Should Juveniles Be Charged As Adults Essay

Whether or not we should try juveniles as adults has always been a controversial issue. First of all, “juveniles” are children who fall under the age of 18. However, the legal age varies within certain states across the USA. Despite the age difference, some juveniles are still tried as adults. Does convicting a juvenile as an adult, turn out to be a better problem-solver, and how is this affecting the deterrence of crime?

By trying juveniles in the adult courts they are forcing them to accept a punishment that does not allow for the nurturing and growth that they need. Putting them in with other adult criminals only makes them more likely to commit severe crimes in the future. Judge Dorn has this

If we simply send juveniles through the adult justice system it might make them worse individuals. For instance, since their minds are still growing, by being around worse criminals they may pick on their criminal traits.

There are times juveniles should not be convicted as adults because sometimes the “crimes” may not harsh enough to be charged as an adult. For example, if a 8 year old saw a gun in their mother's purse and thought it was a toy and grabbed it and began to shoot who would be at fault ? Plus children in adult prisons are 10 times more likely to be taken advantage of in their time. Research shows that children prosecuted in the adult criminal justice system are more likely to reoffend than those held in the juvenile justice

While some individuals feel that exposure to an adult sanction will have a negative effect on the health of juveniles, the major crimes committed by these minors are the same as those committed by their surrounding adult inmates. The threat of adult incarceration will also repel juveniles from committing serious crimes. According to Professor Morgan Reynolds from Texas A&M University, “Between 1980 and 1993 juvenile crime rose alarmingly, and as the states toughened their approach during the 1990s, it declined just as steeply” (2005). In addition, incarceration lowers the chances of reoffending (Schneider cited by Reynolds, 2005). Enforcing laws that discourage juveniles from executing major crimes are effective in reducing crime rates and implementing public safety. Also, those that have already committed severe crimes are less likely to reoffend after exposure to adult sanction. Like Christopher Simmons, juveniles are aware of the crimes they are committing, and may even be proud of their actions. Regardless of the motive, teens committing major offenses should be placed in adult sanctions because their actions are no different than adult offenders. The intimidation of adult detention is successful in both deterring juvenile crime, and appropriately holds minors accountable for their severe offenses.

Some juvenile delinquents are being treated like adults and being sent to adult prisons instead of juvenile prisons. In an article called “ADULT PRISONS: No Place for Kids,” by Steven J. Smith, Smith presents an argument against treating juveniles like adults. His argument states that minors shouldn’t be trialed and placed into adult prisons because instead of being rehabilitated, they typically come out worse because of the daily exposure to already hardened criminals. Smith provides reasons why juveniles are convicted as adults, the drawbacks of placing adolescents in prisons with adults, and an alternative punishment for juvenile criminals.

Most of the time, the system has proven itself to be unsuccessful in dealing with juvenile crimeMost often, the system is unsuccessful. “There are kids who are five times more likely to be raped or otherwise sexually assaulted in adult prisons than in juvenile facilities. The risk of suicide is likewise much higher for juveniles in adult jails.”(How to reduce crime Pg 3). When juveniles are sent to jail, they are still relatively impressionable from people in the prison, and may go back into crime after they’re released, hindering rehabilitation and just creating another violent criminal in the world. The court sentencing the criminal is also at

Sending juveniles to jail not only hurts the juveniles themselves but it also hurts the American economy. In the article, “Children in adult jails; Juvenile Justice” by The Economist statistical data is displayed to show the affects of being tried as adults have on juveniles and the economy. Some may ponder and think how sending juveniles to prison would hurt the economy. According to the article, “It is costly: more than $31,000, on average, to incarcerate an adult for a year” (The Economist). Juveniles who are tried as adults and sent to prison fall under that price tag. It is incredible to think the federal government would spend $31,000

Should Juveniles Age 16 be tried for murder as an adult? In the United States it is popular for many juveniles, mostly around the age of 16 to be tried as an adult for murder. Two assumptions that make this easier for juvenile to be tried as adults, are because they will receive sentences in the adult criminal system. This will make their punishment for crime much harsher and more "proportional" to the crime committed.

Kids should be subjected to the measures of punishment that our judicial system is giving to them. Kids who show lots of enmity should be tried as adults. It is the only way to protect the innocent children. These kids know right from wrong, but they choose to do the wrong things and violence is wrong. As the laws have gotten stricter on discipline the kids have gotten wilder. When we let society tell us how to discipline our children then violent children is the result.

Crimes are most associated with adults. Murder is especially most associated with adults. When a teenager commits such a crime such as murder they must be tried, and they should not be treated with leniency and coddling, but with the full force of the law as an adult.

Heinous crimes are committed every day in the United States. Each year thousands of juveniles under the age of 18 are arrested. The debate of “should a juvenile be tried as an adult” is one for the ages. Many would like to argue against the idea as they believe firmly in rehabilitation. But what happens when the crimes are so violent that the family is unable to recognize the victim or when the juvenile shows no remorse and then goes on to harm others. At what age should one be held accountable for their actions? At what age is a person taught right from wrong? A juvenile is someone who in many states is eighteen and under, but here in the state of Texas a juvenile is considered 17 and under. The people who agree that juveniles should be sentenced or tried as adults are the families of the victims, and the majority who acknowledge an adolescent should know right from wrong. Juveniles who commit violent crimes should be tried as adults because they are old enough to know the difference between right and wrong.

By law adolescents are not able to vote, purchase tobacco or alcohol, join the armed forces, or sign a legal contract. Children are not permitted the same rights and responsibilities as adults because the law recognizes their inability to make adult decisions. The law acknowledges that children are unable to handle the consequences that come along with the rights that adults have. By allowing them to be charged as adults is holding them to a double standard. Telling them that they are not old enough to enjoy the same luxuries as adults, but they can experience the same punishment as adults if they commit a crime. The law acknowledged the inability of children to make decisions but still allows them to suffer the same consequences as adults. Research demonstrates that transferring children from juvenile court to adult court does not decrease recidivism, and in fact actually increases crime. Instead of the child learning their mistake they are more likely to repeat it. Juvenile detention centers have programs that help reconstruct young minds and help them realize where they went wrong. Prison does not offer this same opportunity. (Estudillo, Mary Onelia)

Recent crimes have been committed by young people. Rapists, torturers, murderers...They’re ranging from ages 12-18 years old. And even though they have committed violent crimes that have affected thousands of people, they receive small punishments! 5-10 years is the longest jail time juveniles can receive in court. It’s almost like a slap on the wrist when they commit these crimes. They aren’t being tried fairly based on them. If young offenders are tried based on their crimes and past offences instead of their age, they can receive more fitting punishments. Teenagers can get about 20-30 years for murder crimes, 25 years for rape. They can learn from their mistakes and others can do the same. This can help decrease crime rates in juveniles

I do not think it is a good idea to lock juveniles up in prisons with adults. For a child to set down and plan a murder for instance, there would have to be some kind of deep emotional problem. On the other side of this, if the child knows right from wrong and he can sit down and plan a murder, then you could say if he is old enough to kill someone then he is old enough to die. The juvenile criminal is rooted much deeper than right from wrong. It starts back from when they are small children. Most of them are usually outsiders or outcasts. Who can you hold fault for that other than society? If juveniles don't fit in with the popular kids in school they are considered an