what are some reasons why minors commit crimes?
355484
One reason is to see if they can get away with it. It is a challenge that has a risk if they fail, so it can provide a rush. The other factors may be economical. Some minors see it easier to steal than to get a job to pay for it. If parents are rich and the child is a bit naive he/she may romanticize the ghetto fantasies they learn from TV. Many minors haven't learned why something is wrong so they don't identify w/ laws.
890230
One of the leading causes of crime is poverty. Shame our\nleaders will never acknowledge this. \nJust check out the places where there's the most crime.
282074
Because they weren't taught to do it when they were younger.\nThe behavior that they were allowed to get away with when little, isn't quite as cute in a 15 year old.\nI work with teenagers, and there is a definite difference in the teenagers of parents who have been consistent with discipline in a young age, and the teenagers of parents who weren't.
183779
It depends on the ages of the kids.  Maybe only one was under 16.  Also, lawyers make deals all the time; they may have agreed to reduce the charges in return for a confession (makes their jobs a lot easier).
1074686
Please expand on your question.  In most cases, juveniles get MORE freedom than adults for the same crimes/accusations.
926869
The one all over riding cause of crime is bad parenting. With truancy being the for most indicator of future criminal behavior
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.
961000
because non-whites commit most of the crimes
887190
I think it is a lot of reasons.\n\n1) Jealousy-lawyers make a LOT of money.  When you break down an hourly wage, its crazy compared to the average person.\n\n2) A lawyer can take a logical reason and make it illogical.  eg A person commits a murder.  Admits it.  Then the lawyer will give all sorts of reasons to justify the murder so the person isnt penalized as severely.  Or, in the case of laws, they have to assume for so many things it jumbles up the org reason for the law\n\n3) People see lawyers as defending people that have done horrendous things.  Child molesters Murders Terrorists  Under law everone deserves a fair trial...but its darn hard to watch an inempt prosecuter "let" someone get away with something, or watch a defense lawyer defend the wrongful actions of someone and see them get off\n\n4) The bad lawyers are the ones you see most often or hear about.  The corrupt ones.  For every good lawyer, the public remembers the 20 "bad" ones.\n\n5) Lawyers, because of their education and wealth, exude a class system that those who dont have either, resent.  Some of the lawyers seem to look down on those "without" and that furthers the resentment.\n\nDo they deserve the reputation?  As with any generalization...some do, some dont.  :)
713195
There are registered offenders, whom you know to look out for.  Then there are those who haven't been caught.  \n\nThe world is an imperfect place. As a parent, teach your children all you can.  Arm them with knowledge so you know they'll be safe even when you're not around. \n\n.
941377
Since a juvenile culprit is under the state of developement and not able to take prudent dcisions of his own till he attains majority [ 18 years in most of the countries ], the legal system has protected him and therefore punishment awarded to him is not detrimental but to provide him a chance to correct him.\n\nWhile on the other hand since an adult mind is capable of designing a crime, he is believed to have commited the crime fully knowing its consequence. Hence the lagal system has provided harsh punishment for him to punish him, to correct him, to stop him for future crime and give detrimental punishment so that people like you and me dont even think about commiting any crime and society at large.
951380
The officers will not need his consent.  If they believe there is a reason, they will search the vehicle to make sure there is nothing in it that imposes the danger to the minor. (In the US, the "minor" is anyone who is under the age of 18).
409593
I think that its because they feel liket they already screwed up (talking about the kids in jail). They are not loved by anyone, so they want to live an easy life style.
428748
There has been tons and tons of studies done on why people commit crime.There are many psychological factors in criminal thinking. Addiction is perhaps one of the biggest predictors for crime. Mental illness is also a risk factor in criminal thinking.  Not all addicts nor all mental ill people commit crime.  For most who commit crime they do not think they are committing a crime. It is the police, and society who is picking on them.  Go to any jail and any prison and you will hear how they were set up how it wasn't their fault. Criminals think different the rest of society.
621029
because people are crappy parents and dont want to do any work, they dont want to sit down with there kids and explain how things work, they want to abuse them and then wonder why they listen to shitty music and shoot people. then they arent createive enough to come up with a god reason for it to happen so they blame someone they can sue.
1039600
There are two primary justifications (reasons) for having criminal laws and criminal punishments.\n\nThe first is purely pragmatic/practical. Certain actions cause problems for society, in that people are harmed (reducing productivity) or property is damaged. Preventing someone who has shown they will commit such crimes from being free to do so again is one reason why we have punishments. Also, rehabilitation is often stated as a goal, so that people who have committed crimes in the past do not do so again.\n\nThe second reason is that some actions are inherently bad, and people deserve to be punished for them. Where society is harmed (see above) these are easy to understand and justify.\n\nThe trickier subset of the second category comes with crimes that do not cause direct damage to anyone, or even increase risk of harm (like speeding), but rather offend some moral sense of right/wrong.\n\nThis is the gray area, where the majority makes something illegal purely because they don't like it. And almost always that dislike comes because of their moral (religious) framework. So, effectively, they are enacting laws punishing activity that their religion dissapproves of.\n\nNow, if the action is one that pretty much everyone disapproves of anyway, regardless of religion, then it can be considered a cultural justification, rather than a religious one. And those are valid.\n\nBut, the courts have struck down laws that are only based on religious justifications, because the US Constitution prohibits enforcement of religious dogma as a matter of law.\n\nSo, the fine line in the second category (no actual harm) is always whether the moral justification is really a generally accepted cultural expectation, or is it religiously motivated. That's how morality comes into the equation.
61591
because proportionaly they are commiting more crimes