The Consequences Of Youth Crime

As a person grows up, they experience the different stages of life, such as childhood, adolescent or teenage years, and ultimately adulthood. Society views adults and teenagers differently because adults are “adults,” they are: mature, developed, and experienced at this so called game, life. So why does this limit become blurred when an adolescent commits a crime, suddenly they are being attacked on the basis that they are mature enough to understand their actions. These characteristics like knowledge and maturity are those that naturally correspond to adults. The law defines a juvenile offender as a “person who is not old enough to be held responsible for criminal acts,” so why is it then that society is quick to prosecute a child as an adult …show more content…
For example, in Vincent Schiraldi’s article “Lessons Can Be Learned,” he uses the murderer Nathaniel Abraham, eleven years of age, as a focal point in his work to argue that “We shouldn’t look to explain why youth crime is on the increase…We shouldn’t look at why kids commit more violent crimes than adults, as 60 percent of respondents to a 1996 California poll believe…We shouldn’t look at why kids are killing at younger and younger ages, a refrain we head with particular frequency” (Schiraldi’s 122). He vocalizes that, instead of prosecuting juveniles as adults, we should be investing in programs that help troubled teens cope with their psychological problems or the obstacles they face in their home environment. He adds “Again, Moore pointed out in his sentencing decision…It is only by intervening now and helping to develop mature, responsible, caring, empathic children, that we can assure a safer society” (pg.122). Being able to prevent juvenile delinquents from becoming criminals is a great solution, instead of sentencing them as to life in prison. Intervening can decrease the amount of juveniles reoffending if more programs existed for juvenile while they are in prison or even before they commit the actual murder. Helping adolescents with their mental problems would be easier than helping a young teenager …show more content…
Although others, such as Paul Thompson argues that “a massive brain loss of brain tissues that occurs in the teenage years… which brain researchers believe supports all our thinking and emotions… are only being lost in the areas controlling impulses, risk-taking, and self-control” (pg.89, paragraph 7). The brain loss that teenagers go through until there final stages of brain development, around the age of 25, is crucial in order of deciding whether or not teenagers should be tried as adults. Teenagers on the other hand do not have this self – control that is needed when making rational decisions, adolescents act out on impulses and heavy emotions that ultimately blur the kids’ intuition. For instances, when your mother wouldn’t let you go to the movies with your friends, the natural reaction for a teenager would be to lash out and yell or argue heavily with their parents, however, an adult would not do that because they are adults and can decide for themselves. So why do so many people argue that children are not adults but then are quick to change their opinion once that child commits a crime, when do they suddenly forget that they are children and not adults; that they cannot make a clear and wise decision at the ages ten through