1. Adolescents should be treated differently because they are more vulnerable. They are going through changes, their cognitive abilities are still immature and they are more likely to be influenced by coercive factors. People are not the same as they were when they were adolscents which proves that adolescents ARE different from adults and should not be held as or tried as adults.
2. On the other hand, adolscents should not be held differently because their body changes should not be a valid excuse to commit crime. What about all the other adolscents that do not commit crime? Does that mean that the non offenders do not go through the same changes that offenders go through? No. All adolscents go through the same changes, some choose to commit crimes and others do not. So we should hold them accountable for their actions. In my opinion it should be the severity of their crime that deems their sentence and how they are tried. If these kids are starting out young, then how will their crimes intensify if they are not held for life?
Interesting argument -- that body changes does not excuse crime. That may be a more important argument as we find more brain/physiological correlates/predictors of violence and maladaptive behavior...
ReplyDeleteAs adolescents are in fact vulnerable during this time, would it be ok if an adult committed a crime and did not get harsh punishment due to an emotional vulnerability that led them to lose the ability to self regulaten themselves and act when being bullied?
ReplyDeleteThe controversy of punishment and the level. If adolescents are capable of killing someone on purpose then they should be punished, but not with a life sentence or death penalty. Consequently, the controversy continues.....why not?
ReplyDelete