The age of 18 brings about freedom for young people in America. At 18, a person legally becomes an "adult". A person can now buy cigarettes or a home, vote, and even get married. In addition, from their 18th birthday and beyond, the young person is no longer tried for crimes in juvenile courts; now, they are tried in adult courts. But, does one or two years make such a difference between sixteen year olds and eighteen year olds? Is it fair for one person, just seventeen years of age, to be tried in a juvenile court, receiving a lesser sentence for murder than an person just six months older in age who committed the same crime? I think not. Trying juveniles as adults should be constantly allowed because punishment should be based on the harshness of the crime, not the criminal's age. Responsibility and out of date courts are 2 examples of reasons why juveniles should be tried as adults.
In schools, counselors of juveniles don’t have the skills to handle juvenile delinquents. Most counselors do not deal with juveniles that have committed violent crimes. The juveniles get sent to a rehabilitation facility, but sometimes they don’t always work. The juvenile may go back to continue crime when getting out of the rehab facility. Most counselors now don’t have the resources needed to “fix” the juvenile. Juvenile crime records show that it is one of the most valid predictors of repeat adult crimes and adult offenders. 13 people were killed and 24 wounded by two students in Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado on April 20, 1999. Do you believe they should have been tried as adults or as juveniles? Unfortunately, it didn’t even get to that point because during the Columbine shooting, the two students, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, killed themselves to end the terror that struck the high school. In the article, “Juveniles Should Be Tried as Adults in Certain Circumstances”, Mary Onelia Estudillo said, “Children are killed by children. Teens are killed by teens....
Please join StudyMode to read the full document