ShyGuyInChicago
September 9th, 2010, 02:01 PM
This is a controversial issue with no easy solutions. There are those who believe that if one is old enough to commit a crime then they are old enough to deal with the consequences. Then there are those who feel that it is not right to charge a minor as an adult because they are deemed to not be competent enough to make adult decisions such as voting, joining the military, and smoking, signing contracts, and etc. Also it is argued that charging minors as adults will only make them worse criminals and that what they need most of all is rehabilitation. Also something worth considering is that children and teens are often impulsive, prone to following peer pressure, and prone to poor judgment. This point was summed up by the U.S. Supreme Court when they ruled that executing some one for crimes committed under age 18 is unconstitutional and violates the 8th Amendment which forbids cruel and unusual punishments:
"First, lack of maturity and an underdeveloped sense of responsibility are found in youth more often than in adults and are more understandable among the young. These qualities often result in impetuous and ill-considered actions and decisions…."
"Second, juveniles are more vulnerable or susceptible to negative influences and outside pressures, including peer pressure…."
"Third, the character of a juvenile is not as well formed as that of an adult. The personality traits of juveniles are more transitory, less fixed."
Another thing to consider is that charging juveniles as adults for certain crimes can help fight teen crime. One could argue that if teens know that they can or will get away with certain crimes and get a lenient punishment then they will just continue to commit crimes. I have read of gangs assigning juvenile members to commit murders because they will get lesser punishments. Therefore, charging juveniles as adults can serve as a deterrent.
My opinion is that what needs to be done is that if it is shown that a juvenile commits a crime and there is a low or no likelihood of being rehabilitated then they should be charged as an adult. If whether or not they can be rehabilitated is not clear then they should have a blended sentence where they have until a certain age to be rehabilitated otherwise they should stay incarcerated as long as possible. If there is a good chance of them being rehabilitated then they should not be charged as an adult. I feel that the likelihood of being rehabilitated is inversely related to the severity of the crime. The more serious the crime, the less likely one can be reformed.
"First, lack of maturity and an underdeveloped sense of responsibility are found in youth more often than in adults and are more understandable among the young. These qualities often result in impetuous and ill-considered actions and decisions…."
"Second, juveniles are more vulnerable or susceptible to negative influences and outside pressures, including peer pressure…."
"Third, the character of a juvenile is not as well formed as that of an adult. The personality traits of juveniles are more transitory, less fixed."
Another thing to consider is that charging juveniles as adults for certain crimes can help fight teen crime. One could argue that if teens know that they can or will get away with certain crimes and get a lenient punishment then they will just continue to commit crimes. I have read of gangs assigning juvenile members to commit murders because they will get lesser punishments. Therefore, charging juveniles as adults can serve as a deterrent.
My opinion is that what needs to be done is that if it is shown that a juvenile commits a crime and there is a low or no likelihood of being rehabilitated then they should be charged as an adult. If whether or not they can be rehabilitated is not clear then they should have a blended sentence where they have until a certain age to be rehabilitated otherwise they should stay incarcerated as long as possible. If there is a good chance of them being rehabilitated then they should not be charged as an adult. I feel that the likelihood of being rehabilitated is inversely related to the severity of the crime. The more serious the crime, the less likely one can be reformed.