Major Persuasive Speech Outline

In the United States, “an estimated 7,100 juvenile defendants were charged with felonies in adult criminal court in 1998” ("Juvenile Defendants"). These numbers portray how there were a lot of juveniles being charged. In addition to a large increase in the amount of crime, there was a change in the severity of the crimes that were committed, “the number of violent crimes committed by young people declined substantially from the 1990s to 2003, but then surged again that year, with the estimated number of juvenile murder offenders increasing 30 percent” (Kahn). These numbers show how juveniles were committing more crimes that were serious in the face of the law. These numbers are a brief snippet of

Youth and juvenile crime is a common and serious issue in current society, and people, especially parents and educators, are pretty worried about the trend of this problem. According to Bala and Roberts, around 17% of criminals were youths, compared to 8% of Canadian population ranging between 12 to 18 years of age between 2003 and 2004 (2006, p37). As a big federal country, Canada has taken a series of actions since 1908. So far, there are three justice acts in the history of Canadian juvenile justice system, the 1908 Juvenile Delinquents Act, the 1982 Young Offenders Act, and the 2003 Youth Criminal Justice Act. In Canada, the judicial system and the principle of these laws have been debated for a long time. This paper will discuss how

Youth crime is a growing epidemic that affects most teenagers at one point in their life. There is no question in society to whether or not youths are committing crimes. It has been shown that since 1986 to 1998 violent crime committed by youth jumped approximately 120% (CITE). The most controversial debate in Canadian history would have to be about the Young Offenders Act (YOA). In 1982, Parliament passed the Young Offenders Act (YOA). Effective since 1984, the Young Offenders Act replaced the most recent version of the Juvenile Delinquents Act (JDA). The Young Offenders Act’s purpose was to shift from a social welfare approach to making youth take responsibility for their actions. It also addressed concerns that the paternalistic

In 2009, 18% of all offences were committed by juveniles, with most of these offences being for minor crimes such as graffiti, vandalism, theft, fare evasion, and road traffic offences. (Qld Police Service, 2009.) Most of these offences were “unplanned and opportunistic, and occurred when the juvenile was under the influence of alcohol and drug use, and affected by peer pressure.” (Cunneen and White 2007). Research also shows that juveniles are often victims of crime , with young people aged 15 to 24 years of age being at higher risk of assault than any other age group ( Eikelhor et al, 2009 ), and that this sometimes leads them to offending

The point in which a person is considered an adult, assuming the person in question is under 18 years of age, depends a lot and on a number of factors. The point in which that demarcation occurs can be in the early teens and can range all the way up to 17 years old. There are legal limits in place in terms of who can be charged as an adult despite being under 18 and they vary widely based on the jurisdiction in which the person is being charged, and that can range from local to state to federal jurisdictions (Nolo, 2012).

The public’s distorted perceptions of the youth crime caused by the connection between these social systems has led to a call for a more punitive youth criminal justice system in which there are harsher punishments and longer custodial sentences. In response to the so-called need for a more punitive justice system, the Young Offenders Act was introduced and allowed for many young people to be arrested and incarcerated for minor offenses such as breach of probation and petty theft. As a result, youth have become severely overrepresented in the youth criminal justice system. The idea that youth behaviour is changing and becoming more violent is stretched, when the truth is that “violence has been redefined” over time and the justice system uses this to make it seem as though teens are more dangerous than ever. (Minaker and Hogeveen, 2009, p.11)

Notably, children of below 18 years old have a little understanding of the law. In most cases, these individuals commit crimes as a result of an inward or outward pressure. Hence, they should not be sentenced in adults' prisons without parole. For example, most of the eleven old children in the U.S engage in homicide crimes as a result of mental illnesses. Mostly, children suffering from domestic violence have a higher likelihood of suffering from stress and depression. Most of them drop out school and join the gangs in the urban centers. Especially, victims of divorce engage in drug and substance abuse because they lack the parental love and care. Henceforth, charging them without parole is unjust because the court needs to examine the motive of the crime. Additionally, sentencing juveniles in the adult prisons is a form of manipulation of the youths. Chiefly, charging individuals of 18 years and below in a similar manner with the adults is a form of intimidation and torture. Individuals of this age require care and love because they are the generation of tomorrow. For example, in the U.S, individuals of 18 years and below makes up the bulk of the nation’s population. Henceforth, in the future, these individuals would be ruling the nation. Thus, sentencing them without trail serves to kill their dreams and ambitions. Likewise, most of these individuals possess

It is true that teenagers are biologically different than adults when it comes to brain development, but this can not be used as an excuse to commit awful crimes. When kids come to a certain age, they are fully aware of what is right and wrong, and must face proper punishment for their wrong doings. Those that are serving unfair sentences however, deserve chances at rehabilitation.

