• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should these teens be tried as adults

Should the 15 and 16 year old also be tried as adults

  • yes and throw away the key

    Votes: 72 87.8%

  • no, they deserve a second chance

    Votes: 10 12.2%
  • Total voters
    82
ChrisL said:
I think kids are worth a shot at rehabilitation. Throwing them into the adult system only creates more chaos and doesn't do any good, but like I said multiple times I think the juvenile system also needs to be fixed so that kids have to do more time in the system for more serious crimes. There are no easy answers, because either way you are going to be mixing adults with minors and that isn't a good thing because they are just not the same. When it comes to a particularly heinous crime, I really don't know what else to do other than holding them for life. Maybe they get transferred over to the adult system somehow, but this I can see having unintended consequences too.
Click to expand...

While I don't think they can be rehabilitated, I don't think they should be thrown into the general prison population either. I think they should reside on death row until such time as they are executed. And just so they enjoy their last moments, maybe they could all be executed at the same time so they can see their friends die since watching someone die is apparently fun in their world.
 
If you don't know by 16 the heinousness of premeditated murder, you really don't need a lifetime of freedom to try and figure it out.
 
ChrisL said:
And you can't say, well you're an adult when it comes to this, but not when it comes to this, this and this. Where the heck is the logic in that?
Click to expand...
Our society can and does say these type of things every day.
16 to drive
18 to vote
21 to drink and buy pistol ammunition
13 to pay full price at the movies.

There are many exceptions that allow a Juvenile to be tried as an adult,
and murder makes just about everyone's list.
Juvenile Tried as an Adult | LegalMatch Law Library
This is a reflection of what our legal system's bases purpose,
to keep people who refuse to follow the rules, away from those of us who follow the rules.
 
CRUE CAB said:
I am down with that, but chris wants them to get treated like little boys.
Click to expand...

Again, a terrible argument, not addressing any of the points of the studies I linked to, such as scientific data demonstrating that 15, 16 and even a lot of 17 year olds are certainly NOT adults as much as you would like to view them as such. It's just not the case.
 
longview said:
Our society can and does say these type of things every day.
16 to drive
18 to vote
21 to drink and buy pistol ammunition
13 to pay full price at the movies.

There are many exceptions that allow a Juvenile to be tried as an adult,
and murder makes just about everyone's list.
Juvenile Tried as an Adult | LegalMatch Law Library
This is a reflection of what our legal system's bases purpose,
to keep people who refuse to follow the rules, away from those of us who follow the rules.
Click to expand...

Our juvenile justice system was established to try and rehabilitate rather than punish when it comes to crimes committed by children.

https://www.ncjrs.gov/html/ojjdp/9912_2/juv1.html

Throughout the late 18th century, "infants" below the age of reason (traditionally age 7) were presumed to be incapable of criminal intent and were, therefore, exempt from prosecution and punishment. Children as young as 7, however, could stand trial in criminal court for offenses committed and, if found guilty, could be sentenced to prison or even to death.

The 19th-century movement that led to the establishment of the juvenile court in the U.S. had its roots in 16th-century European educational reform movements. These earlier reform movements changed the perception of children from one of miniature adults to one of persons with less than fully developed moral and cognitive capacities.
Click to expand...
 
ChrisL said:
Again, a terrible argument, not addressing any of the points of the studies I linked to, such as scientific data demonstrating that 15, 16 and even a lot of 17 year olds are certainly NOT adults as much as you would like to view them as such. It's just not the case.
Click to expand...

come on ChrisL, it's not like these guys were out goofing around and did something stupid that accidentally got someone killed. They set out with the express intention of killing a random human being because they thought it would be fun.
 
Goshin said:
Sorry, no way. 15-16yo know murder is wrong. This wasn't in the heat of anger, or sort-kinda-by-accident, or negligence, or even in response to some insult or offense.... this was entirely malum-in-se with no mitigating circumstances. There are some things for which "they're just kids" is no longer an excuse for people past puberty. This was one.
Click to expand...

This. As remarkable as the changes in my cognition have been since I was 15, I definitely knew shooting people for fun was wrong, and that shooting people can kill them. There is no excuse for this. A 15-year-old is capable of empathy, understanding death, and understanding the law. That is all that is required for an adult to be tried as a competent individual, rather than under an insanity/mental deficiency clause.

18 is an arbitrary age. We had to pick something, so we picked that. In truth, the human brain is undergoing development up until about 25 or so. So if people are claiming brain development is the reason they shouldn't be tried as adults, I suppose we should extend the same to a 24-year-old murderer?

This is just plain old sociopathy.
 
ChrisL said:
Again, a terrible argument, not addressing any of the points of the studies I linked to, such as scientific data demonstrating that 15, 16 and even a lot of 17 year olds are certainly NOT adults as much as you would like to view them as such. It's just not the case.
Click to expand...
Didnt know you needed a "study" to figure out what to do with killers.
 
