Should they just do the maximum 10 years or do you think they should do life. Me personnally i think that anyone no matter what age you are, if you intend to kill someone and know that what you are doing is wrong, i think that person should be in jail for life for sure! I am seeing alot more youth killings recently; where i live and all over canada, and the world and i think something needs to be done. I think youths do these for many reasons, gang initiation, gang relations ..tempers..etc. and they know they can get away with it...meaning they are only in jail for max youth sentence which is like 10 years. I think that is most ridiculous thing in my opinion.
2007-11-09 05:26:04 · 16 answers · asked by Dacia L 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
If we were talking about some terrible accident with a 7 year old that is one thing! but i agree with you. if they know what they are doing is wrong they should PAY the price
2007-11-13 02:38:46 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Agreed,and more people are demanding that the Youth Criminal Justice Act be repealed or changed all the time now.
The world was a different place when it was put on the books
and people still had hope that kindness would reform. For
repeat offenders and killers,it should not apply and they should be treated like adults. Being soft on crime is a sign
of weakness in a society,and kids are smart enough to know when they can get away with something. The bad ones will act
on it.
As for those who say there are no bad kids,only bad parents
or teachers,let them get swarmed sometime. Then they can
spout off.
2007-11-09 13:42:29 · answer #2 · answered by Alion 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Depends on the situation. Not all cases are the same. When I was 18 I stabbed someone while he was holding a gun to my head and was on my property. But he ditched the gun, I had no marks on me and he had stab wounds, so I was arrested(even though Im the one who called the cops to my house, and even though he had a peace bond on my property which basically said that he was not allowed anywhere near it because of past problems) and later had the charges dropped since this guy was a career criminal and I had never been in trouble prior. If I would have killed him it would have been for murder and I would have a bunch of people like the ones answering this question, pointing the finger at me and saying "he should be in prison the rest of his life". Each case is different.
2007-11-09 13:40:45 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
I personally feel if a person killed someone else, they deserve to have not lead a normal life. If a juvenile between the ages of 12 and 16 (17 in some states) committed murder, I believe they should spend the rest of their life in prison. Under the age of 12, I do not believe they have the mental capacity to completely understand what they did, and should remain in the juvenile system.
2007-11-09 16:08:33 · answer #4 · answered by Zach 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If someone under 17 commits murder, they should be kept in a home for boys until they are 18. Then they should be given a mental evaluation. If they pass they should have to join the military for 4 years. If they fail they should be placed into a mental health care facility or group home until they are able to re enter society. Lets retrain children who know nothing but abuse and violence.
Believe in second chances for some. Do no harm to another human being unless in self defense. Let one act of violence be enough. Blessings
2007-11-09 13:57:44 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Just until their execution date. Murder implies a deliberate act and if the "child" intends to take a life, then he obviously has the capacity to distinguish right from wrong. Now, if the kid was involved in an auto accident that was caused by him street racing and is charged with vehicular manslaughter, then that implies that he did not intend for a person to die and the potential for this person to benefit from a lesser sentence is much greater.
2007-11-09 13:33:52 · answer #6 · answered by Jim 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think minors should not have mandatory sentencing. I think every one should be heard by a concerned judge before the sentence is decided. Sometimes, life may be the only choice. Others, it isn't. Minors do have special rights, and they should. They are children, even though most of them don't think so!
2007-11-09 21:29:10 · answer #7 · answered by .. .this can't be good 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I believe that youthful offenders of vilolent crimes should get the same time as an adult. Even a Ten year olds knows that muder is wrong.
2007-11-09 13:35:41 · answer #8 · answered by jon_mac_usa_007 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Life under most surcumstances. There may be some cases that warrent a lower sentance. Just because they are young does not mean that they do not know it is wrong.
2007-11-09 13:34:43 · answer #9 · answered by bildymooner 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If a person is guilty of murder (self-defense is not murder), then regardless of their age, they should receive the death penalty, or life-without in states that refuse to kill those that deserve it.
2007-11-09 13:52:48 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