The Lesson
For the most part, I believe teenagers should be tried as adults if they do violent crimes, but I also believe that it depends on the circumstances. For example, there are some who committed such heinous crimes and were aware that what they did was wrong and have little to no remorse for their actions and carry out the offense for no logical reason. These adolescents should be prosecuted to the full extent. Others, whose misdeeds were accidental or in self-defense should be punished in some way as well, but not as if they were adults.
Teens like Robert Acuna ought to be penalized as adults. He performed the first- degree murder of his two elder neighbors “execution style” with a gun just so he could steal their car (Liptak 1). During his trial, he was said to be very nonchalant (Liptak 2). As if stealing the car wasn’t enough, he did not have to kill them. He apparently premeditated his misconduct due to the fact that he brought a gun with him, exemplifying that he had cruel intentions and was fully conscious of what he did. He chose to play grim reaper and this is why I deem that there should be no leniency with such delinquency as his.
However, some young adults like Jacob Ind and Nathan Ybanez did their wrongdoings in what appeared to have been in self- defense (When Kids Get Life). Both lived in physically and mentally abusive households. They did their misdemeanors to prevent their parents from further abusing them. The two testified that they were unable to comprehend what consequences they would have to succumb to. All they knew was that the abuse would cease (When Kids Get Life). Their minds were focused on their safety, which is part of human nature. These teenagers were tormented and I think they should have received psychiatric help instead of simply throwing them into the prison system for life. People fail to realize that they were victims as well.
I feel a resolution to this controversy should be considered on the basis of the conditions of the transgression. There should not be one set rule because there are some incidents that are apparent in one case that aren’t in another. Also, as part of the solution, an age limit should be taken into deliberation to hold them to be seen as fully accountable for their fault. If a child is 13 and up and act out an inhumane or intentionally reckless felony, then he or she should be tried as an adult. Although I grant that some people are so quick to throw “the book” at children that they fail to take into concern the teens’ mindsets and age, I do think that there are those who think they are invisible to the law because they are young and need to be shown that they are responsible for everything they do.
For the most part, I believe teenagers should be tried as adults if they do violent crimes, but I also believe that it depends on the circumstances. For example, there are some who committed such heinous crimes and were aware that what they did was wrong and have little to no remorse for their actions and carry out the offense for no logical reason. These adolescents should be prosecuted to the full extent. Others, whose misdeeds were accidental or in self-defense should be punished in some way as well, but not as if they were adults.
Teens like Robert Acuna ought to be penalized as adults. He performed the first- degree murder of his two elder neighbors “execution style” with a gun just so he could steal their car (Liptak 1). During his trial, he was said to be very nonchalant (Liptak 2). As if stealing the car wasn’t enough, he did not have to kill them. He apparently premeditated his misconduct due to the fact that he brought a gun with him, exemplifying that he had cruel intentions and was fully conscious of what he did. He chose to play grim reaper and this is why I deem that there should be no leniency with such delinquency as his.
However, some young adults like Jacob Ind and Nathan Ybanez did their wrongdoings in what appeared to have been in self- defense (When Kids Get Life). Both lived in physically and mentally abusive households. They did their misdemeanors to prevent their parents from further abusing them. The two testified that they were unable to comprehend what consequences they would have to succumb to. All they knew was that the abuse would cease (When Kids Get Life). Their minds were focused on their safety, which is part of human nature. These teenagers were tormented and I think they should have received psychiatric help instead of simply throwing them into the prison system for life. People fail to realize that they were victims as well.
I feel a resolution to this controversy should be considered on the basis of the conditions of the transgression. There should not be one set rule because there are some incidents that are apparent in one case that aren’t in another. Also, as part of the solution, an age limit should be taken into deliberation to hold them to be seen as fully accountable for their fault. If a child is 13 and up and act out an inhumane or intentionally reckless felony, then he or she should be tried as an adult. Although I grant that some people are so quick to throw “the book” at children that they fail to take into concern the teens’ mindsets and age, I do think that there are those who think they are invisible to the law because they are young and need to be shown that they are responsible for everything they do.
Can anyone think of a better title?
What can I do to make it better?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.