Juvenile Justice In Juveniles

In our reading (Juvenile Justice in America) it talks about a 1992 survey of law enforcement department’s product by G. David Curry and colleagues’ it says “the seventy-nine largest U.S. cities, 91 percent of respondents reported the presence of gang problems. These researchers estimated that there were 4,881 gangs with 249,324 gang members” and it also states “that juveniles made up 90 percent of the gang membership.” There have been seven stages identified for these emergent gangs with stage one being implementation. That is were gang leaders go to a new city to recruit juveniles to sell drug for money. They go into the low-income minority neighborhood where they promise their recruits protection and part of the profits from the drug sells.

Placing a juvenile in a detention center early in the court process increases the risk that youths will be found to be delinquent and damage their prospects for future success. A majority of the youths that are placed in these facilities pose little or no threat to the public and essentially do not need to be there. This portion of the juvenile court process is detrimental to the future and mental aspects of a youth’s life. We desperately need to change the way that we handle the juvenile court system because we are only reinforcing the delinquent behavior that these youths have been exposed to. We need to focus on the rehabilitation and prevention efforts for these youths not the punishment aspect and until then (insert a better ending).

We believe that YCJA is fair. The law is fair and equitable in the light of fact that some of the adolescent who have a crime might not know what they are doing but will get a fair sentence and punishment. Having these laws will help the teenagers to not do the same crime again because they may need to pay restitution or do a community service. As years pass by, we are seeing that there fewer cases of youth breaking laws and they are given a second chance to reintegrate. In this way, the youth is given a chance to learn from his/her previous mistakes. The YCJA also provides fair consequences and fair

There have been many studies conducted that examine ways in which the juvenile justice system responds to female offenders. Historically juvenile female offenders have been treated under status offense jurisdiction (Zahn et al., 2010, p. 10). United States Courts would exercise the principle of “parens patriae” to place the female in detention as a form of punishment for misbehavior (Sherman, 2012, pp. 1589-1590). This principle also remains prevalent as it pertains to how the juvenile justice system currently responds to juvenile female offenders.

In Spring 2009, three offenders, all in grade eleven , set two houses is Sherwood park on fire. The youth criminal justice Act (YCJA) provided opportunities for them to reintegrate and rehabilitate, instead of throwing them in jail. YCJA covers kids between the ages twelve to seventeen years old. It 's purpose is to handle youth offenders more differently than adults because of their undeveloped minds. The YCJA was released back in 2003. By protecting the rights and providing Youth Canadians the support they need, the YCJA benefits the offenders in a positive way. The act gentrust the youth a second chance to make sure they don 't reoffend by rehabilitating and reintegrating them. Also youth over the age 14 years can get an adult sentence if necessary. Therefore, the YCJA is an effective law because it supports everyone; youth will acquire the help they need and Public Safety is insured.

Justice is like a river,strong but can be easily contaminated.On April 1,2003 the government introduced the YCJA in canada,It covers the prosecution of youths for criminal offences for ages 12-17.It is clear that since it’s introduction in 2003 the YCJA has been making a remarkable stride for youth offenders.It is evident that the YCJA is both fair and equitable to youth who have broken the law. The YCJA gives youths seconds chances at a better future,don't clog the court with minor cases and understand kids haven't matured yet.

The overwhelming majority of juveniles are involved in impulsive or risky, even delinquent behaviors during their teenage years. However, the majority go on to become very productive citizens who do not commit crimes. In order for this to continue the government established the Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA) which gives young offenders a chance to better themselves, and. By doing so, the YCJA helps teach youth that their actions are unacceptable and the punishments imposed are lesser then an adult. Through the analysis of their unacceptable actions, lesser punishments and a better future, it is clear that YCJA is highly effective at giving youth a better chance in society.

The Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA) takes care of people from the ages 12-17, who have committed criminal offences. The YCJA protects the young offenders from getting a criminal record, but instead these youths have to face a sentence. The YCJA came into effect on April 1, 2003 but was introduced to the House of Commons on October 14, 1999. Anne Mcallen who was the minister of justice of the YCJA at the time, replaced the Young Offenders Act (YOA) in 2003. Since then, the YCJA made its debut which decreased the youth charges by 21% in 2010. Nevertheless, the YCJA in my opinion has been fair and equal to all youth, but at the same time the YCJA needs improvement.

Juveniles committing crimes is not a new issued being introduced to society; actually, it has been an issue for centuries. However, the big question is, should juveniles be tried in adult courts? Before answering, take into consideration every possible scenario that could have led them to commit the crime. For instance, were they the leader in the act? Did they participate in the crime? Was the juvenile even aware of what was taking place? Were they peer pressured? Did they have any other choice at the time? There are so many other questions we could consider when making a decision here.

One person may argue that young offenders that commit tremendous crimes should not be able to have these special privileges. What they may not realize is that young offenders can fall under what is called “the age of presumption”, which is when a young offender commits an indictable crime and is over the age of fourteen, but less than eighteen years of age. If a child is under this category, their crime can be punished by being given an adult sentence, but only if the child has committed first degree murder or a serious violent offence (Howard Society, 2008). The YCJA gives the opportunity to discipline youth criminals without treating them as harsh as adults would be.

According to Caldwell (1961) the juvenile justice system is based on the principle that youth are developmentally and fundamentally different from adults. According to Mack (1909) the focus of the juvenile justice system has shifted from “was the crime committed” to “why did the child commit the crime”, “how can we help the child”. When performing as it is designed and up to the initial intentions, the juvenile court balances rehabilitation (treatment) of the offender with suitable sanctions when necessary such as incarceration. According to Griffin (2008) in some cases juveniles may be required to be “transferred” to adult court. In this paper I am going to discuss the three primary mechanisms of waiver to adult court: judicial waiver

When thinking of reforming the juvenile justice system one has to think; what can we do to make this better for everyone involve? There are some programs that can be implemented when trying to make a change in the juvenile system. The main thing is getting parents or the guardian more involved in the child’s whereabouts. Secondly the community where the youth will have a place to go and have something more constructive to do to keep them out of trouble. Law enforcement can get involved in giving ride along and having visits to the local jails or prisons from the youth to talk to some of the inmates. Crime in life isn’t racist at all it has a no age limit, no certain gender and no social status for most of those whom decide to partake in a criminal activity. From the beginning juveniles have been an issue with law enforcement, the question has always arisen of whom will take control without cruel and unusual punishment and assist with the rehabilitation and prevention future crime actions.

Currently to deal with juvenile offenders involved in the youth crime, there are two options available. The first option that prevails to a larger extent is known to us as incarceration while the second option that is slowly gaining trends is known to us as rehabilitation programs. This paper focuses on thorough analysis of both these options and the impact that they have on the offenders as well as the society as a whole. The paper also assesses the viability of these options in order to determine which of these will prove to be more effective and beneficial.

The juvenile justice system is similar to the criminal justice system. This system is where juveniles are processed, and may be arrested after referrals for juvenile delinquency. Juvenile justice is very different in every state and can be very similar as well because every system has limited jurisdiction and that most focus on the offenders and not their offenses. Therefore, there are 51 juvenile justice systems in the United States. The United States has the juvenile justice system because children are very different than adults – in that they can be better receptive for change and also being easier to rehabilitate. Moreover, the main goal of the juvenile justice system is rehabilitation (Juvenile Law Center). The juvenile justice system is made up of police, courts, corrections, probation and parole services, as well as community-based programs to name a few (book).

In the past years, cases of crime committed by teenagers are found everywhere throughout the world. Sentencing options are given to youth offenders based on their circumstances of the crime that was carried out. Often, juveniles are tried as adults and are punished with a lifetime in jail. The mindset between a child and a grown person aren't the same. Due to juvenile’s lack of knowledge and maturity, crimes committed by teens shouldn’t result in them being sentenced to life without parole.