Should violent juveniles be tried as adults
Debate Rounds (2)
I am fervently opposed to my opponents view that "juveniles should be tried as adults for various reasons".
As it turns out, I've done quite a bit of research on this very subject. From the very first round, my opponent is making a lot a broad strokes with his "pen" that simply are untrue.
First of all, most young children have no concept of truth vs. lie. There are numerous experiments that have been conducted where small children, even after "swearing on a bible", would openly discuss having a good time with their best friend - their friendly neighborhood dragon or unicorn, having talks with them, taking them for rides, etc. In open court - mind you. Little children simply have not developed the skills required to understand the difference between reality and make-believe. Their coping mechanisms for this world we live in is completely different from the one that adults have. For this reason alone, in most courts in the world, children's testimony is often discarded or even not allowed in the first place.
Second, historically the treatment of juvenile offenders as adults has led to many abuses. A perfect example of this is the story of George Junius Stinney Jr., who was executed at the age of 14 in 1944. Just read this page in wikipedia and tell yourself how this was justice: http://en.wikipedia.org.... There was even a film made to showcase this injustice (see youtube link): . Children simply aren't equipped to deal with our modern justice system. The idea that a public defender and a bunch of lying police officers are going to somehow make "justice happen" is silly - there are literally thousands of examples that we know of when the system has failed for adults; We shouldn't believe that children have any better chances than adults when it comes to navigating their legal rights.
There is a perfect example of just how skewed the point of view for children is: There is a well known story about young children being used to blow themselves up by the Taliban with explosive vests. They are told that they are martyrs and that the explosion will only "blow outward" and not harm them. Believe it or not, there is a known instance of at least one child having been captured alive, explained the truth & released back to his family, and then being captured again a second time with more explosive strapped to his body. How can anyone argue that these kids are guilty?
AngailTheGREAT forfeited this round.
Thank you for forfeiting this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by bsh1 3 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||1|
Reasons for voting decision: FF
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.