ChrisL said:
Our juvenile justice system was established to try and rehabilitate rather than punish when it comes to crimes committed by children.

https://www.ncjrs.gov/html/ojjdp/9912_2/juv1.html
Click to expand...
I agree, but I don't think rehabilitation can fix what is broken in this case.
But then again I am not a psychiatrist, in the case of freedom, perhaps
a professional should judge weather they are fit to return to society.
I still don't think I would want someone who places such a low value on
life, living next to me.
 
CanadaJohn said:
I believe this is one area where the American justice system has it right. Young people, 15, 16 and 17, who commit such crimes are not children.
Click to expand...

The law says they are minors, so they should be tried as minors. You can't just say minors are adults for convenience. No-one is defending them, and IF they are convicted, they should be severely punished.
 
ChrisL said:
You can't make such claims considering you are NOT a psychiatrist and have never examined these kids, never mind even spoken with them.
Click to expand...

I'm not an osteopath either but I can diagnose a broken leg when the bone is sticking out.
 
ChrisL said:
I think kids are worth a shot at rehabilitation. Throwing them into the adult system only creates more chaos and doesn't do any good, but like I said multiple times I think the juvenile system also needs to be fixed so that kids have to do more time in the system for more serious crimes. There are no easy answers, because either way you are going to be mixing adults with minors and that isn't a good thing because they are just not the same. When it comes to a particularly heinous crime, I really don't know what else to do other than holding them for life. Maybe they get transferred over to the adult system somehow, but this I can see having unintended consequences too.
Click to expand...

If they were thieves, or otherwise criminals who did not commit acts which resulted in the death of a human being, I would tend to agree. These aren't kids who just happened to do something stupid and negligent.
 
Mr X said:
The law says they are minors, so they should be tried as minors. You can't just say minors are adults for convenience. No-one is defending them, and IF they are convicted, they should be severely punished.
Click to expand...

And what do you consider "severely punished" for committing an execution under youth offender laws?
 
lizzie said:
If they were thieves, or otherwise criminals who did not commit acts which resulted in the death of a human being, I would tend to agree. These aren't kids who just happened to do something stupid and negligent.
Click to expand...

The severity of the crime is also taken into account. If 16 or 17 year olds were accused of petty larceny, vandalism, or other misdemeanors/nonviolent felonies, they're tried as juveniles because they can still be reasoned with. Thinking that a teenager can just go "oops my bad" with murder is asinine.

If 17 year olds know that they can commit murder and go free with a clean slate in a year, what's stopping them? Maybe you want to set someone free after 12 months who understood the criminality and sociopathy involved in taking a life maliciously. That's fine - how about they go stay with you and you can sleep with both eyes closed.

That wasn't directed at you, lizzie...just quoting at random. :D
 
the fact that this even draws debate astounds me: how would you treat a 65 year old who went out and shot some random guy 'because it would be fun'? unless you are genuinely mentally deficient, and even then, i've known legally retarded children who know 'shooting people isn't nice, even if it's okay in video games'. but every now and then you get some ****head who goes and shoots somebody, and then tries to play the 'oh i was just a stupid kid' it's not even like a case of (consensual) statutory rape: he can't exactly claim he was thinking with his genitals, something i have just a tiny bit of sympathy for. this isn't like the time i jumped off the neighbor's roof to impress the neighbor girl with my flying abilities (honestly, i can fly. i just haven't figured out the whole 'landing' thing yet.....) this is "hey dudes, i'm bored. you wanna go shoot somebody?"
Criminal Stupidity is not a legal defense.
 
CanadaJohn said:
And what do you consider "severely punished" for committing an execution under youth offender laws?
Click to expand...

That is for the judge to decide, A young offenders institute until 18 then transferred to an adult prison. but the main point is that they should be tried as minors due to their age. Under law, everyone under the age of 18 is a minor, that doesn't change regardless of their actions.

Stealing is wrong, but if a 4 year old stole a chocolate bar from a shop, I wouldn't expect them to be tried as an adult.
 
Serenity said:
Just to give you some insight as to what we are seeing in our Media here....

Obviously the family and friends of the young man are devastated. We're just shaking our heads at such a senseless waste of a life. The mind boggles trying to understand what would make kids decide to go out to shoot someone just for something to do. This entire tragedy impacts on so many innocent people whose lives will never be the same.

The family of Chris are comforted by the fact that he was very happy in the US. They are so grateful he was being well looked after, he had a girlfriend of 4 years and the Community had embraced him as one of their own. His friends and second family in the US are heartbroken too.

Many of us are also concerned that his death is already being "used" by those arguing for stricter gun control. He's not a pawn to be used in your arguments. These kids were hell bent on wanting to kill someone and anyone who is that deranged can kill numerous ways. We understand that evil does indeed exist everywhere. We see it here too. We don't have a gun culture here but that doesn't make our kids safe.

Evil people do evil things.
Click to expand...
I haven't heard much from their side yet fortunately but worry as well that it is going to be abused that way. So far the story is mostly focused on the victim and the sickos who perpetuated this horrid act. It's a shame that an innocent's life was relegated to a game, truly.
 
