Essay On Whether Juveniles Should Be Prosecuted Like Adults

Juvenile delinquency has become a controversial issue within the Criminal Justice system. In the United States, juvenile delinquency refers to disruptive and criminal behavior committed by an individual under the age of 18. In many states, a minor at the age of 16 to 17 ½ can be tried as an adult. Once the individual reaches adulthood, the disruptive and criminal behavior is recognized as a crime. However, the criminal justice system has divided juvenile delinquency into two general types of categories that has brought upon controversial issues of inequality and corruption. Yet, putting young individuals in juvenile detentions facilities seems to open the door for them to commit more crimes in the future. Therefore, under certain circumstances juveniles should be tried as an adult.

Getting transferred into a big adult facility affects the way the teenager develops mentally and physically. Nearly all of the juveniles that get taken in for trial, do not have a fully developed mentality or brain. The mind at this young age is not fully developed which means that the minor will not develop into an adult mind like they should. Teenagers in this environment are five times as likely to get sexually assaulted by another prisoner in an adult prison. Beating is one of the most common injury that happens to these juveniles. Committing suicide among these juveniles in an adult facility is eight times more likely to occur than in a juvenile facility. Punishment this harsh is a failed strategy in trying to change these juvenile’s behaviors and making them have more positive attitudes and beliefs. Juveniles tried as adults puts them in a spot where they are most likely to not get any classes on rehabilitation. The juvenile’s criminal record could contain more weight after they finish their sentence since they were not rehabilitated or around much experience with maturity ("6 facts about crime and the adolescent brain",

To Be An Adult Depending on factors of the offense, age and past criminal history, some juvenile offenders should be tried as adults – if not to be placed in jail, to receive the help that they desperately need. There’s already a system in place, but ultimately it all comes down to the judge and the jury. Of course it’d make life simpler if we were to just throw them aside and send them off to where they can no longer do us any harm, but even though it sounds like the very best idea for our own self-preservation; it doesn’t help them, in fact it only hinders. Life is far too short, and if we choose to give up on our nation’s youth because of their misdeeds at such a young age then what hope should we have for their generation and the future of this country? None, because we have set them all up for failure.

Youth is defined as the period between childhood and maturity; an adolescent who have not fully developed. An adult is a person who is fully developed and is mature. Juveniles should not be tried as an adult because they are too young. Even though, some children believe that they are grown and can make their own decisions, they still are young.

The debate on whether or not to try a child as an adult has been raging for many years. Today’s society needs to be cautious with the way they handle juvenile criminals. Our prison system is already busting at the seams with blood-thirsty criminals. Tossing a twelve year old in a prison system designed for adults is dangerous. A chance for rehabilitation should be afforded to every juvenile offender. However, not all juveniles can be rehabilitated and we owe it to the victims, and their families, to ensure that justice prevails. Juvenile offenders should not be prosecuted as adults, unless extenuating circumstances exist that prevents them from being rehabilitated.

The main reason for this is to learn more and have a better understanding of how Juvenile Courts work and about there Juvenile Court Sentencing Options. Kent Scheidegger, legal director, of the criminal justice legal foundation, states that “Most teenagers, know enough to be tried in adult court,” "Minors aren’t fully capable of understanding what is going on, I find not credible in the case of intellectually normal teenagers." he said. Research on the youths brain development shows that teens have a different understanding and common sense from adults. There are discussions among the juvenile courts whether

In 2007, there were more than 200,000 minors/juveniles that were tried as adults (McCrea). This represents the current problem within the juvenile justice system well. This represents the problem because it shows how our system allows for hundreds of thousands of juveniles to be tried as adults. This is why I believe that juveniles should not be tried as adults. For one, the juveniles are not fully understanding of the consequences that are possible if they break the laws that they do (Redding). Also, while they are able to be tried as an adult in our current juvenile justice system, they are not allowed the rights that come with being an adult (McCrea). Lastly, juveniles are going through changes and putting them in jail can greatly affect them (Ortiz)

According to statistics, juveniles being tried as adults is not a new phenomenon. Since the beginning of the juvenile court, juveniles have been eligible to be tried as adults for the commission of capital crimes. However, starting in the 1960s and 1970s and mounting in the 1980s and 1990s, there has been an extensive upsurge in the number of juveniles tried as adults as well as a rise in research on the topic. This increase has coincided with the proliferation of laws that cover and dictate

The juvenile law in America’s system was created on the premise that due to young people’s immaturity, the crimes they have committed should be handled in a different manner from those ascribed to adults. The young people were mostly under the age of eighteen. The key basis was to address the cause of their misdemeanors and to ultimately restore their responsible membership within the community (Bernard, 2012). Juvenile courts date back to the late nineteenth and early twentieth century. In the United States, juvenile courts vary in structure and organization, but all serve the common goal of rehabilitating young people.

