Essay about Juvenile Life Without Parole, Cruel or Just Unusual?

The data for this project was collected by administering an anonymous survey to incarcerated juveniles at (name of facility), the (name) receiving center and at the NAACP office in Sacramento, California. The survey asked for gender and parental status (incarcerated versus not incarcerated). Participants were given a paper survey and a pencil to complete the survey. See Appendix for a copy of the survey.

One of the most controversial questions in the juvenile justice system today is, "Should the death penalty be applied to juveniles?”. A lot of people think that the death penalty for juveniles is cruel and unusual punishment and should only be used for adults. The crimes that juveniles commit are as dangerous and as violent as adult crimes. People argue that the adolescent brain does not mature until the late teens or early twenties, and that death penalty should not be the resolution. Some studies show that childhood abuse or neglect can causes the child to commit crimes when they grow to adulthood. Debate about the use of the death penalty for juveniles has grown more intense because of the crimes they are

Today, we live in a society faced with many problems, including crime and the fear that it creates. In the modern era, juveniles have become a part of society to be feared, not rehabilitated. The basis of the early juvenile justice system was to rehabilitate and create safe havens for wayward youth. This is not the current philosophy, although the U.S. is one of the few remaining countries to execute juveniles. Presently, our nation is under a presidential administration that strongly advocates the death penalty, including the execution of juveniles. The media and supporters of capital punishment warn of the "superpredator," the juvenile with no fear, remorse, or conscience. Opponents of this view encourage

In the article “On Punishment and Teen Killers” by Jennifer Jenkins asserts that teens are becoming more violent and starting commit more crimes because of the national television they watch.Jenkins tells the reader about “JLWOP” (Juvenile Life Without Parole) and how kids are being sentenced to life in prison without parole.Some people are trying to advocate to minimize the offender culpability because of their age.While kids are getting sentenced to life without parole, this disproves juvenile advocates reliance on the undeveloped brain.Some juvenile offenders truly understand what the victim family go through and how long it takes them to recover.There were millions of dollars spent to end JLWOP and to set convicted murderers free.

The death penalty also known as capital punishment is an execution in which the person who committed the offence is put to death by the state. It was first practiced in Jamestown colony, 1608. The person was hanged for spying for the Spanish government and was the 1st person sentenced to death in America. Since then, it has been a form to punish the criminals for committing such heinous crimes and putting end to violence and crime rates. Despite how people agree that the death penalty is justifiable, however; it still violates the international human rights laws. These laws were created to protect the lives of all human beings including the criminals, who some might agree they do not deserve to live. Even though some might say that the

Garinger was a former juvenile court judge, so Garinger is a very credible source when it comes to the topic of juvenile criminals. To support Garinger’s credible usage of ethos, he demonstrates that in 2005, Supreme Court acknowledged that even though juveniles have committed terrible crimes such as homicide “juvenile offenders cannot with reliability be classified among the worst offenders” (6). This technique of providing the opinions of Supreme Court helps build Garinger’s credibility, and even more so that he is was a former juvenile court judges, so he most likely has a personal relationships with the Supreme Court. Readers feel sympathy to any juvenile who have been charged as adults and been sentenced to life without parole.

“Sentenced young: The story of life without parole for juvenile offenders” by Beth Schwartzapfel tells the story of two women: Jennifer Pruitt and Donnell Miracle and the sad truth behind life sentences

Gail Garinger, the author of “Juveniles Don’t Deserve Life Sentences,” argues that children should not be struck down for life because they commit the most vile and horrible crimes imaginable, based on the sole fact that they are still adolescents, and that they should be given the chance for parole and rehabilitation because they are not fully developed; therefore, in her article she shows exceptionally strong ethos to support her claim. Garinger first exposes her strong ethos by using the authority of the Supreme Court to exclaim why the youth shouldn’t be punished to a life sentence for homicide or manslaughter by saying, “the Supreme Court

In 2006, the Colorado Legislature passed a reform bill changing juvenile life without parole to 40 years before parole eligibility, but the bill did not make the reform retroactive, so the reform does not apply to any juveniles sentenced before 2006.

Supreme Court ruling Graham v. Florida (2010) banned the use of life without parole for juveniles who committed non-homicide crimes, and Roper v. Simmons (2005) abolished the use of the death penalty for juvenile offenders. They both argued that these sentences violated the 8th Amendment, which prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. While these landmark cases made great strides for the rights of minors passing through the criminal justice system, they are just the first steps in creating a juvenile justice system that takes into consideration the vast differences between adolescents and adults. Using sociological (Butler, 2010) and legal (Harvard Law Review, 2010) documents, this essay will explicate why the next such step to be taken is

This treaty has been recently questioned because at the time of the treaty’s ratification, the United States had around 400 juveniles serving life without parole. Today, there are over 2,000 juveniles serving this sentence. However, according to the Human Rights Watch, they are only aware of twelve juveniles serving this term. The United States has a significantly high number of juveniles serving life without parole compared to other nations. America justifies this remarkable number by stating that only the worst juveniles are given this sentence. The United States attempts to fit the criteria of the treaty that states that juveniles can be treated as adults in exceptional situations. However, most of these criminals are not violent individuals, they are children who made a horrible mistake at the wrong

Various scholars have determined that, “life without parole is examined as a form of death penalty, namely, death by incarceration as distinct from death by execution” in order to determine the difficulties that juveniles face when not given the option to serve their sentence through probation or parole (Johnson, Mcgunigall-Smith 2008, p.

A 16 year old boy is at the peak of their adolescent life, learning and discovering about puberty, maturity, right and wrong and future life goals. On the other hand, a man of 25 has matured, lived long enough to have made both good and bad judgments and has already been in the process of achieving those life goals they once thought of as a teenager. In a given situation, is it ethical to hold these two age groups, with mentalities that are worlds apart, to the same standards and punishments in the justice system? Until Roper v. Simmons in 2005, the justice system did just that, treat the actions of 16 year old with the same consequences as if they had been committed by an adult. In Roper v. Simmons the United States Supreme Court declared

     Capital punishment should be viewed as the stripping away of humanity from a person. The death penalty itself should be "executed" because of racial inequities, the concept of murder, the possibility of error, lack of deterrence, the cost, and an overwhelmed legal system. "The goal of capital punishment is revenge" (Introduction 1). Capital punishment is simply an outlet for the bloodlust of the American people (Introduction 1).

Juvenile justice has proved to be as imprudent as it is practical. Snyder and Sickmund (1999) found that as early as 1825, there was a significant push to establish a separate juvenile justice system focused on rehabilitation and treatment. The procedure continued to stay focused on the rehabilitation of a person, even though financial support and assets sustained to hold back its achievement. In reaction to rising juvenile crime rates in the 1980s’, more corrective laws were approved (Snyder and Sickmund 1999). In the 1990s, the United States legal system took further steps regarding transfer provisions that lowered the threshold at which juveniles could be tried in criminal court and sentenced to adult prison (Snyder and Sickmund 1999). Furthermore, laws were enacted that allowed prosecutors and judges more discretion in their sentencing options; and confidentiality standards, which made juvenile court proceedings and records more available to the public (Snyder and Sickmund 1999), were reduced.