The issue of juvenile delinquents is complicated. Although what is done after the child has committed the crime is important, preventing the crime would be even better and more easily done. If schools in high-crime neighborhoods worked more to teach and educate the children and offer more programs about prevention of crime, the students could learn about what not to do before it is too late. For instance, the program of parens patriae removes a child from a negative environment. There is no reason for a child to grow up in an environment that encourages crime. But, once a child has gone down the path of inability to judge what is moral or immoral, the process of getting them to return to a life of quality is more difficult. Once the child has committed the crime, however, they should not be tried as adults because there is a chance that they can be rehabilitated and put back into society. At such a young age, it would be a waste to punish the children as if they were adults. They are far from being adults because the same experiences and knowledge have not been obtained.
If the juvenile crime rate does not diminish, the crime rate will continue to rise. Youth that was not rehabilitated will produce offspring that does not know what is right and wrong, because their parents will not have educated them. Therefore, it is my opinion that the issue of America’s youth and crime be solved by a better prevention program and rehabilitation center. If teens of a poor, crime-filled neighborhood were better educated about right and wrong and the laws and their consequences, crime rate may diminish. Once convicted, however, the youth should be taught and mentored so that criminal behavior will not be committed again. Youth can be taught, and it is our job to teach them because they are the future leaders of our nation.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
If the point of punishment in our justice system is rehabilitation, whether it be adults or juveniles, then why does it make a difference how the youth are tried? If your argument is to give juveniles a chance to become a better and more productive member of society later on, I believe being tried as an adult and possibly getting a more severe sentence would better show our youth the wrong path they are taking. I believe there is a good distinction in our system between those who can be and should tried as adults and those tried as juveniles.
I agree that courts should try to rehabilitate juveniles rather than trying them as adults. Something definitely needs to be done to decrease juvenile crime rate because if those committing these crimes do not learn a lesson, they will continue to partake in offenses into their adulthood. The parens patriae is a good method for helping produce good kids who cannot help the environment into which they were born. Many children probably do not realize that some of their misdemeanors are wrong due to the way their parents raised them. The parens patriae, however, could encounter predicaments. How does the country make this principle of taking a kid from his natural home, of which he or she may love, appealing? Are these kids going to be placed into foster homes? If this situation is the answer, do we have enough available families and resources to provide for these juveniles? Additionally, I do not think juveniles should be tried as adults because their mental capacity may not be fully developed and because they may not completely understand their Constitutional rights.
I agree with the fact that juveniles should not be tried in courts as adults. They haven't yet fully developed and, trying them as adults, would be unfair. Since our justice system is, or should be, based around the ideal of rehabilitation, I feel as though there should be different critera based upon which juveniles are tried. Juveniles should be given a second chance to fix their mistakes and rehabilitating them into society will give them this chance.
I agree with Allison. Crime rates are extremely high and I think they will continue to rise unless we death our youth what is right and what is wrong. I think that a major part of this, however, is the media. This includes TV shows, movies, radio, and video games. I know that we will not be able to get rid of these, but we should do more to teach kids who don't know better that these are fake. I think the idea of rehablitiations centers are much better than trying youths as adults.
Juveniles should not be tried as adults in my opinion as well, however I think this brings up a topic constantly mentioned in explaining behavior. Nature vs. Nurture. Is it possible to nurture these kids to a state where they can function in society, or are they naturally predisposed to acting violent and wreckless regardless of what society does to rehabilitate them? At best we can say that both factors are important in the development of an individual and that at best, you can rehabilitate the nature induced side of a person.
I like your topic I think that it has alot of good things to say. I think that your arguments could be a little bit more clear. Maybe be a little more direct in stating what you are going to talk about. I was also wondering if you had a focus on preventing youth from commiting the crime or were you focused on how the judicial system would carry out the punishment on them? It seems like you are talking about both and I wasn't sure if that is what you wanted.
You do not expand fully on parens patriae and jump into environment affecting the child. How does the doctrine of parens patriae relate to this?
Also I think you should expand on why children and young people should not be punished as adults. You simply state your opinion without backing it up properly.
For the sake of helping your post out, I think you should be a bit more specific when you talk about certain things. You start out saying that the issue is complicated,but never elaborate. When you use your first source, you should say how it specifically removes them. The way you use 'negative environment' is too subjective, tell us what you believe to be high-crime neighborhoods etc. When you compare Adults to children state some ways in which they are different to convince us. I think your implications post is fine just be more specific and give us more of an idea of what you are talking about (like if we had never read your other one).
I understand your encouragement of prevention programs and rehabilitation after crimes are commmitted, but I am a little fuzzy on how prevention relates to how the youth should be tried. I think if you just clear up that part it would strengthen your argument as a whole. Your argument is juveniles should not be tried as adults, but instead if found guilty of a crime should be placed in programs that will teach them to be better citizens and the consequences of committing crimes. However, I don't believe you can fully educate someone about the consequences of breaking the laws unless they endure the punishment themselves. Your ideas of programs to reform them afterwards seems like a really good idea that I believe should be in conjunction with their sentence.
I feel like you are very broad in stating your ideas and more elaboration would make your argument more understandable. I would like to hear more about your opinion on children raised in high crime rate neighborhoods and how that has an affect on their criminal record in the future. Perhaps if you gave some examples of children getting into trouble with the legal system and then being rehabilitated it would add weight to your argument.
I think you are making a pretty interesting argument here. It goes back to the original purpose of our jails, rehabilitation. Delinquent youth in America are being channeled into a life perpetual crime, and you do a good job of pointing that out. However, you do not really give any specific ideas or theories on how to accomplish this. Education is great and all, but clearly it is not working. How should we fix it?
Crime rate will continue to rise? I am how it would change if people committing the crimes aren't out there doing it again. I feel like it would help reduce crime though if we introduce some programs for our youth to participate in. But are there any real negative side affects if we don't introduce these programs? Crime I guess is a bad thing for society in general but what will it imply if our youth aren't corrected? I guess the only real argument for introducing these programs is that it will serve as a deterrent and a form of punishment for youth. Thats if we don't try them as adults. I can see how dealing with this issue can become complicated simply because there is no real way of ensuring that we 'rehabilitate' them.
Post a Comment