Youth Crime In Canada

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.

In Canada when a young person gets in trouble with the law, the punishment given will be in accordance with the Youth Criminal Justice Act. The Youth Criminal Justice Act was created in 2003. The main objective of this legislation is to hold youth accountable for their actions through the promotion of “rehabilitation” and “reintegration” (Youth Criminal Justice Act, 2002, S.3a(ii)). Within the Canadian court system, there is a youth court for individuals who get in trouble with the law while they are still under the age of 18 years. In Calgary, Alberta the youth courtrooms are located in the Calgary Courts Center building, which is located at 601 5th Street SW. I attended youth court on Wednesday, October 26, 2016 and Monday, October 31th. This paper will shed light on the atmosphere of the youth courtroom, analyze how the criminal justice professionals are acting within the courtroom, and discuss certain cases that went through the youth courts.

Canada has many rules in place for all the crimes that happens throughout the country. However, people of different ages are treated differently. This is because of the YCJA, which gives youth who commit crime, under the age of eighteen, certain rights that adult criminals don’t get. This is a very debated and important topic because this act gives certain advantages to youth criminals because of their age and some people don’t think that this is fair.

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

The Youth Justice System uses rehabilitative justice when dealing with youth. This method is proven to be effective. If we compare this way of justice to United States (which uses retributive justice) we will see a difference in crime rates and notice that United States has a higher rate of people prisoned than Canada. This affects citizens of United States of quality of life since they have to pay more taxes to keep those people in jail. In Canada our quality of life is affected by this, because we have less people in prisons which means we have more people in society that our sharing the load of taxes. The Youth Justice System subjects the offender to just and meaningful consequences that will affect the young offender in positive way. Instead of just locking up the offender or using harsh punishments, it uses methods such as restitution, community service, counselling (social and mental health workers) to deal with the

The Australian criminal justice system approaches young offenders through unique strategies to address the challenges of dealing with juvenile offending. Even though young offenders commit a higher percentage of crime compared to adults, young offenders also have the highest likelihood to be rehabilitated and change their lifestyle as they mature, resulting in a lower court appearance percentage due to the different rights children have.

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

communities. These programs proving job opportunities kept me out of trouble growing up in the streets of Chicago, and mentors from these after school matter program saved my life on numerous occasion. These youth programs give children a sense of hope by showing them that there are people who care about them, but most youth in these communities are typically in unstable homes. The number of school days in a year is essentially equal to the number of non-school days in a year. “Despite this split, most (63%) violent crimes committed by juveniles occur on school days. Nearly one-fifth (19%) of juvenile violent crimes occur in the 4 hours between 3 p.m. and 7 p.m. on school days. A smaller proportion of juvenile violent crime (15%) occurs during

A lot of Canadian youth face issues such as living in poverty, living in violent neighbourhoods and sometimes that leads to them becoming young offenders. In order to help these youth become positive contributing parts of Canadian society the impact that the Youth Criminal Justice Act and the Safe Streets and Communities Act has had on them must be studied. Therefore this essay will address the questions of whether the purpose of the legislation we have to deal with youth offenders is to rehabilitate youth or punish them, and whether or not the method being used by the Canadian government is effective in allowing young offenders to create and lead a stable life after being released from jail. This paper will argue that the main goal of the

In their article Doug Hillian and Marge Reitsma- Street examines parents’ involvement in the youth criminal justice system in Western Canada. Their study was conducting on ten Caucasian families nine of which were middle and upper middle class, with sons, involved in the Juvenile Criminal Justice System. The study was to determine the parents place in the judicial system, which appears to make it more arduous for parents, attempting to deal with the difficult task of parenting young offenders, while navigating a system, which labels, blames, and assumes that as parents they are unfit, irresponsible, and uncaring.

In today’s society there has been an increase in the crimes committed by juveniles. Most juveniles have underlining factors that have caused them to choose this type of lifestyle. Many children in the juvenile system have come from impoverish stricken neighborhoods and are festered with gang activity which has made them a product of their environment. The minds of adolescents do not allow them to see how they are affecting their lives. A study was conducted, and according to the article, “Adolescents in Adult Court: Does the Punishment Fit the Criminal?”, when children mature, they will look back at their past and possibly leave their surroundings. Think about two people committing the same crime, both with the same thought process and ability to make decisions, except one is a juvenile and the other is grown. Due to the lack of experience in decision-making or the time to evaluate the situation like the adult, the youth should be viewed as irresponsible. The fact that a child’s mind is still maturing should reassure people that they will not be the same person incarcerated a few years later.

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.

Youth crime is the crime committed by juvenile offenders. It is the common issue in Australia. The age group between 14-19 years old is the popular group of youth crime. (News 2013) Different age groups commit different types of crimes. (The youth court 2009) Also, there are many kinds of crime and crime method in the society, such as, drug offences, robbery, burglary, assault and violent offenses. The group of people who crime together that is called criminal group. It is a prevalence crime method and it is effective for crime. This question will focus on what is youth crime, the change of youth crime in recent year and the relationship between drug offences and the youth crime in Australia.

I strongly agree with the artist’s point of view in this political cartoon. Youths committing violent crimes do not receive the proper punishment, just a “slap on the wrist”. Even though violent youths may not be adults and may not be fully mature, they should be accountable for their actions. They had the option to do or not to commit a specific crime, and if they did it, they should be punished harshly. Why should they be harshly punished? So that they are deterred to commit such a crime again. If violent youths just received a moderate punishment or a slap on the wrist for the crime they committed, they have the motives to repeat a crime as such. They are given a chance to not do such again and not given harsh punishment- why

In 1992, the Inspector General of the United States issued a report entitled “Youth and Alcohol: Drinking and Crime” (1992). This report stated that a study by the Department of Justice found that in an 11-city survey from 4 to 32 percent of male juvenile arrestees admitted using alcohol in the 72 hours prior to their arrest. Also, the Inspector General’s report pointed out that 31.9 percent of youth under 18 in long-term, state-operated juvenile institutions in 1987 were under the influence of alcohol at the time of their offense. In addition, 55.4 percent admitted that they drank one or more times per week in the year before their incarceration.