Should teenagers accused of violent crimes be tried and sentenced as adults?

Question

Why or why not?

Answer 1

Each case should be determined on an individual basis. Most violent crimes committed by youths who have lived and function as adults in society should be treated as adults. Those who are younger youth and have no concept of the consequences of their actions should be charged as juveniles. The age, the maturity level, and criminal history should be taken into account.

Answer 2

Yes. #1. Because savvy criminal adults use them to commit crimes knowing they will not be as severly punished if caught. #2. Send a message that society will no longer tolerate such behavior-that the sentence should fit the crime irregardless of age (does it matter if your family member is shot dead by a 14 year old or a 34 year old). #3. High probability that the teenager committing violent crimes will become an adult committing violent crimes (preventing a second violent crime-which the DA as a public servant is obligated to do). #4. Deterent-It has been proven to be the most effective way to stem the tide of violent crimes being committed by youths (Do you know a 14 year old who wants to spend 25 years to life in prison).

Answer 3

I think it should be case by case. If it is a 13-14 year old, were they influenced by an older person? What kind of life style were they brought up in? There is alot to look at. Definitely at 16 they know better.

What about an 11 year old that commits a violent crime? Should he be sentenced as an adult or be rehabilitated?

Answer 4

depending on how old the teen is. early teens 14-15 or later teens 16-17 also on the crime committed if there is no plea of insanity or medical reason as to why they committed the crime and it was simply an act of violence like say, a 17 year old murdered someone then yes they should be tried as an adult because they are almost an adult anyway and and juvenile punishments would not suffice. different cases call for different actions but i would say that some cases could definitely allow a teen to be tried as an adult.

Answer 5

The one thing we do not have to be taught is SIN. It is unfortunately our nature. But we do however, have a conscience. Even as a small child, we know between right and wrong. When a crime is committed, the person had a choice, and if they chose to do the crime, then they should pay for that crime. I say try and sentence as an adult. My boys are 12 and 14. They know the diference in right and wrong. They do the crime, and they will pay for that crime.

Answer 6

We need to make up our minds. Pick an age and that's it. If they are not adults at 18, it's because we've decide they are not ready to be adults. So, if they're "good", they're not adults, just don't know what they're doing. If they're bad, suddenly it's clear they knew what they were doing?

I think if they don't have rights and privileges as adults, neither can we blame them in the same way as adults. There really should be a better system.

Answer 7

Violent crimes? In most cases, yes. It's best to remove young sociopaths from society before they can do more damage. For that matter, their parents should probably be investigated for negligence, especially if it was a gun crime, and the gun came from the kid's own household. I put fingerprint locks on my weapons to prevent this, and so should you.

Answer 8

Yes. It will serve as a deterrent in some cases for others who think they may be able to do a specific crime and get away with a lighter punishment based on the their age.

Answer 9

Because killing a person is not the act of a child, regardless of what a bunch of bleeding heart liberals say. These are mean, ruthless little criminals who need to face the full wrath of an angry society in response to the heinous crimes they commit.

Answer 10

Just remember the Washington D.C. snipers. The older man had the young boy snipe with him 13 people. He must be sentenced as an adult. Being a teen does not mean you have license to kill, maim, rob, rape or kidnap.