If a twelve-year-old child murdered a person, what should be his/her punishment? If a thirty-year-old adult murdered a person, what should be his/her punishment? Should there be a difference in punishment? Should one be more strict then the other? Should one be more lenient then the other? These are all questions that most people have thought about. With all the youth crime talk in the media, these questions have been asked many times, and we always get the same outcome; DEBATE. One side of the story is that of the juvenile correction system. This system is about a hundred years old and has been revised before. This system has a positive outlook on what youths in trouble can become. They believe that one can be rehabilitated and taught differently. They believe that pre-adolescent children do not know the difference between reality and fantasy.
They believe that they do no know the difference between right and wrong. The juvenile system was started in England after they opposed to the killing of young convicted felons. The English invented a juvenile correction system that would re-teach values and morals to the young, rehabilitate them, and give them a second chance at a happy life. They also set up a separate court system from that of adults. In this system, there was to be no sort of media, no jury of peers, and no lawyers, there would only be a judge and the accused party. The judge would listen to the accused and decide for him/herself the correct punishment.
The Essay on Adult Justice System vs. Juvenile Justice System
... As a contrast, there are many differences between the adult and juvenile justice system. These differences consist of the right to a ... who does not have proper supervision. The adult justice system initiates punishment in their sentencing. The goal is to inflict ... their protection from unethical treatment. As juvenile crimes have become increasingly brutal over the years, it is important that if ...
This punishment could include lock up in a juvenile correction facility, probation, foster care, and community service or any combination of. In this system, the young adult could only be kept until the age of twenty-one. At this age, the young adult would be released and he/she would be able to start a new life. This system was started because the citizens of England thought that children were being punished to harshly. They thought that children that were put into the atmosphere of convicted hardened criminals were subject to abuse and harassment. They also believe that the youth were taught worse things in prison then they had already known. Today, this system is still around and is practiced often. But now, it is more complicated. There are those who think that young offenders should do adult time for adult crime.
Today, we now have waivers that send juveniles into the adult court system. There are those who believe that the juvenile system should be done away with and/or strengthened. These people believe that the system is no longer doing its job. They believe that too many young offenders are being released onto the streets and are still committing crime. Their idea for improving this situation would be to strengthen the juvenile system or waive the heavy offenders into adult court. Over twenty states already have a waiving policy for those offenders over the age of sixteen and some as young as fourteen. Crimes involving murder, aggravated assault, illegal possession of a weapon, and drugs are all crimes that have eligibility for waiving into the adult court.
The Term Paper on Supreme Court Juvenile Justice Juveniles
4 February 2000 The Effect of Landmark Supreme Court Cases on Juvenile Justice Thesis: In the past juvenile offenders were held to the same standards and sanctions as adult offenders. The juvenile justice system has changed in the past 100 years as result of several case laws. I. Introduction II. The first juvenile courts. A. Parens Patriae B. Uniform Juvenile Court Act III. Kent v. United States ...
If youths are sent into adult court, they are subject to everything that adults are. They can serve life sentences, parole, and death penalty. They are also subject to being locked up with adults. They would be placed in the county, state, or federal prison. They would be treated exactly like adults. There are those citizens that think young offenders should be tried as adults but that they should be held in a different facility. They believe this because they think that juveniles are subject to sexual assault and harassment.
They also feel that they might learn how to become more of a criminal. I believe that children who commit serious crimes like murder, rape, assault, and armed robbery should be tried in adult court, especially teenagers. Teenagers know the difference between right and wrong. They know that if they shoot and kill someone, that that is wrong. I think that if they are big enough to do the crime then they should be big enough to do the time and face their consequences. On the contrary, I do think that they should be held in a different section of the prison or what ever facility they happen to be in.
I do think that the older, more hardened criminals would take advantage of power and abuse and harass the youth. But I do think that they should be in the same facility. As with any controversial issue, there are many sides and it is very hard to explain each one equally. One should have an open mind and look at both sides of the issue before choosing a side. Before I read some of the articles that I did, I thought that youths should be tried in adult court depending on the crime, that has not changed, but I do think that where they are held should be considered heavily.