Between June 2011 and June 2013, The New Zealand Herald reported that youth crime dropped by 19 percent (Boyle, 2014). Statistics New Zealand numbers also show that conviction rates in the Youth Court are at the lowest level since records

Juvenile or youth crime has become a controversial issue in the politics of Canada because of the huge disagreements regarding how the youths should be treated in the criminal system despite of the fact that youth crime in the country is lamentable. The controversy is mainly centered on the best and most suitable approach taken to handle the youth criminals and the severity of the punishment that should be given (Makarenko, 2007). In addition to generating concerns and dominating Canada politics, youth crime has also attracted huge concerns by many Canadians, especially violent youth crime. According to some statistics, youth crime has continued to increase despite reports by the police that offenses committed by people between 12 and 17 years have declined. In 2010, the overall juvenile crime rate declined by 7 percent relative to 2009 while violent crime dropped by 3 percent within the same period. The Youth Criminal Justice Act has contributed to numerous changes in youth justice in Canada including decrease in the rate of youth crime, changes in the way the society responds to young people, and development of humane and respectful ways of dealing with the youth.

In 1992, the demonstration expressed that youthful wrongdoers must be conveyed to adult court if the security of the general population and the youth can not be met through Youth Offenders Act and raised the most extreme sentence for murder from three to five years (Hartnagel, 4004, pp. 361). However, in 1995 the youth accused of a vicious offense went straight to adult court unless allowed an application expressing the individual can be attempted in youth court, on the condition that there is proof that the trial would be of the best interest for the recovery of the youth and the security of the overall public (Hartnagel, 2004, pp.361). Canadians believed due to survey and studies that the Youth Offenders Act is unsuccessful because youth crime elevated over the years (Hartnagel, 2004, pp.364). The media has a huge impact on the public therefore, the article states that the media rarely contains the correct information. General society believe what they read since the media is not completely true they are deceived, along these lines the feelings on youth crime will keep on being contorted (Hartnagel, 2004,

Youth criminal behaviour from the ages of 12-17 has been and still is a major concern for utmost cultural societies in Canada. Youth commit crimes ranging from small petty crimes to big killings; like theft, mischief, the possession of cannabis to shooting or common assaults. “Statistics Canada reported that there were almost 101,000 youth aged from 12-17 accused of criminal code violation reported by the police in 2014” (Allen & Superle, 2014, 3). “101,000 aged youths results in 4,322 per 100,000 youth population, while in the Canadian population youth make up 7% of the population, and persons accused of crime comprise of 13%” (Allen & Superle, 2014, 3). The small petty crimes youth commit are done daily. The dominant group to be committing these crimes are more males than females. One of the major crimes male youth commit is mischief, which

Resolved: Teen criminals, ages 14-17, should be locked up in adult prisons if convicted of felonies. As my colleague mentioned, by this we mean that the judge should have the right to try a juvenile as an adult depending on the severity of the crime. One example of this is the case of a 15 year old who shot her dad with a hunting bow. She did this to get back at him for taking away her phone. After she shot him, she then proceeded to hide the house phone, making him climb out the window and drive himself a third of a mile to the nearest neighbor. She was arrested for first-degree assault,which is punishable by up to 25 years in prison.If this girl were sent to a juvenile detention center (also known as Juvie) instead of prison she would be

In addition, the actions that teenages perform while as a child shouldn't count against their future. They should be given a chance to rehabilitate and be allowed to prove themselves as a better person as an adult. In

Really, this is untrue. As said in Some Juvenile Killers Deserve Adult Justice, “a developing adolescent brain does not prevent deliberate, thoughtful actions” (Weir 1). Juveniles are aware of what they’re doing, no matter what the state of mine they are in. The development in the brain does not matter when it comes to making choices. A juvenile can still plan and execute a crime the same as an adult and sadly, some do. This does not mean that they should get off of the same punishment because of their age. Juveniles should receive a punishment that equates their crime.