I agree with the idea that juveniles should be tried and sentenced as such, distinct from adults. But in my mind, there comes a point where the crime committed far overshadows the age of the offender. Like this case for example. Juveniles that with intent commit life threatening crimes, esp. of a sexual nature, should be tried as adult without hesitation. These crimes are far more serious than simple stealing, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shawnee123
Which they did. Sorry, I don't buy that they just weren't "developed" enough to understand. 15, 18, 21. I didn't draw the arbitrary lines in the sand, but I sure know when those lines don't matter.
|
In all of my education classes (I'm pursuing a degree in special education/early childhood for those who don't know, which is probably close to everyone haha), something that is stressed throughout every class is that age
does not matter. Every child grows and develops personally and socially at different rates and at different stages. It is not a simple ladder. Using age to discriminate between juveniles and adults though convenient, shows its profound weakness and ineffectiveness in times like this. This runs into my unpopular opinion that our country needs to refocus on our public education system first and foremost and incorporate it, via various tests and standards that have to be met, into the two big stages of responsibility dictated by the government: turning 16 and being able to drive, and turning 18 and being called an "adult" and everything that comes with that age.
"And now back to your regularly scheduled broadcast"