• 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 an 11 year old ever be tried as an adult?

Should an 11 year old ever be tried as an adult?

  • Yes, this particular young man is a perfect example

    Votes: 12 20.3%

  • No, never.

    Votes: 31 52.5%

  • The justice system needs another alternative for extremely young, potentially dangerous offenders

    Votes: 11 18.6%

  • Other, please explain

    Votes: 5 8.5%
  • Total voters
    59
jallman said:
Then don't present your perspective so emotionally.
Click to expand...

Warning: IMPENDING BITCH FIGHT

bitch-fight.jpg
 
Blackdog said:
Good thing for us the law is clear.
Click to expand...

Actually, the law ISN'T that clear, else this disagreement would not be happening. Your cherry picking of what case law applies to your argument does not clarify your emotion clouded lense for anyone but you.
 
jallman said:
But doesn't that experience tell you that these kids need rehab rather than adult punishment? If an adult did any of those things, we would immediately move to medicate, sedate, and lock away in a criminal mental facility.

Why is it different when kids do these things? Because they're kids who have had adults in their life fail them. There's a mitigation of culpability on that fact alone.
Click to expand...

My experience tells me that regardless of what they NEED MANY CHOOSE NOT to BE rehabbed. And many are for whatever reason incapable. And in those cases...do you want to be confined to a set of rules based on age?
 
VanceMack said:
...if you had known '******' you might think otherwise. And there are unfortunately a lot of kids like ****** out there. ****** was 9 when he got STARTED. He was 14 when he got sent to a secure facility. He was 21 when he got let out. He was 22 (and 4 rape victims later) when he got sent back. He will likely serve 7...maybe 12 of the 14 years he was sentenced. He WILL reoffend.
Click to expand...

Actually, there AREN'T a lot of kids like ******* out there. Statistically speaking, juveniles whose first offense is a violent one at age 9 are a statistical anomally...the metaphoric needle in a haystack.

Please stop exaggerating. You know *******. I understand that ****** is ****ed up. He is hardly a poster child for what should be done in juvenile justice.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
The problem is that the laws, as they currently stand, are a knee-jerk reaction to the high juvenile crime wave that hit in the late 1980s (most likely correlated to the upswing in gang activity nationwide). They have little basis in current research on adolescent neurological development, and they also were enacted in a vacuum of knowledge about what was available in adult correctional settings to deal with violent juvenile offenders.

In short, they're bad laws. That's what Jall is reacting to.
Click to expand...

The laws are as recent as 2006. I don't think they were bad even if knee jerk.

Yes he is reacting emotionally and lashing out while all the while saying I am emotional because I disagree.

Catz Part Deux said:
If this juvenile is a sociopath, the best setting for him in virtually every state I've ever worked in would STILL be a secure juvenile facility. In most states, he can be held for 10 years. Prior to release, he should be evaluated by the youth corrections authority in that state, and his parole should be transferred to adult authorities, if possible, with strict parole requirements. There are multiple ways to handle this case without referring it to the adult system, almost all of which are a better alternative than sending a fifth grader to an adult prison which is ill-equipped to handle him.
Click to expand...

We don't send juveniles to adult facility's until they are adults.

So again it is irrelevant.
 
VanceMack said:
My experience tells me that regardless of what they NEED MANY CHOOSE NOT to BE rehabbed. And many are for whatever reason incapable. And in those cases...do you want to be confined to a set of rules based on age?
Click to expand...

I would rather have the law apply consistently and objectively in every case so that every kid has the benefit of mitigated culpability that was designed into the law rather than have a subjective and emotional reaction to the crime eclipse the equitable treatment of the child defendant.
 
Last edited:
VanceMack said:
do you want to be confined to a set of rules based on age?
Click to expand...

Yes. Because, speaking generally, a juvenile secure facility is a far better place for a young offender, no matter how violent, than an adult facility. Sending 10 year olds to prison is an archaic, inhumane, and barbaric practice.
 
jallman said:
Actually, the law ISN'T that clear, else this disagreement would not be happening. Your cherry picking of what case law applies to your argument does not clarify your emotion clouded lense for anyone but you.
Click to expand...

The law in this case is clear. He is to be tried as an adult. Case closed.
 
Blackdog said:
Yes he is reacting emotionally and lashing out while all the while saying I am emotional because I disagree.
Click to expand...

This is a lie. I have consistently applied an objective standard to the issue. You, however, have invoked nothing but subjectivity.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
Yes. Because, speaking generally, a juvenile secure facility is a far better place for a young offender, no matter how violent, than an adult facility. Sending 10 year olds to prison is an archaic, inhumane, and barbaric practice.
Click to expand...

If the child is convicted even if given a life sentence he will be in a juvenile facility until at least 18!

We do not throw children into a state or Federal penitentiary!
 
Catz Part Deux said:
Your personal anectdotes don't count as evidence to bolster a reasonable argument. Sorry. I've seen juveniles shoot other juveniles, sometimes to death. Two of my clients shot two people to death over a set of hubcaps. Several of my clients were tried as adults and served prison terms. Several are on death row.

I have 5 times as much experience as you do, purely on the basis of longevity.

I still provided evidence and research from the field to support my viewpoint that trying an 11-year-old as an adult is insanity. So should you.
Click to expand...

But they probably should be set free at 21...and you'd be happy with that...right?

Isnt THAT what this is about? SOME deserve to be precisely where they are. Bless their hearts and souls...for whatever reason...they have chosen to be what they are and arent likely to change. SOME...not ALL...deserve their fate. Have I suggested ANYTHING more???

You want evidence? Fine...use Google...hell...you've proven you know how...just dont look at JUST the articles and points of view that support your position and you should have all the reading material you could ever want or need.
 
jallman said:
This is a lie. I have consistently applied an objective standard to the issue. You, however, have invoked nothing but subjectivity.
Click to expand...

Your objective standard is emotional in essence. It's the same "it's for the children" emotional cry we get every time something bad happens to a kid.

Subjectivity does not = Knee jerk or emotional.
 
Blackdog said:
If the child is convicted even if given a life sentence he will be in a juvenile facility until at least 18!

We do not throw children into a state or Federal penitentiary!
Click to expand...

Why not? After all, he's being tried as an adult, right? So is he an adult, or not?

See the point?
 
Blackdog said:
The law in this case is clear. He is to be tried as an adult. Case closed.
Click to expand...

No the case is not closed. That's just another frustrated (read: emotional) attempt to end the debate on your word alone.

There is still an appeals process, etc. And, if you weren't so clouded with emotion, you would remember that the opening post wasn't specifically about this kid, but a general question as to whether an 11 year old should EVER be tried as an adult.

Breathe. Just breathe.
 
misterman said:
Why not? After all, he's being tried as an adult, right? So is he an adult, or not?

See the point?
Click to expand...

State and Federal penitentiary's are not set up to house juveniles.

See the point? :roll:
 
Catz Part Deux said:
Yes. Because, speaking generally, a juvenile secure facility is a far better place for a young offender, no matter how violent, than an adult facility. Sending 10 year olds to prison is an archaic, inhumane, and barbaric practice.
Click to expand...

OK then. We will agree to disagree. And when the state of Pennsylvania calls either of us for our opinion we'll offer it. Oh...thats right...they already CALLED a psychiatrist...and he felt the kid belonged in BIG BOY prison...PROBABLY because the kid at least at this point and time clearly demonstrates he is a danger to society.
 
Blackdog said:
Your objective standard is emotional in essence. It's the same "it's for the children" emotional cry we get every time something bad happens to a kid.

Subjectivity does not = Knee jerk or emotional.
Click to expand...

Find where I said "it's for the children". That hasn't been my argument here at all. It's been about fair, objective, and consistent application of the law. You might have picked up on that if you weren't so given to subjectivity.
 
jallman said:
No the case is not closed. That's just another frustrated (read: emotional) attempt to end the debate on your word alone.

There is still an appeals process, etc. And, if you weren't so clouded with emotion, you would remember that the opening post wasn't specifically about this kid, but a general question as to whether an 11 year old should EVER be tried as an adult.

Breathe. Just breathe.
Click to expand...

No it's an attempt to let the reality of the situation sink into yours.

He is being tried as an adult. Nothing left to talk about.

I gave my opinion, and you don't like it. So what?
 
jallman said:
I would rather have the law apply consistently and objectively in every case so that every kid has the benefit of mitigated culpability that as designed into the law rather than have a subjective and emotional reaction to the crime eclipse the equitable treatment of the child defendant.
Click to expand...

OK...but if the laws were applied 'consistently' then there would be little room for leniency or variance for people OVER the age of 18...right?

Again...we'll agree to disagree.
 
jallman said:
Find where I said "it's for the children". That hasn't been my argument here at all. It's been about fair, objective, and consistent application of the law. You might have picked up on that if you weren't so given to subjectivity.
Click to expand...

He's 11

He's 11

He's 11

That was basically your argument.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
Yes. Because, speaking generally, a juvenile secure facility is a far better place for a young offender, no matter how violent, than an adult facility. Sending 10 year olds to prison is an archaic, inhumane, and barbaric practice.
Click to expand...

For the record...SPEAKING GENERALLY...I agree with you.
 
Blackdog said:
The laws are as recent as 2006. I don't think they were bad even if knee jerk.
Click to expand...

We will probably have to agree to disagree on this one. I saw juvenile crime rise after we began trying 16-17 year olds as adults, because the gangs started to recruit 14 & 15 year olds to commit homicides so that the older members wouldn't receive life sentences. For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction, and it may be something we never intended.

Trying juveniles as adults is NOT an effective solution to violent juvenile crime.

We don't send juveniles to adult facility's until they are adults.
Click to expand...

16 and 17 year old offenders are routinely send to state prisons after being tried as adults. There are very few states with separate facilities to house juvenile offenders tried as adults. They are two totally separate systems.

http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/bja/182503.pdf

There are a number of studies that have shown that recidivism is significantly higher for juveniles incarcerated with adults than for similar juveniles who are placed in juvenile facilities. (one example: The Recidivism of Violent Youths in Juvenile and Adult Court: A Consideration of Selection Bias -- Myers 1 (1): 79 -- Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice) That's why many professionals in the fields of criminal justice, law enforcement, and juvenile justice do not support trying juveniles under the age of 18 as adults.
 
Blackdog said:
No it's an attempt to let the reality of the situation sink into yours.

He is being tried as an adult. Nothing left to talk about.
Click to expand...

Then kindly exit the discussion since you have nothing left to talk about. Those of us who indulge rational conversation of ideas rather than regurgitation of the opening post will continue to do so without the taint of emotional opining to hinder our debate.

I gave my opinion, and you don't like it. So what?
Click to expand...

Would you like to wiggle your fingers beside your ears and stick your tongue out at us, too?
 
Blackdog said:
If the child is convicted even if given a life sentence he will be in a juvenile facility until at least 18!

We do not throw children into a state or Federal penitentiary!
Click to expand...

No, we throw them into state prisons. DAILY. Thousands of them. I worked with several dozen juvenile gang members who were tried as adults and sent to state prison.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom