Retribution and Culpability
We
are of a generation of Americans who believe that rehabilitation/programs for
juvenile delinquents prevents crime and is the better solution. However, I
cannot accept the overall conclusion of a teenagers potentially getting away
with a violent crime with only a slap on the wrist. So what should be done about
it? Both sides of the argument on
juvenile crime desire to keep violent offenders off the street, we all do.
Bumbling idealists argue for
rehabilitation alone to protect the “integrity” of that juvenile’s life. When the logical thinkers of the world
believe that treating teenagers as adults in the criminal justice system is the
most effective way to inherently promote retribution and culpability for one’s
actions..
There is substantial argument amongst the American people over whether
the consequences of treating juveniles as an adult are too strict. However, most
law enforcement officials will contend that the victim should come before the
perpetrator. As yet again most Americans would. In the conflict between the
lives of Adolf Hitler or of the Jews’ mercilessly slaughtered during the
Holocaust, America and the World chose the victims, not the knowing
perpetrator. However, I do acknowledge this example is a bit extreme, so lets
bring in some more pertinent facts. 54
percent of 4938 juveniles who came into contact with police in 1999 were
convicted again within 10 years (Wallace 1). So let’s say 1000 of those
reconvicted were for murder of lets say one person each. So now because they
weren’t treated as an adult, they have now caused the loss of life to increase
2,000 innocent lives lost or damaged. That’s 2,000s grandmothers, 2,000 mothers,
2,000 joyfully innocent children. These victims would then have essentially died
in vain. Yet, the opposition would have you all believe that the quality of life
of a teenager is substantially more important than those who are hurt. One of
the main arguments they fall back on is that there is no culpability amongst
teenagers because they do not comprehend their actions, but this is a falsehood.
Teenagers are in Piaget’s formal operational stage.
During this stage there is “codification of rules” or the full awareness of what
is moral and immoral (Sch. 4). Once this stage has been reached hypothetical and
abstract thinking have been developed, as well as a sense of what is right and
wrong. Barring mental illness or extenuating circumstances, by the age of 13
most kids are fully aware that murdering someone is illegal, that beating
someone over the head with a metal baseball bat is wrong, that even if they want
too, they should not rob a bank. It does not take being a full-fledged adult to
understand that. But let’s say we give credence to the opposition’s arguments
that we followed their plan, would it be more successful? This answer, yet
again, is no. The former attorney
general of California contends that crime between the 1990’s and now has
actually been pretty consistent(West 2). This consistency shows that on average,
juveniles are reconvicted 4 times through the juvenile system (Wallace 1). This
was when juvenile oriented programs really took off and the juvenile system was
placed in a higher level of authority. However, if this approach is successful,
why has crime not changed? It is true that not all crime will go away, its an
unfortunate truth. However, in the battle between evil we as human beings must
take it upon ourselves to make sure more people will not be harmed by the
violent actions of a juvenile.
By
focusing on the juveniles who have committed the crime, pro-juvenile system
advocates overlook the deeper problem of repeat offenders abusing and taking
advantage of the juvenile criminal system. When a teenager mugs a little old
lady on the street, takes her purse, and murders her, it does not stay as simple
as the advocacy may make it seem. The juvenile’s life is not the only one ruined
from this point on. That old lady had a family, maybe even grandchildren, who a
couple of days after would be sitting at a funeral crying wondering
what happened of their beloved grandmother who snuck them chocolate chip
cookies. This juvenile, under the present system, has the opportunity to go
into a lenient juvenile system and would be released before they were 25 years
old, as that is the maximum punishment under the juvenile system ( Lemov 1 and
2). So my grandmother is beaten to death by a 17 year old and they at MOST will
spend 6 years in prison. Does that sound fair? Does that sound like justice?
Although I grant that we as a nation should strive to be humane with our
treatment of juveniles, I still maintain that we as a nation should put our
victims over the ones that have hurt them. It’s possible that the juvenile in
questions rehabilitation would be unsuccessful and they would
go on to hurt and rob other grandmothers, fathers, children, and mothers. This
is an unfortunate reality as juveniles accounted for 16 percent of all violent
crimes in the year 2007( Puzz. 1). . But, where is the justice? A few years in a
juvenile detention center, which many consider to be only a slap on the wrist,
is hardly the equivalent of human lives ruined by one’s actions. I repeat, where
is the justice? Where is the retribution that the families of the victims
involved seek? If these juveniles were tried as adults, they would receive
punishments that fit the crime. If they committed assault, they’d receive proper
punishment. If they took an innocent life, they would be sent to jail.
