Question of the Day: Day 68
Do you think that it is right or wrong for youth to be tried as adults for violent crimes?
Why or why not?
Why or why not?
posted by Michelle at 9:02 AM
We are looking for answers to some hard questions as we dig deep inside and explore our own core values and how that guides not just our own lives but the very world that we live in. These questions will be asked to a group of high school students but we would also like to hear from the world at large. While we hope to keep this forum wide open we do reserve the right to delete responses that we find to be offensive or combative in nature. Thank you for participating with us.
posted by Michelle at 9:02 AM
7 Comments:
I think that it depednds on the age and the mental stauts on the youth because what if a 10 year old killed some one do you think they should spend the rest of there life in jail or prison? Or if it was your sister or brother that killed someone would you what them to spend the rest of there life in jail! I think it depends on the age, the growth of there brain, and if they had mental problems
i DON'T THINK IT RIGHT BECAUSE WE AS THE YOUTH IS STILL KIDS WE MAY NOT BE IN THE RIGHT STATE OF MIND.IT DEPANDS ON IF THERE CLOSE TO AGE.
I think every crime should be treated in context. So kids who aren't mature enough to make a proper judgement about right and wrong should be sentenced differently to older teens/adults who can.
But teenagers shoudln't end up in a prison full of adults. Thats just asking for trouble - giving them a jail full of bad role models to take thier pick from.
I agree with Cecil and Wings. Perhaps under a certain age, we can instead investigate/arrest the child's parents. They shouldn't be left alone when a child does something so abhorrent that would require a conviction. The child is THEIR responsibility after all.
We talked about many facets of this question for 35 minutes this morning.
How responsible can we hold a child who has had an upringing that was filled with violence? How responsible can we hold a child whose brain is not even fully developed yet and we already know that the last section to develop is the frontal lobe where rational thinking takes place.
And yet...
How can we NOT hold a person responsible when it is a seriously heinous crime? Do we keep on allowing them the opportunity to harm others just because they are young?
Where do we draw the line?
Is it at 16? 14? Younger?
What other circumstances do we take into account? Do we come from a place where consequences are punitive or rehabilitative? Is the greatest concern that of the youth or that of the community/society? Or are they one and the same: Youth = society?
I think that each youth must be judged upon the merits and facts of that case including whatever other factors contributed to that situation. I do not believe that we can have a blanket policy that fits every youth in every case and at every age. Some know exactly what they are doing and should be held accountable and others may not have the mental capacity to distinguish the outcomes of their behaviors and should, in all probability, not be held to the exact same standard though he/she should still have SOME consequence.
Well, here's a very tough question...I wish I felt a little more comfortable about my answer, but I don't.
Anyway, to cut to the chase, I guess, yes, I think they should be tried as adults if it can be proven that the child methodically planned out the violent crime. A slow, deliberate decision process would show that the child didn't act out irrationally and had, in fact, thought about the way he or she would go about it so as to avoid getting caught or injurring themselves.
Ruben,
well it depends on what kind of crime if its murder throw em jail.
some pity crap forget the law send them to juvi.
Post a Comment
<< Home