Mr X said:
That is for the judge to decide, A young offenders institute until 18 then transferred to an adult prison. but the main point is that they should be tried as minors due to their age. Under law, everyone under the age of 18 is a minor, that doesn't change regardless of their actions.

Stealing is wrong, but if a 4 year old stole a chocolate bar from a shop, I wouldn't expect them to be tried as an adult.
Click to expand...

The very fact that you would try to equate a 4 year old shoplifting a chocolate bar with three late teens executing an innocent man makes anything you say worthless.

Take care and have a good day.
 
I'm always skeptical of putting a fifteen or sixteen year old into a cage for the rest of their lives even if they committed an atrocious crime. Other than slaking a completely understandable desire for vengeance and potentially (though unlikely in the long run) soothing a victims family what is the purpose? It seems plausible that they could be rehabilitated and eventually reintroduced into society as productive citizens. This would in my view do more for society than holding them for life.
 
Sherman123 said:
I'm always skeptical of putting a fifteen or sixteen year old into a cage for the rest of their lives even if they committed an atrocious crime. Other than slaking a completely understandable desire for vengeance and potentially (though unlikely in the long run) soothing a victims family what is the purpose? It seems plausible that they could be rehabilitated and eventually reintroduced into society as productive citizens. This would in my view do more for society than holding them for life.
Click to expand...

We generally reach the age of understanding right from wrong at around 10 years of age. I would agree with you if it were a case of theft, vandalism, drug dealing, or any other crime where they did not kill someone. I draw the line at murder without just cause.
 
Sherman123 said:
I'm always skeptical of putting a fifteen or sixteen year old into a cage for the rest of their lives even if they committed an atrocious crime. Other than slaking a completely understandable desire for vengeance and potentially (though unlikely in the long run) soothing a victims family what is the purpose? It seems plausible that they could be rehabilitated and eventually reintroduced into society as productive citizens. This would in my view do more for society than holding them for life.
Click to expand...

I don't necessarily disagree with this, but not all murders get a life sentence. Furthermore, there are plenty of places that do make efforts to rehabilitate the overwhelming majority of their adult prisoners, and with a great degree of success.

There's no reason we shouldn't be doing that anyway.

By the same token, if they are deemed to be sociopathic, and thus they can't be rehabilitated, then I'd rather we throw away the key now than release them because they're a couple years shy of some arbitrary age, and have someone else have to pay with their life for that mistake.
 
I've got to say that a lot of people who are promoting leniency for a trio of late teens who essentially executed an innocent young man they didn't even know must not know many 15, 16, 17 year old young people these days. At that age, they are not country bumpkins and rubes and most young people that age are pretty level headed, smart, well adjusted, etc. etc.

To make blanket statements that young people that age don't understand the concepts of right and wrong, don't appreciate the consequences of their actions, aren't mature enough, etc. is to suggest we've done a pretty crappy job collectively of raising children these days and the next generation is doomed.

I don't believe it for a minute.
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
I don't necessarily disagree with this, but not all murders get a life sentence. Furthermore, there are plenty of places that do make efforts to rehabilitate the overwhelming majority of their adult prisoners, and with a great degree of success.

There's no reason we shouldn't be doing that anyway.

By the same token, if they are deemed to be sociopathic, and thus they can't be rehabilitated, then I'd rather we throw away the key now than release them because they're a couple years shy of some arbitrary age, and have someone else have to pay with their life for that mistake.
Click to expand...


Perhaps "great deal of success" depends on whether one is the victim of new crimes committed by ex-cons, or wishful thinkers.

Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) - Recidivism

During 2007, a total of 1,180,469 persons on parole were at-risk of reincarceration. This includes persons under parole supervision on January 1 or those entering parole during the year. Of these parolees, about 16% were returned to incarceration in 2007.
Among nearly 300,000 prisoners released in 15 states in 1994, 67.5% were rearrested within 3 years. A study of prisoners released in 1983 estimated 62.5%.
Of the 272,111 persons released from prisons in 15 states in 1994, an estimated 67.5% were rearrested for a felony or serious misdemeanor within 3 years, 46.9% were reconvicted, and 25.4% resentenced to prison for a new crime.
 
ocean515 said:
Perhaps "great deal of success" depends on whether one is the victim of new crimes committed by ex-cons, or wishful thinkers.

Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) - Recidivism

During 2007, a total of 1,180,469 persons on parole were at-risk of reincarceration. This includes persons under parole supervision on January 1 or those entering parole during the year. Of these parolees, about 16% were returned to incarceration in 2007.
Among nearly 300,000 prisoners released in 15 states in 1994, 67.5% were rearrested within 3 years. A study of prisoners released in 1983 estimated 62.5%.
Of the 272,111 persons released from prisons in 15 states in 1994, an estimated 67.5% were rearrested for a felony or serious misdemeanor within 3 years, 46.9% were reconvicted, and 25.4% resentenced to prison for a new crime.
Click to expand...

These are not JUVENILE recidivism rates.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom