The Young Offenders Act

[redghost]

Hey everyone

Lets talk about the Young Offenders Act. Personally I think Young offenders should be treated equally as adult. I think in today's society our youths are more aware and intelligent, with things such as media and other influences present in today’s society. This is why I think they shouldn’t be treated lenient. Also the young offenders act is just putting out the message to youths that they can get off easy, which they'll never learn from their actions.

What do you think about the young offenders act? and why?

[cybercoma]

Hey everyone

Lets talk about the Young Offenders Act. Personally I think Young offenders should be treated equally as adult.  I think in today's society our youths are more aware and intelligent, with things such as media and other influences present in today’s society. This is why I think they shouldn’t be treated lenient. Also the young offenders act is just putting out the message to youths that they can get off easy, which they'll never learn from their actions.

What do you think about the young offenders act? and why?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The NIH brain research suggests that the problem is human biology. A crucial part of the teen's brain — the area that peers ahead and considers consequences — remains undeveloped. That means careless attitudes and rash emotions often drive teen decisions, says Jay Giedd, chief of brain imaging in the child psychiatric unit at the National Institute of Mental Health, who's leading the study.

"It all comes down to impulse control," Giedd says. "The brain is changing a lot longer than we used to think. And that part of the brain involved in decision-making and controlling impulses is among the latest to come on board."

The teen brain is a paradox. Some areas — those that control senses, reactions and physical abilities — are fully developed in teenagers. "Physically, they should be ruling the world," Giedd says. "But (adolescence) is not that great of a time emotionally."

Giedd and an international research team have analyzed 4,000 brain scans from 2,000 volunteers to document how brains evolve as children mature.

In his office at the NIH, Giedd points to an image of a brain on his computer screen that illustrates brain development from childhood to adulthood. As he sets the time lapse in motion, the brain turns blue rapidly in some areas and more slowly in others. One area that's slow to turn blue — which represents development over time — is the right side just over the temple. It's the spot on the head where a parent might tap a frustrated finger while asking his teen, "What were you thinking?"

This underdeveloped area is called the dorsal lateral prefrontal cortex. The underdeveloped blue on Giedd's screen is where thoughts of long-term consequences spring to consciousness. And in teen after teen, the research team found, it's not fully mature.

"This is the top rung," Giedd says. "This is the part of the brain that, in a sense, associates everything. All of our hopes and dreams for the future. All of our memories of the past. Our values. Everything going on in our environment. Everything to make a decision."

When a smart, talented and very mature teen does something a parent might call "stupid," Giedd says, it's this underdeveloped part of the brain that has most likely failed.

"That's the part of the brain that helps look farther ahead," he says. "In a sense, increasing the time between impulse and decisions. It seems not to get as good as it's going to get until age 25."

This slow process plays a kind of dirty trick on teens, whose hormones are churning. As their bodies turn more adultlike, the hormones encourage more risk-taking and thrill-seeking. That might be nature's way of helping them leave the nest. But as the hormones fire up the part of the brain that responds to pleasure, known as the limbic system, emotions run high. Those emotions make it hard to quickly form wise judgments — the kind drivers must make every day.

That's also why teens often seem more impetuous than adults. In making decisions, they rely more on the parts of their brain that control emotion. They're "hotter" when angry and "colder" when sad, Giedd says.

When a teen is traveling 15 to 20 miles per hour over the speed limit, the part of his or her brain that processes a thrill is working brilliantly. But the part that warns of negative consequences? It's all but useless.

Sorry for the terribly long cut and paste job, I'll try to sum it up in my own words as to what I mean.

A teenager's brain isnt' fully developed, in fact, studies show the human brain does not fully develop until sometime around 25 years of age. By the time a teenager is 16 years old, their emotional and physical sides have finished growing; however, the part of the brain that reasons, makes decisions, judgements and understands the consequences of actions is still "all but useless".

Because of this slow development of this part of the brain teenagers are more likely to do things based solely on their emotions which swing much further than a full grown adult.

Trying young offenders as adults is unfair to them as they are medically predisposed to irrational emotional reactions and outbursts. Scientifically they're not able to appreciate the consequences of their actions and as such should be worked with in an attempt to rehabilitate them. Potentially locking someone up for the rest of their life seems a bit severe when they're going to eventually develop that part of their mind and become almost an entirely different rational being.

[cybercoma]

Oh and let's just assume you meant the "Youth Criminal Justice Act".

[Riverwind]

Lets talk about the Young Offenders Act. Personally I think Young offenders should be treated equally as adult.  I think in today's society our youths are more aware and intelligent, with things such as media and other influences present in today’s society. This is why I think they shouldn’t be treated lenient. Also the young offenders act is just putting out the message to youths that they can get off easy, which they'll never learn from their actions.

What do you think about the young offenders act? and why?

Question: What is the best way to teach a teenager to become a career criminal?

Answer: Put him in jail with adult criminals.

There are teenagers that are basically psychopaths that need to be locked up for a long time, however, they are a small minority of the kids that get entangled with the justice system. What the system needs to get better at is recognizing who the 'psychopaths' and divert them from the youth system.

[geoffrey]

Lets talk about the Young Offenders Act. Personally I think Young offenders should be treated equally as adult.  I think in today's society our youths are more aware and intelligent, with things such as media and other influences present in today’s society. This is why I think they shouldn’t be treated lenient. Also the young offenders act is just putting out the message to youths that they can get off easy, which they'll never learn from their actions.

What do you think about the young offenders act? and why?

Question: What is the best way to teach a teenager to become a career criminal?

Answer: Put him in jail with adult criminals.

There are teenagers that are basically psychopaths that need to be locked up for a long time, however, they are a small minority of the kids that get entangled with the justice system. What the system needs to get better at is recognizing who the 'psychopaths' and divert them from the youth system.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That really depends on the situation. I think that murder or any violent assaults should always be tried as adults. I don't think its fair to the victim or the victims family for these violent offenders that have ended others lives so young, to be given a clean slate a year later.

If people were forced to take responsibility for their actions, less people would commit crimes, period. Knowing that a murder will only get you 2 years if your under age, why not do it in a gang setting (or in any setting). You have no criminal record when you leave prison (which will be a nice cushy prision anyways), and you have all the status you want in the criminal world.

Our weak pentalies encourage crime in our society.

[cybercoma]

That really depends on the situation. I think that murder or any violent assaults should always be tried as adults. I don't think its fair to the victim or the victims family for these violent offenders that have ended others lives so young, to be given a clean slate a year later.

If people were forced to take responsibility for their actions, less people would commit crimes, period. Knowing that a murder will only get you 2 years if your under age, why not do it in a gang setting (or in any setting). You have no criminal record when you leave prison (which will be a nice cushy prision anyways), and you have all the status you want in the criminal world.

Our weak pentalies encourage crime in our society.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Harsher penalties will do nothing for people who are incapable of rationalizing the consequences (of tomorrow) for the things the do today. You obviously skipped over my post.

[Achiles]

Do you think that the justice system should look at youth offenses subjectively or objectively?

Subjectively would oviously be the preference but then where do you draw the line?

[Newfie Canadian]

IMHO, how youth are treated at home and in school have a lot to do with their behaviour.

These days, parents aren't allowed to discipline their children, for fear of being reported as an abusive parent.

And it is worse in schools. My wife works in a school, Their was an incident a few days ago where a student had become physically abusive towards faculty and students. The principal asked my wife if another faculty member had their Crisis Intervention course. She did, but she isn't allowed to use it. That's a wonderful system.

I agree with geoffrey. Deterrence for youth (and even adults) at this time, isn't really a deterrence at all.

They do the crime. They're treated with velvet gloves. Their identities are protected. They get a slap on the wrist, and their records are sealed and eventually expunged.

While I appreciate where you are going with your post cybercoma, you can train a puppy to do it's business outdoors by rubbing it nose in it when it pees indoors (I know this from experience). If you show a youth what jail is like (rub it's nose in it) don't you think they would wan't to avoid it in the future?

[Argus]

Trying young offenders as adults is unfair to them as they are medically predisposed to irrational emotional reactions and outbursts.  Scientifically they're not able to appreciate the consequences of their actions and as such should be worked with in an attempt to rehabilitate them.  Potentially locking someone up for the rest of their life seems a bit severe when they're going to eventually develop that part of their mind and become almost an entirely different rational being.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What you say is true to a certain extent. However, I don't know about you, but when I was fourteen, I knew that murdering people was wrong. I knew that beating people up for fun was a rotten thing to do. I knew knocking old ladies down and stealing their purses was the act of toilet scrapings.

