Every generation comes with its challenges. Linda J. Collier addresses a sympathetic and concerned audience as she uncovers an issue long swept under the rug: punishments of juveniles who commit adult crimes, such as murder, rape, etcetera. As a former university attorney and court appointed guardian for juveniles in legal trouble, she has firsthand knowledge of the ineffectiveness of the juvenile court system. While her use of thought provoking examples creates a strong argument, she fails to convince me that juveniles who commit serious crimes deserve to serve adult punishments. Collier begins her argument by recounting the incident of Mitchell Johnson and Andrew Golden, who had led a massacre in Jonesboro, Arkansas. From this example,
…show more content…
The system was created to prevent children from being treated unfairly in the adult criminal system. She explains each step of the process, from an interview with an intake officer who decides the punishment of the child: anywhere from warning the child to sending him to juvenile adjudication proceedings. Then she goes into detail explaining that children’s fates are decided in the adjudication process—some are sent home, some need extra supervision, some are put in state institutions. She wraps up her explanations by saying that “This system was developed with truants, vandals and petty thieves in mind,” but that the juvenile system is not an appropriate system for children who commit violent crimes, claiming that it is barely punishment at all for violent offenders (Collier 305). Though she goes into so much detail, she leaves out what life inside the juvenile detainment centers is like. I feel I cannot decide if her claim is sound because of the lack of this information. She only tells us her opinion that juvenile detention is not an adequate punishment; there is no evidence of this provided. Excluding this information causes me to question her claim that it is not adequate punishment. What weakens Collier’s article the most, though, is her lack of acknowledgement of the opposition. Without addressing any other opinions, it gives the readers the impression that
The system was created to prevent children from being treated unfairly in the adult criminal system. She explains each step of the process, from an interview with an intake officer who decides the punishment of the child: anywhere from warning the child to sending him to juvenile adjudication proceedings. Then she goes into detail explaining that children’s fates are decided in the adjudication process—some are sent home, some need extra supervision, some are put in state institutions. She wraps up her explanations by saying that “This system was developed with truants, vandals and petty thieves in mind,” but that the juvenile system is not an appropriate system for children who commit violent crimes, claiming that it is barely punishment at all for violent offenders (Collier 305). Though she goes into so much detail, she leaves out what life inside the juvenile detainment centers is like. I feel I cannot decide if her claim is sound because of the lack of this information. She only tells us her opinion that juvenile detention is not an adequate punishment; there is no evidence of this provided. Excluding this information causes me to question her claim that it is not adequate punishment. What weakens Collier’s article the most, though, is her lack of acknowledgement of the opposition. Without addressing any other opinions, it gives the readers the impression that