Juveniles should be tried as adults
Links to more PRO research:
The proposition can use this site to prepare. The NCPA uses a fact sheet format to explain the current status of the juvenile crime issue.
Both sides should use this article, as it provides detailed arguments for each position.
Juveniles: Children below the age of 18
Tried: Put through the adult trial process, i.e., jury, judge, etc, for the crimes of rape and murder. I would like to clarify that an adult trial does not necessarily reflect an adult punishment, but, as the Affirmation will prove, it undeniably produces a fairer and more realistic punishment than does a quick sentencing provided by an overworked, underpaid, juvenile judge.
Adults: Citizens above the age of 18
Reasoning: "The rate of murders by kids has indeed been skyrocketing across the country. According to the National Crime Analysis Project of Northeastern University in Massachusetts, the number of 17-year-olds arrested for murder climbed 121 per cent in the latter half of the '80s; the number of 16-year-olds by 158 per cent; and the number of 15-year-olds by 217 per cent." In addition, juvenile arrest rates for violent have, in the majority of cases, exceeded those for adults since 1980. The number of serious crimes committed by juveniles is on track to more than double every decade.
Evidence: Jailing Juveniles", by Steve Bogira, and "Juvenile Crime", from California's Legislative Analyst's Office
Reasoning: Crime victims have a much higher lifetime incidence of post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) than people who have not been victimized (25% vs. 9,4%). Of crime victims diagnosed with PTSD, 37% also suffer from depression. (...) Crime victims suffer a tremendous amount of physical and psychological trauma. (...) Every victim's experience is different, and the recovery process can be extremely difficult. It can take a few months or years -- or an entire lifetime -- depending upon the variables involved."
Evidence: [Kilpatrick Dean G. and Ron Acierno, "Mental Health Needs of Crime Victims: Epidemiology and Outcomes", Journal of Traumatic Stress 16 (2003), in "Trauma of Victimization", National Center of Victims of Crime]
Reasoning: The adult justice system gives juveniles a jury, a proper judge, and good representation. The juvenile system however has no jury; the judge is over-worked along with the counsel provided. The adult criminal system also works better in terms of getting suspects in prison. "Juveniles tried as adults were more likely to be incarcerated, and incarcerated for longer than those who remained in the juvenile system."
Reasoning 2: An adult trial would serve towards the goal of protection of the society. Adult criminal system helps protect the society from dangerous delinquents, because it keeps them locked up in prisons for a longer period of time, thus increasing the chance of their reformation. Even if it certain cases, it doesn't increase it, the couple of extra years of protection are worth the change of the status quo as the criminal is kept away from hurting families in the future.
Evidence: Crime and Delinquency, vol. 42
Reasoning: Judge, if a student were to walk in here at this moment and kill everyone in the room, do you know what would happen in California? He would receive eight years of juvenile detention. And afterwards, he would be let go. Just like that. That is an abuse of our legal system is clearly impermissible.
Reasoning 2: A crime is a crime, and the punishment should prevent a future crime in a sufficient manner. In juvenile court, this is not the case.
Links to more CON research:
Jolanta Juszkiewicz uses statistics and research to highlight the problems with charging juveniles as adults.
The Washington Monthly explores why charging juveniles as adults is not the best remedy for juvenile crime.