We
as a nation are founded upon the belief that everyone deserves the right to
life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and anyone who tried to take that
away would be rightfully punished. Proponents of the juvenile system are right
to argue that there are issues within the adult system that need to be worked
out. Nowhere will I say that is the perfect solution. That perfect solution is
for the crime to never have happened. However, advocates of the juvenile system
exaggerate the danger when they claim it is a form of cruel and unusual
punishment. As it is now, many juveniles tried as adults are still given more
lenient sentences than adults as well as some cases being turned back into the
juvenile system’s care by the National District Attorneys Association ( Back.
2). In fact it is now illegal for juveniles to be sentenced to life, even when
tried as an adult, therefore they are not having their 8th amendment
protection against cruel and unusual punishment taken away.
Opponents of treating juveniles as adults after the committing of a
violent crime claim that treating juveniles as adults hurts their life to a
degree, but we don’t need them to tell us that. Anyone familiar with the
enforcement of laws and background checks has long known that criminals will
have hard life afterwards, be they 17 or 66. Proponents of the juvenile system
are right to argue that there are differences that need to be accounted for
between juveniles and adults, there is a difference in brain functionality. But
they exaggerate when they claim the overall innocence and naiveté purity of
non-adults. My position is not arguing for a kid who got caught smoking pot to
be tried as an adult, or a kid who stole a baseball bat from the local store to
be thrown into an adult jail. I argue for murderers, rapists, violent robbers
and muggers to be treated as any other of that horrific breed, as an adult in
the criminal justice system to avoid a potential slap on the wrist. Yes, there
are potential issues in the adult system that need to be worked on as well, such
as the eventual proximity of the juveniles to violent adults.
But on the other hand, justice still needs to be served for us the
people. Is it worth the potential rise in crime for violent juveniles to avoid
jail time? Or is it better for one to be faced with retribution for one’s
actions and for victims to be avenged with the prevailing of justice? A potential compromise may be in the
best interest for the foreseeable future, but until that compromise comes more
teenagers should be treated as adults in the criminal justice system. It may
even help a life or two, maybe it could help you.
are of a generation of Americans who believe that rehabilitation/programs for
juvenile delinquents prevents crime and is the better solution. However, I
cannot accept the overall conclusion of a teenagers potentially getting away
with a violent crime with only a slap on the wrist. So what should be done about
it? Both sides of the argument on
juvenile crime desire to keep violent offenders off the street, we all do.
Bumbling idealists argue for
rehabilitation alone to protect the “integrity” of that juvenile’s life. When the logical thinkers of the world
believe that treating teenagers as adults in the criminal justice system is the
most effective way to inherently promote retribution and culpability for one’s
actions..
There is substantial argument amongst the American people over whether
the consequences of treating juveniles as an adult are too strict. However, most
law enforcement officials will contend that the victim should come before the
perpetrator. As yet again most Americans would. In the conflict between the
lives of Adolf Hitler or of the Jews’ mercilessly slaughtered during the
Holocaust, America and the World chose the victims, not the knowing
perpetrator. However, I do acknowledge this example is a bit extreme, so lets
bring in some more pertinent facts. 54
percent of 4938 juveniles who came into contact with police in 1999 were
convicted again within 10 years (Wallace 1). So let’s say 1000 of those
reconvicted were for murder of lets say one person each. So now because they
weren’t treated as an adult, they have now caused the loss of life to increase
2,000 innocent lives lost or damaged. That’s 2,000s grandmothers, 2,000 mothers,
2,000 joyfully innocent children. These victims would then have essentially died
in vain. Yet, the opposition would have you all believe that the quality of life
of a teenager is substantially more important than those who are hurt. One of
the main arguments they fall back on is that there is no culpability amongst
teenagers because they do not comprehend their actions, but this is a falsehood.
Teenagers are in Piaget’s formal operational stage.
During this stage there is “codification of rules” or the full awareness of what
is moral and immoral (Sch. 4). Once this stage has been reached hypothetical and
abstract thinking have been developed, as well as a sense of what is right and
wrong. Barring mental illness or extenuating circumstances, by the age of 13
most kids are fully aware that murdering someone is illegal, that beating
someone over the head with a metal baseball bat is wrong, that even if they want
too, they should not rob a bank. It does not take being a full-fledged adult to
understand that. But let’s say we give credence to the opposition’s arguments
that we followed their plan, would it be more successful? This answer, yet
again, is no. The former attorney
general of California contends that crime between the 1990’s and now has
actually been pretty consistent(West 2). This consistency shows that on average,
juveniles are reconvicted 4 times through the juvenile system (Wallace 1). This
was when juvenile oriented programs really took off and the juvenile system was
placed in a higher level of authority. However, if this approach is successful,
why has crime not changed? It is true that not all crime will go away, its an
unfortunate truth. However, in the battle between evil we as human beings must
take it upon ourselves to make sure more people will not be harmed by the
violent actions of a juvenile.
By
focusing on the juveniles who have committed the crime, pro-juvenile system
advocates overlook the deeper problem of repeat offenders abusing and taking
advantage of the juvenile criminal system. When a teenager mugs a little old
lady on the street, takes her purse, and murders her, it does not stay as simple
as the advocacy may make it seem. The juvenile’s life is not the only one ruined
from this point on. That old lady had a family, maybe even grandchildren, who a
couple of days after would be sitting at a funeral crying wondering
what happened of their beloved grandmother who snuck them chocolate chip
cookies. This juvenile, under the present system, has the opportunity to go
into a lenient juvenile system and would be released before they were 25 years
old, as that is the maximum punishment under the juvenile system ( Lemov 1 and
2). So my grandmother is beaten to death by a 17 year old and they at MOST will
spend 6 years in prison. Does that sound fair? Does that sound like justice?
Although I grant that we as a nation should strive to be humane with our
treatment of juveniles, I still maintain that we as a nation should put our
victims over the ones that have hurt them. It’s possible that the juvenile in
questions rehabilitation would be unsuccessful and they would
go on to hurt and rob other grandmothers, fathers, children, and mothers. This
is an unfortunate reality as juveniles accounted for 16 percent of all violent
crimes in the year 2007( Puzz. 1). . But, where is the justice? A few years in a
juvenile detention center, which many consider to be only a slap on the wrist,
is hardly the equivalent of human lives ruined by one’s actions. I repeat, where
is the justice? Where is the retribution that the families of the victims
involved seek? If these juveniles were tried as adults, they would receive
punishments that fit the crime. If they committed assault, they’d receive proper
punishment. If they took an innocent life, they would be sent to jail.
We
as a nation are founded upon the belief that everyone deserves the right to
life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and anyone who tried to take that
away would be rightfully punished. Proponents of the juvenile system are right
to argue that there are issues within the adult system that need to be worked
out. Nowhere will I say that is the perfect solution. That perfect solution is
for the crime to never have happened. However, advocates of the juvenile system
exaggerate the danger when they claim it is a form of cruel and unusual
punishment. As it is now, many juveniles tried as adults are still given more
lenient sentences than adults as well as some cases being turned back into the
juvenile system’s care by the National District Attorneys Association ( Back.
2). In fact it is now illegal for juveniles to be sentenced to life, even when
tried as an adult, therefore they are not having their 8th amendment
protection against cruel and unusual punishment taken away.
Opponents of treating juveniles as adults after the committing of a
violent crime claim that treating juveniles as adults hurts their life to a
degree, but we don’t need them to tell us that. Anyone familiar with the
enforcement of laws and background checks has long known that criminals will
have hard life afterwards, be they 17 or 66. Proponents of the juvenile system
are right to argue that there are differences that need to be accounted for
between juveniles and adults, there is a difference in brain functionality. But
they exaggerate when they claim the overall innocence and naiveté purity of
non-adults. My position is not arguing for a kid who got caught smoking pot to
be tried as an adult, or a kid who stole a baseball bat from the local store to
be thrown into an adult jail. I argue for murderers, rapists, violent robbers
and muggers to be treated as any other of that horrific breed, as an adult in
the criminal justice system to avoid a potential slap on the wrist. Yes, there
are potential issues in the adult system that need to be worked on as well, such
as the eventual proximity of the juveniles to violent adults.
But on the other hand, justice still needs to be served for us the
people. Is it worth the potential rise in crime for violent juveniles to avoid
jail time? Or is it better for one to be faced with retribution for one’s
actions and for victims to be avenged with the prevailing of justice? A potential compromise may be in the
best interest for the foreseeable future, but until that compromise comes more
teenagers should be treated as adults in the criminal justice system. It may
even help a life or two, maybe it could help you.