Juvenile Crime Solution

Juveniles committing crimes, being arrested and going to jails and prisons, is a sad fact that has hit every city, in every state in the United States of America. It is not a hard thing to comprehend, turn on the TV and watch the news. Every night there is surely to be a report about a crime committed by one of America’s youth. Many people question the reason for such high numbers of juveniles committing crimes; others turn a blind eye and refuse to acknowledge the fact that every day more children of this country are slipping into the life of crime. Some concerned members of society ask what can be done to stop it; how can they help? The answer is action! Law enforcement, as well as Local, State, and

People feel that the American justice system constructs upon holding perpetrators accountable for their actions. Most states in America believe by setting harsh sentences that this will act as a deterrent to other juveniles who are considering committing crimes. There may be some veracity to trying juveniles as adults. The juvenile arrest rate reported by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention shows that, “The juvenile Violent Crime Index arrest rate increased in the mid-2000s, and then declined through 2012 to its lowest level since at least 1980. The rate in 2012 was 38% below its 1980 level and 63% below the peak year of 1994. In 2012, there were 182 arrests for Violent Crime Index offenses for every 100,000 youth between 10 and 17 years of age. If each of these arrests involved a different juvenile, which is unlikely, then no more than 1 in every 544 person’s ages 10-17 was arrested for a Violent Crime Index offense in 2012, or less than one-fifth of 1% of all juveniles ages 10 to 17 living in the states.” This rating shows that by trying juveniles as adults has coincided considerably with the lowering rate of juvenile

This paper examines the effectiveness of the American justice system surrounding juvenile offenders not yet responsible for their punishable acts. Although the purpose of the juvenile justice system is the rehabilitate and deter juvenile offenders from breaking laws, evidence suggests the justice system is ineffective and unjust. The sentencing of juveniles is unjust and ineffective because juveniles are not mentally developed enough to make rational decisions, incarcerating juveniles is costly, and youth incarceration does not discourage youth from committing more crimes, and the incarceration of juveniles often results in mental and physical abuse of the youth.

Juveniles are not children. Juveniles are teens who commit crimes knowing the consequences but commit them knowing the flawed juvenile system will give them a free pass of a punishment because they are still children. Mary Estudillo, a writer for the University of California San Diego student newspaper, advocates that, “Violent, preventable crimes by minors have long plagued America's larger cities but have scarcely been punished because of the age of the perpetrators” (Estudillo, 4). She argues that these juvenile offenders are, “Protected by a lenient and highly outdated juvenile justice system, violent youth have taken advantage of such benefits and

The topic of juvenile criminal justice is much like the art of parenting. The main concern is figuring out how to deter the child from the same action without letting them get away with too much and not crushing their spirits. SUCH AS when a child goes beyond the set boundaries for him while playing outside which leads to hurting another child, the child should be disciplined to be deterred from crossing those boundaries again, but that discipline shouldn’t scare them away from ever going outside or playing again. There is a large range of beliefs on what types of punishment should be given to juvenile criminals depending on their age and crime. The requirements of retribution are different across the United States but that doesn’t mean it’s not a big issue. {Maybe a statistic here? This paper is an accumulation of various sources that revolve around rehabilitating juvenile criminals and adjusting the juvenile justice system and prevention programs through researcher, Richard A. Mendal’s five suggestions. Juvenile criminals should be responsibly punished for their crime but be able to go through rehabilitation with the goal to reintegrate into society again.

Currently all state legislatures have laws that children can be tried as adults for committing crimes. The beginning will examine how the juvenile justice system fails to promote the rehabilitative objectives of the juvenile system. Next this paper will argue that it will be beneficial for juveniles not be tried as adults due to their delayed brain development, issues regarding repeat offenders, and the problems with sentencing juveniles to adult sentences and how some states have begun passing laws to move the juvenile justice system back to a place of rehabilitation for children.

The community is where the rubber meets the road, so-to-speak. This is the reason and purpose that drives the need for criminal justice programs. Some may believe that the system is designed for the criminals; but, in all actuality, it was created and designed to preserve families, neighborhoods, and businesses. Everything mentioned will become a heritage to the children present in today’s world. Today, however, youth have become easily influenced by criminal activity. Over 74% of youth in 2009 were reported from diverse areas of the United States, mainly for status offenses. (Puzzanchera, 2012) Juvenile court statistics reflect alarming data related to youth crime. What is most concerning is the amount of juveniles committing violent

In recent decades, juvenile crime has become somewhat of a controversy due to the young age and immaturity of these criminals. Incidences of juvenile crime skyrocketed in the 1980s and 1990s, and policymakers pushed for laws that sent children as young as thirteen years old to trial, and even made them eligible for prison sentences. The general public has expressed a common desire to reduce the incidence of juvenile crime and find effective legislation to discipline these youths, but there are questions about these methods. What is more effective, incarceration or rehabilitation? Does criminal punishment intimidate more youths away from a life of crime, and would productive rehabilitation efforts influence these youths to becoming more valuable members of society?

Analysis of the population of the US brings forward that it constitutes twenty-five percent of the total population who are under the benchmark of eighteen years and are classified as juveniles. This group of individuals has enlarged over the last three decades and is expected to exhibit an increasing pattern for another decade too. Demographic experts assert that juveniles can be divided into further sub-groups and with an increase in their overall population, number of children and youth in different classes will change accordingly. As the proportion of likable offenders rises, the juvenile justice system will display transformations in synchrony with it (OJJDP, n.d.).

If I can implement only one policing strategy to eliminate juvenile crime in the United States, the strategy I would choose is community policing. Community policing is beneficial because the focus is on members of a community and police officers to be more involved in setting priorities, building ties, and improving security. Police are able to have immediate information about issues in a community and gain a better understanding of what needs to be improved. Also, instead of relying solely on police patrols to prevent juvenile crimes or crimes in general, using a community-based crime prevention is a more effective method due to the increase of neighborhood watch and builds a trustworthy relationship between police and members of the community.

Interestingly, in the last years, some states have implemented revised approaches to juvenile offenders, due to research has shown that imprisonment actually increases the probability that a young girl or boy will commit another crime. As a result, some states have been mandated into changing the methods used to deal with juveniles by state or federal court rulings. Regrettably, documentation shows that 22 states have been reported for abusive conditions and violent behaviors in the juvenile justice system (Childress, 2014). Impressively, several states began to reform their juvenile justice system. In my opinion, based on this research, the legal condemnation and

Juvenile delinquency has been a problem in the United States ever since it has been able to be documented. From 100 years ago to now, the process of juvenile delinquency has changed dramatically; from the way juveniles are tried, to the way that they are released back into society, so that they do not return back to the justice system (Scott and Steinberg, 2008). Saying this, juveniles tend to

One of the biggest problems the Country faces today is juvenile crime. Juvenile crime does not only affect the person who commits the crime, it also affects victims in the crime. After evaluating two sources concerning the topic of juvenile crime, I have come to my own conclusions related to this topic. I believe that changing the juvenile jurisdiction age from age seventeen to eighteen is a great idea. I also believe that sexting is a crime for some. Juvenile crime is a huge issue in the United States, but how we punish them is also very important.

Soon after the Progressive Era, the first juvenile court system was opened in Illinois. The main focus of these courts was rehabilitation for the juveniles (Fiorillo, 2013). Juvenile violent crime rates had increased so much that law makers knew they had to do something to combat all of the violence. Juveniles were committing murder, assault, rape and other serious crimes which sent the public into a fear overload. These increases in juvenile violent crimes lead to some of our early “get tough” on juvenile laws. Policy makers were inclined to push for harsher laws for juveniles who committed violent crimes.

If academic success leads to a better future what can one say about the future of children of lower socio-economic status who may have less access to the tools for achieving success? I believe one of the greatest concepts to be implemented in our country is the principle that all American children should be educated for free and to their full capacity. Education was and continues to be a game-changing social reform. Reformers have viewed education as the key to individual opportunity and to the creation of an enlightened and responsible population. They also believe that quality public schooling is among the most effective weapons in the fight against juvenile crime and is an essential component aiding in the assimilation of immigrants. A good education provides substantial benefits to individuals and, as individual benefits are aggregated throughout a community, it creates broad social and economic benefits. Investing in public education is, then, far more cost-effective for the state than paying for the social and economic consequences of under-funded, low quality schools. The primary goal of the Universal Pre-kindergarten Movement is to make access to quality pre-school educational programs available, to all children in all walks of life. This movement, at its foundation, addresses social and income inequality. In the recent past, universal pre-k was not an educational mandate and, thus, quality pre-school programs were primarily available to the children in families who