The evaluation of success for the purpose of justice is worth seeing the adolescent’s age to be no longer considered a juvenile. Has society dealt with the crime correctly or does the cost for said decision outweigh the punishment the juvenile deserves? Is this the right direction? The struggling issue the legal system is navigating through leads into a decision pointing the said juvenile in the right direction by guidance and education or destroying the juvenile by matching a harsher punishment to a particular crime. In order to make the appropriate decision, a list of “pros” and “cons” would be able to offer some assistance. The “pro” side for a juvenile court system is direction and guidance. This court system sees the lack of maturity and discretion of this youth. This should give cause of seeing the youth as “different” than an adult and should be held less blameworthy for the crime committed. This court’s main objective is to handle the youth through policed courses and correctional involvement for the purpose of rehabilitation. The court focuses on the “age” instead of the “crime.” Transferring to the adult courts, the purpose is to bring harsher sentences for the crime committed as well as the slim chance of “getting off” the hook by attending counseling or other step-process program. Adult courts also see the victims and their families need relief for the crime committed against them. Adult courts do offer the juvenile the majority

Either to try individuals as adults or juveniles has evoked profound strife. I strongly believe that all individuals over the age 15 should be tried as an adult no matter the crime. According to the Justice Department, serious illegal offenses such as rape, assault, robbery with violence, and drug negotiation have increased among juveniles to 30% with 10% of all homicides by juveniles. To begin with, juveniles have the ability to plan a kill. As well as acknowledging that a crime by a juvenile is no different than a crime by an adult.

Should juveniles be tried as adults? There are many conflicts to this question.Many people say no and others say yes. Today many juveniles that commit serious crimes do get tried as adults. Violent crimes are committed in the United States every day. Almost one-half of them are committed by teenagers ages 13 through 17. In 2015 there were seven thousand juveniles that were tried as an adult. I do believe that juveniles should be tried as adults because anyone who commits a serious crime should be punished, the boy has the capacity to understand what they are doing, and these young adults are old enough to take responsibility for their actions.

As more minors are committing violent crimes, the question of whether they should be tried as adults has arisen. Children as young as 13 or 14 are committing violent crimes such as murder, rape, and armed robbery. Some of these children are being tried as adults while others are being tried as juveniles and receiving milder punishments. A juvenile offender may receive a few years in a juvenile detention facility and possibly probation following his release at age eighteen. An adult committing the same violent crime will receive a much harsher penalty, often years in jail, possibly a life sentence, with little or no chance of parole. The only difference between the two offenders is the age at which they committed the crime. Juveniles over

Juvenile crime has mushroomed into an enormous dilemma for the legal system. The juvenile court system needs to devote more time to backing up what the judicial system stands for. “The courts allow the majority of juveniles off of the hook for committing crimes instead of arraigning them as adults like they should” (Stapleton 117). Due to the overflow of cases in lower circuit courts, the courts cannot handle the cases with the diligence necessary (Snyder 3). Moreover, a boom in juvenile crime poses a threat to the way that the judicial system conducts itself. Crimes that need to transfer to adult criminal courts are instead dealt with in the misdemeanor court (Snyder 3). Howard Snyder, Director of the National Juvenile Court Data Archive, in his report, demands that the courts must not continue letting minors leave the courtroom with minimal sentences for dangerous crimes. Most importantly, juvenile crime forces the courts to neglect time from the adult criminal courts. Juvenile crime has done nothing but increase in the past, and because of the increase in crime by minors courts have been forced to place less emphasis on lower criminal cases (McPolin 26). Increasing crime amongst minors will be the primary cause for the “downfall of the American judicial system” (Stapleton 119).

Prior to 1899, in the United States, child offenders over the age of seven were imprisoned in the same facilities as adult offenders. As a result of political and social reformers, society’s views on juvenile justice began to shift to a more sympathetic view. Beginning in 1899, individual states began to address the youth incarceration problem by establishing youth reform homes, the predecessor to juvenile dentition centers. The objective of these homes was the rehabilitation of juvenile offenders for their re-entry into society and for the greater good. However, in recent years, many have argued that juveniles charged with violent felonies ought to be treated as adults; while others argue its antithesis. In 2005, Kirk Gunderson (17)