In some cases juveniles should be tried as adults: Are adult-like trials better at preventing recidivism?

  • Yes, they take the crimes seriously.

    Yes, trying juveniles as adults is helpful to prevent recidivism, because it impresses upon the teen the importance of the matter. Too many teens think that juvenile proceedings are a joke. Some even see criminal proceedings as a badge of honor. Adult-like trials would help the teens realize that they are in serious trouble.

  • Some kids should be tried as adults

    I do think that some older kids do need to be tried as an adult. If someone is murdering people, they understand how horrible that is even if they are 15. However, this should not apply to really young kids because I think it could go really wrong. When they are older, it should be done.

  • Adult-like trials are better at preventing recidivism.

    Adult-like trials are better at preventing recidivism. Many juveniles commit these offenses because they feel that they can get away with it with a hit on the wrist. If we enforced harsher sentences on the serious juvenile offenders then most of them would not repeat the crime in the future.

  • Adult Situations Prevent Repeat Offenders

    If a juvenile commits a serious crime and is tried as an adult, an adult trial may be one deterrent to become a repeat offender in the U.S. criminal justice system. Even if juveniles aren't tried as adults, having an adult-like trial may help keep kids out of trouble for a long time.

  • In a way

    The severity of what can happen at adult trials in a lot of ways trumps those for juveniles. So, for that reason, they can prevent recidivism by making it resonate more that whatever took place is a really big deal and it's something you pay the price for dearly, there's no gray area for being a "misguided kid."

  • Yes, in some cases.

    I believe that some cases involving juveniles should warrant an adult-like trial. I don't think there is enough of a difference between a 17 year old's mind and an 18 year old's mind for there to be a difference in the trial and procedure. It should depend more on the nature of the crime (was it planned, has it happened before, etc) than the defendant's age. That said, I don't think any trials in the US system are particularly good at preventing recidivism, as evidenced by the recidivism rate.

  • I don't know but.....

    Kids under 17 should not be tried as adults depending on the crime.If a child under 17 commits murder he should be tried as a adult because it is a SERIOUS CRIME. If a kid like tries to break somone window because they a re mad at the person then "no" but still should be treated accordingly.But if the child I'd above 17 and commites a crime he should be tried as a adult because he knows better, because he learned in his past and is hard headed and doesn't learn.If you are above 17 and commit any crime you should be trailed as a adult because you learned better.If you are under 17 you should not be tried as a adult but treated accordingly as said before.

  • It just surrounds the kid with major league criminals.

    While there are times when treating a juvenile like an adult for certain crimes is appropriate, let's not kid ourselves about any sort of rehabilitation taking place. The American adult prison system has fully transitioned from rehabilitation to warehousing and punishment. Exposing a child to those hardened and violent criminals means you're creating a criminal for life, from a very young age.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.