I am working on an essay for school and i need some opions on this subject..I need to know what people think about Young Criminals and if they shoulf be trialed as adults or not. I am open for both situations
2007-01-12 02:25:26 · 12 answers · asked by ~*~The one and Only Ali Garcia~*~ 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
Depends on the crime and the age/competence of the kid.
A 16 year old understands the difference between right and wrong and the ramifications of shooting someone with a gun. It is very likely they will die and death is permanent. What's more, they understand the extended effects of a family losing a loved one, a child growing up without a parent, etc.
While a 12 year old may understand right and wrong, the ramifications of shooting someone, and permanence of death, they may not understand the extended effects. They just haven't grasped life yet.
I personally don't have a problem with 16 and 17 year olds being tried as adults in most cases. For kids younger than that, it depends on the crime and the competence of the child.
2007-01-12 02:45:40 · answer #1 · answered by ? 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that it is a case by case instance.
I used to think that if a teen committed murder, they should be tried as an adult, but after some research, as well as speaking to teens, I changed my mind because teens have this attitude of being able to do anything. Their rational thought is different than an adult, so they shouldn't be held to the same standards. I think that if a psychiatric exam reveals their rational thought was fine, and they totally understand what they did and the true consequences, then they should be held accountable for their actions.
I also think that their parents should be looked at. True - parents can't watch someone 24/7, but your ideals and morals are directly influenced by your parents and how you are raised. If the parents didn't parent, then they should also be held accountable. I bet you if the law started holding parents accountable for their child's actions, there would be a resurgence in parents doing their jobs at home instead of playing the "not my kid" card. . .
2007-01-12 11:04:05 · answer #2 · answered by volleyballchick (cowards block) 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think the age limit needs to be brought down from where it is now. Obviously a kid not even in puberty should not be tried as an adult, but most 16 year old criminals (for instance) are well aware of what they are doing and doing it with criminal intent.
2007-01-12 10:45:56 · answer #3 · answered by kathy_is_a_nurse 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
For alot of crimes 100% yes! But they need to be worked with not put in some detention center to rot! But alot of kids these days know they can get away with things because as some people think "They don't know any better!" That is B.S. they most definitely do know and that is why they do it because they know they will only get a slap on the wrist and told don't do it again! The only way to curb this is to hold them accountable and make them understand that they will not be let off lightly!
2007-01-12 10:45:42 · answer #4 · answered by mrjamfy 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In my own community, several programs have been establish in an attempt to help our local youth through more difficult times. One of the programs is called "Teen Court." This is a program for issues of lesser severity. However, many youthful offenders commit crimes that can be considered "adult crimes" as other responses indicate. In my job, I've had juveniles who've commited serious assaults, robberies, and even murder. As such, the laws determine whether these underage offenders should answer for the "adult crimes" in "adult court." I have to agree that if you "do the crime....you do the time!"
2007-01-12 11:33:26 · answer #5 · answered by KC V ™ 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They should be charged as adults, they know right from wrong and if they choose wrong, then they should suffer the consequenses of their actions. I am getting tired of these unfit parents who did not take the time in raising their children properly, and then feel sorry for their poor babies when they get arrested. Only because they are juvies, does not give them special privlidges in comminting a crime and then want to use their young status as a defense to prosecution. The way kids are now, they know what they are doing, and should be held liable for their actions, and if not then the parents should be held liable for their kids actions.
2007-01-12 10:52:07 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think it should depend on the crime. I think if a juvenile makes a mistake and their behavior can be adjusted by the court early in life this might very well stop them from committing that serious crime.
2007-01-12 10:36:42 · answer #7 · answered by The Cleaner 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think young law breakers should be tried as an adult if they killed someone. i also think they should be tried as an adult for dui's as well they should just get a few months probation and a suspended license.
2007-01-12 11:51:10 · answer #8 · answered by "LC" KNOWEN AS AIRFORC 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You need to be more careful with your spelling if you're writing an essay.
The word is tried - not triald
"Young Criminals" is not capitalized
2007-01-12 10:34:12 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
OH CRAP--The spelling police again. Get a life......just answer the question and don't criticize people trying to ask. I bet if I were to look through your junk I'd find problems with your spelling to. NO ONE IS pERfEkt !
2007-01-12 10:42:05 · answer #10 · answered by davydaduce 1 · 1⤊ 3⤋