should juveniles be trialed as adults for crimes?
117569
in my state it is possible to try a juvy as an adult for a crime.
673077
i think each state should be mandated to try teenages as an adult, with no parole, no bail and a daily schedule made up for them in the institute that are assigned to. make it more military than just a sentence until they get out. they do not what is requested of them like the military they are punished again and again until they learn. it only takes 1 kid to kill someone and devastate a family.
1074686
Please expand on your question.  In most cases, juveniles get MORE freedom than adults for the same crimes/accusations.
719138
You can be charged with a state crime at any age.  It is simply a matter of whether you will be tried as an adult or as a juvenile.  Children as young as 10 have been charged as adults.
420405
Juvenile Incarceration is a contentious issue.  Some feel it is necessary for the protection of society, and safe streets, others feel that we are throwing away youth during a very tumultuous developmental stage in their lives, and creating future adult criminals.  There has been controversy over the years over when a child should be tried and incarcerated as an adult, when a child should be subject to the death penalty, and even when does a child reach the point.  Most states have different programs and statutes addressing juvenile delinquency.  You may want to look into your states criminal courts website to see what programs they have in place.  Here is the link to the New York site.   http://www.courts.state.ny.us/courts/nyc/family/faqs_juvenile.shtml
535740
The Term is used for "Juveniles" who are "Delinquents". \n:-)
202664
If the minor is under 12 yrs old I'd say "NO"\nBut at Twelve I think your pretty aware of the things you are doing and the effects of them.\nAnd there have been a couple of murders in the U.S. that were very thought out, planned. and commited by tweleve and thirteen year olds. I think they should not only be tried as an adult But punished as one to.
645760
Children have no rights. A child, under a JD Petition doesn't go to what a court considers jail. They are also not housed with criminals or adults. i saw a case in Indiana regariding the same when a child broke probabation.\n\nSome children in some states are tried as adults, some at different ages. Some of them have been executed in Texas when they became 18 or older.\n\nUsually children must meet a test, ours is a three pronged one, at least in this state , before a judge, prior to being bound over as an adult. The Superior Court does not have to accept the judges decision, the decision is reversed and the child is transfered back to it's origibal jurisdiction..\n\nIf they are tried as an adult, they have all the remedys available to them that adults do, including a jury trial. i don't see how anyone can say they can participate in their defense adequately when they are still children, but they do it anyway. Adult courts are not geared for kids.\n\nI am not looking up case law as it is too difficult. You can look at any JD law in any state and most of the cites are going to be at the end of the section. Each state is different.
541683
There are many aspects to your question and it could generate many pages of debate on here.\n\nIn my opinion it depends on the situation, and every case would have to be evaluated individually.  Science has proven that the brain continues to grow and change until about the age of 21, so a teenager's brain has not yet fully developed to understand the implications of any crime in an adultlike manner.   The teenager's brain is not fully mature.\n\nA question that has to be considered is the teenager's background.  Many (not all) young people who commit serious crimes had a horrendous time as a child, and were often victims themselves of abuse, often of many types of abuse, often abuse that society turned a blind eye to.   Such kids are emotionally damaged, and need intensive help to recover and be rehabilitated, if that is possible, and it certainly cannot happen if they are sent to adult prison.  They need in depth assessment to determine the extent of their pathology, if any, and the chance of recovery.\n\nAs a society we sometimes find it very easy to throw kids away.  It is usually much easier to lock them up and forget about them than it is to correct the damage.  No doubt there are problems with the juvenile justice system in any country, and there are no simple answers, nor is there any one answer that fits every situation.  But most of the time (again, not always) when kids commint a violent crime, there was something that made them that way.  Often the source of the problem can be identified and the kid can be turned around.  But it takes a bit time and energy and a huge amount of understanding and compassion and patience to do so.\n\nA society is known by how it treats those who most need help.
100768
Since Michigan law has no minimum age for charging a child as an adult for murder, the maximum would likely be life. Non-violent crime, like the one Amy committed, does not apply, so she would likely not be charged at all, especially if she cooperates.
81284
I think that if they were tried and convicted as juveniles they usually regain their rights at 18 or 21.
893800
All interesting topics. Two sides to all the issues so you can choose any side you want. Juvenile justice I like. Some people think that we need to charge 14 year olds as adults and throw away the key. But there's a lot of info on the other side too. 14 year olds aren't adults when they're "good' so why are they when they're bad. It can be argued that we need a better system. There is science that teenage brains aren't fully developed. And it's a money issue-if you throw a 14 yr old in prison for life instead of rehabilitation, that gets expensive. Not to mention our prisons are full. And then the war against drugs. Another great topic. Do some searches using some of those terms-wikipedia.com is a good place to start looking for ideas....
791118
America's juvenile justice system is responsible for keeping citizens safe and rehabilitating delinquent youth. Meeting these two responsibilities has been the goal of the system since it was first implemented. The dilemma that has faced policymakers and citizens has been deciding which of the two aims should receive the most emphasis, and thus, funding. Should the state build more juvenile penitentiaries and immediately protect its citizens, or should it teach current prisoners life skills that will help them to live in such a way that they will be less likely to recapitulate (reoffend)? Or, in a separate, preventative effort, should the state use its resources to fund parenting, recreational, and mentoring programs that build up youth and enable them to make good decisions early on? In the end, the state must balance effectiveness with urgency. Preventative and rehabilitative measures have been proven time and time again to significantly lower the likelihood of a youth offending (or reoffending). However, the results of prevention and rehabilitation programs do not become apparent until years after they are begun, and few are willing to risk the immediate threat that could befall the community should funding of penitentiaries experience a shortfall while prevention and rehabilitation programs are being established. Citizens do not want to be the guinea pigs through which psychologists measure the effectiveness of their rehabilitative efforts; they want offenders locked up. But most also know a kid, or were a kid, that prevention or rehabilitation measures helped somewhere along the way.The Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act called for a "deinstitutionalization" of juvenile delinquents. It required that states holding youth within adult prisons for status offenses remove them within a span of two years (this timeframe was adjusted over time). The act also provided program grants to states, based on their youth populations, and created the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP).Through research into which programs have been effective - both at home and abroad - policy makers hope to develop strategies that will drop crime rates in future years. By taking the initiative to build anti-crime programs structured to fit local needs, community leaders have generated a plethora of information on which programs work, where they work, and what it takes to carry them out. Current U.S. policy aims to balance public safety with the effective rehabilitation of youth, and courts seek to individualize recommendations to fit the situations of young offenders.
918684
Well, put quite simply, Juveniles should not be tried as adults in court.  But the system is grossly misjudging both adults and children in their capacities to make decisions.\n\nPhysiologically speaking, humans do not fully develop their critical thinking skills until they are adults!  According to developmental psychologists, males' brains do not finish in their development of critical thinking until the age of approximately 21-23.  Women's brains mature a bit earlier, between the ages of 18-21.  \n\nSo this would explain a lot!  Why don't teenagers and young adults seem to make good choices?  Why do many young adults take risks without considering the consequences of their actions?  Because they are physiologically unable!  They have not yet finished developing the mental processes which allow them to do so.  Until the medical community brings forth research to the contrary you will be hard pressed to find juveniles consistently tried as adults...simply for the reason that they are *not* adults! \n\nHave a great day!
1050037
I saw a show on thirteen world about this topic, it is very interesting. \nIt should vary from case to case. If someone found evidence of prior  hate or bad thoughts and such for the victim of the crime, they should have a some jail time, but even if they commited murder, it is  not wise to put them to jail because they were unconcious. If you can prove that they were concious that in fact changes everything. Judges should handle this with thought. I Disagree with everyone else because subconsious movement may be a sickness.
146360
Kids have been tried as adults, depending on the severity of the crime.\n\nAnd, if you think about it, life in prison is a death sentence.
1118942
It really does depend on the crime and the particular youth involved.   Infancy, the legal term referring to minors under the age of 18 in most states, is considered a legal disability.   A blanket rule calling for adult treatment of all 17 year old criminals would be dangerous.  It's important to consider whether the minor offender was mature enough to have formed the intent required to commit a crime, whether he or she understood the nature and consequences of his or her act, and the nature and circumstances of the crime (was it heinous, premeditated, etc).  With nothing more, it would be impossible to say that 17 year olds in general should be held accountable as adults.