In Crowley, Texas a six year old girl returning home is quizzed by her parents, and later police about her encounter with the nearby neighbor, the young girl admits the perpetrator had indecently touched her. The accused was not charged with any crimes or labeled as a sex offender and allowed to return to his home on short probation two houses away from the victim two days later. Consequentially the family of the young girl was disgusted. The reason for the improper punishment: the boy was fifteen at the time the crime was committed.
Many juveniles are not as lucky when their crimes turn into much more such as rape and murder. Those minors have a possibility of being sentenced to life without parole; a harsh sentence that should be saved for the most violent criminals, those with a clear history, and offenders who have no remorse for their actions, even supposing the person is under the age of eighteen. Juvenile delinquency and the punishment they should receive is a controversial topic disagreed upon by many and becomes more taboo when the mention of life without parole is introduced.
The sentence is rare and not often enforced, for instance there are currently “41,095 offenders facing life without parole”, and of those “2,574 [are] people who will spend the rest of their lives behind bars for crimes they committed when they were juveniles. ” (“Sentencing Juveniles”). Though the number is small it is evident that in special cases including extreme violence juvenile life without parole is necessary. While opponents argue that punishing a severe juvenile crime with life without parole is unfair and excessive, proponents maintain that it is safer to commit dangerous criminals to lower the possibility of crime.
One main reason why life sentencing is so often contested against is the idea that continually harshly punishing a child for an action does not give chance for reform, for example “when a drug that has been prescribed for an illness fails to work, the best response is not always to give more of the same medicine. “(Carnell). Solutions offered by opponents to combat life sentencing are shorter sentences paired with reform programs, because “Most youth are likely to mature out of crime”(Jones), that is unless the justice systems makes it difficult for a child delinquent to transition to a law abiding adult.
A tragic example of a juvenile being sentenced to life without parole is the case of Sara Kruzan a girl exploited by a man she considered a father, Howard raped her when she was only thirteen and sold her into prostitution and eventually, a “rival pimp gave Sara a horrific choice: either kill Howard or the rival pimp would kill Sara’s mother. “(Jones) Sara killed Howard and was sentenced to life without parole. In many cases such as Sara’s juveniles do deserve a second chance to be able to become valuable members of society, though it is unfair to assume that is the case for all juvenile offender currently serving life.
The opposition offers a valuable view on incarceration, however many of the viewpoints are relied heavily on emotion, lacking facts and logic. Contrary to the oppositions opinion it is becoming more apparent that teenagers now are able to be much more aware of the implications of crime, “today, most teenagers are aware either because of what they learn in school, what they see on the news, or what they read on the Internet-of the intricacies of the law and the legal consequences for criminal behavior. “( Aliprandini).
With the introduction of the internet and its endless database of already answered questions people have more opportunities to figure out the true outcome of an action before it is committed, rendering the argument that a person did not know the wrongness of their crime because of their young age useless. Though it is important to not confuse the court with a system to enact revenge, “in which the victims (or relatives of the victims) are entitled to see the police, courts, and correctional system carry out their personal wishes”(Lee et al).
A crime only of the highest degree should be punished with life without parole. The laws’ aim is to serve a higher purpose not to right one wrong in the eyes of few. In effect, “juveniles convicted of horrible crimes—typically murder-should be sentenced to life without parole. They are too dangerous to allow to live among law-abiding citizens. “(Sentencing Juveniles) The laws’ higher purpose is for the better of the people, therefore danger should never be sent out of the court house onto the streets.
Laws passed in the 1990s made it much easier for “judges to sentence juveniles to life in prison without the chance of parole”(Sentencing Juveniles) making America a safer place. Violence can be easily accessed from any television, phone, computer, or even videogame changing the amount of exposure children and adults alike have to brutality. Crime is changing, “we’ve got a whole population of disturbed kids out there… they’re mad and bored, and they don’t have anything to lose. “(Stewart) Children who have become desensitized to crime by these outlets are more likely to commit more and more violent crimes, putting more people at risk.
Once a crime has been committed “transferring juveniles to adult court generally emphasize two percieved advantages with this approach: stronger, punishment and greater public safety. “(Myers) History can also affect the outcome of a person’s later involvement with crime many criminals come from abusive families or less than desirable conditions. As an example, Maniac, a former juvenile delinquent was raised in an abusive and damaging household causing him to turn to crime to escape, he stated when interviewed “I think my dad was doing drugs. I mean, I couldn’t say for sure how long, but I think that.
But then he got my mom started on them- Mostly crack, yeah. “(Stewart). Though possibly mentally disturbed children occasionally commit the worst of crimes and still should be considered a menace to society and tried with the possible result of serving life without parole. Though opponents would counter “such sentences are supposed to be reserved for the U. S. ‘s most unstable people, criminals with a proven track record of violence”(Sentencing Juveniles) how can one assume that the first extremely violent crime will be the last if they are not properly dealt with.
Young criminals who show no remorse are more than likely aware of their actions and raise the question “what constitutes a child, especially in the case of a capital crime like murder? The law currently says anyone under age 18 cannot be subject to the same punishment for murder (i. e. , execution) as perpetrators over 18. “(Lee et al) this applies most directly to those along the threshold of eighteen. How can one simply wake up one day and suddenly become aware of consequences they couldn’t comprehend the day before? Eighteen is not a magic number and with it does not come the comprehension of actions.
A minor can commit a crime before the age of eighteen, and be fully aware of the crime they committed and also the laws that allowed them to get away with it. Although many will always disagree with the permanent imprisonment of minors and many laws would need to be enacted to ensure the lawfulness of the imprisonment allowing for life without parole to be sentenced to minors while in an adult court would be very beneficial, decreasing likelihood of violent future crimes, giving victims and victims’ families a sense of closure and justice, and lessening the juvenile crime rate.
Life without parole is a valuable resource when sentencing juveniles that exhibit extreme violence, a history including crime or indication of crime, and those that show no remorse for crimal activity, and should be enacted, though with great care, to continue a fair system of imprisonment.