juveniles should be trialed as adults because they cannot commit more crime when they are in jail, hey cannot commit worse crimes, and itm is safer for the community. I think that juveniles who are under 18 should get trialed as adults. In 2012 the supreme court ruled that Juveniles under the age of 18 can not receive a life sentence or be put to death without parole (lauck). But what if some one under 18 committed a crime that a 23 year old committed why should one get life or be put to death while the other one gets a smack on the wrist and gets away scot free, the under aged person can be just as bad as someone who is over 18. I think that juveniles under the age of 18 should be trialed as adults My reason for why I think that juveniles should be trialed as adults is when the juvenile gets out in 6 years after he/she committed a first degree murder which he should have gotten life for, who to say that he won't commit another

The justice system should have different ways of punishing a person according to the crime they commit, just by putting them in jail and assuming that is going to change them is not a good way of going about that. These criminals as the justice system call them they get stripped of basic civil and human rights when being released from jail. There not able to find a job, and they can’t get any government assistant. Is like the justice system wants these criminals to fail in life for they could keep going back to jail. When a person is released from jail they are considered a criminal for whatever crime they committed they are stripped of basic and civil rights.

In my opinion a law abiding citizen will less likely not break the law and own a handgun if they are banned, but a criminal will. If a person desires to rob a store or murder someone, he or she is not going to be worried about breaking a gun ordinance. Handgun bans remove an extremely valuable self-defense method from citizens. If guns are banned in the United States, then what will happen if someone breaks into your home? Most likely they will have a weapon, and if you call the police, they will already had a chance to kill you and taken all of your possessions by time the cops come.

In jail, there is no freedom and not having freedom is not something an innocent person should suffer. The second reason Tom and Huck should have told the police that Injun Joe killed Mr. Robinson was that Injun Joe should not have been able to run the streets a mad, malevolent murderer. If Joe was capable of killing Mr. Robinson surely he could kill someone else without a second thought. Murderers shouldn’t be able to run free because they feel as if they got away with it, that it’s ok, or that they could do it again and get away with

Many people believe that it is cruel to charge juveniles with life sentences but, many like myself believe that if they committed the crime they should actually go to prison and serve life. People say that it’s not right to do that because we may not know what their situation may be or they probably didn't know what they were doing but, they obviously had a plan they just didn't out of nowhere just go and kill that person. The supreme court ruled in 2012 that juveniles could not be sentenced to life in prison because it violated the eighth amendment. In my opinion, this isn't cruel something that would be cruel, would be giving juveniles the death penalty that is called being cruel. I agree with the four justices, that strongly disagreed, I think it’s right because why should a juvenile that was actually proven to committing be given a second chance to go out into the real world sure they could have changed but, what if they are just saying that to get out.

And I agree and disagree with this case because first he pleaded guilty and then he was caught again and he said he was under extreme duress to confess, but they had caught him and or maybe the accomplice confessed. It’s a tough one. And then there was a question on oyez that said, “is a previously sentenced probationer entitled to a hearing when his probation is revoked? if so is he entitled to a representation by an attorney?” I would say no, because it was revoked for a reason, but yes, because he got caught committing a new crime, so for that he should get a hearing because it is a new offense. And I think he was denied to a counsel, which violated his rights, but he should be entitled to one, not sure why they didn’t give him an attorney.

Crimes are happening around us whether we pay attention to them or not. Those crimes as dangerous as murder are committed by all ages but should younger criminal in their juvenile age received the same punishment as older criminals. On June 25, 2012, the Supreme Court ruled that juveniles committed murder could not be sentenced to life in prison because it violates the Eighth Amendment. (On-Demand Writing Assignment Juvenile Justice) Advocates on the concurring side believes that mandatory life in prison is wrong and should be abolish. However, the dissenting side believe that keeping the there should be a life in prison punishment for juvenile who commit heinous crime regardless of their age.

The Judicial branch enforces the Miranda right laws by when a person is convicted of a crime and has been arrested by a police officer, but hasn’t been read his rights most likely the charges will be dropped. One of the biggest cases on this was the