By all means, in the case of an ordinary young person who has made "A" mistake, be understanding of their youth, and the follies of youth, and try, if possible, to avoid destroying their lives for it. By all means, try alternative forms of punishment to educate them and change them into an ordinary citizen - depending, of course, on just how far off the path they have strayed.

But...

Let me read to you a small paragraph from yesterday's paper:

"A profile of one gang member indicated that the 14 year old has had 42 contacts with police and 14 criminal charges, including aggravated assault, assault with a weapon, robberies, and assaults on seniors."

IMHO, this is an animal which should be caged - permanently, or at the very least until he has demonstrated that he has utterly changed his ways. I have no tolerance and no forgiveness for this kind of "youth". If someone blows his head off during one of his robberies or swarmings I'd consider that pest control.

The law, unfortunately, does not seem to understand the difference between this kind of youth, and a normal young person who lets himself be goaded into stealing a car (for example).

[mcqueen625]

says Jay Giedd, chief of brain imaging in the child psychiatric unit at the National Institute of Mental Health, who's leading the study.

For starters most psychiatrist's need one. They are so busy inventing mental illnesses to give bad people the excuses they need so that they are not held accountable for their actions, that they have not had time to realize that they are so full of it, their eyes are brown.

I worked in the the system for over ten years and actually had youth's tell me they did what they did because they are ADD, or ADHD. Verbally and physically assualting teachers and other authority figures in many cases because this person called them on theri outrageous behaviour or attitudes. I had one youth who didn't want to live with his parents because they wouldn't let him do as he pleased, when he wanted to do it. He wanted to live in my Province with an aunt because she hadn't yet figured out that he was using her to be able to do what he wanted to do. She quickly found out one weekend what he was really all about when she picked him up for a weekend pass and she was told in front of him that under the terms of his weekend pass he was not to be out without being in her or her husband's company. Upon leaving the group home he demanded that she drop him off at his friend's place, a person he was not to have contact with, and when she refused his request he immediatrely became very violent and thank God it was the vehicle he took out his anger on instead of her. He trashed the inside of her vehicle by leaning back in the seat and kicked the dash of her vehicle to pieces. When he realized that she was mad he simply apologized the asked again to be dropped off at his friend's. He was dropped off, but it wasn't at his friend's place, it was back at the group home. It was then that he threatened to kill her for being as he put it, "A rat!"

When he was charged and ended up back before a judge he was simply given more probation, and he had the nerve to ask this same aunt if he could take his passes at her home. Smartly she said definitely no. When he left the group home he was acting as an enforcer for one of our other client's who was dealing drugs. Last I heard he has graduated to the adult system. Without making these youth's responsible for the crimes they are committing they are setting them up for the adult system. The only reason youth crime statistics are down somewhat is because they are not being made responsible for their crimes when they first start down the path of criminal behaviour, and they are only showing up now in the system when they reach that magic age of 18 years. Even then they wind up committing numerous offences as adults before they finally wind up incarcerated behind actual bars. The new jail, House Arrest, commonly referrred to as Community Sentencing, is the next new joke bleeding heart reformer's are perpetrating on us.

I have worked with many people who have the misconception that "There is no such thing as "BAD KIDS." In fact our Executive Director made that statement at a staff meeting, and warned staff that he did not want to ever hear a staff member refer to a youth as being BAD. The truth is that he had never worked front-line with Young Offenders, and was quoting this crap from some textbook written by some bleeding heart Criminology Professor. That's the problem, in many cases policies and decisions are being made by people who talk the talk, but they have never walked the walk. These laws are being made by lawyers who live in some fantasy-land in consultation with social engineers who think they know what is best for everyone. Unfortunately in the case of the Youth Justice Act, Young Offender Act, or whatever that want to call it next week or next year, they are wrong.

[cybercoma]

Let me read to you a small paragraph from yesterday's paper:

"A profile of one gang member indicated that the 14 year old has had 42 contacts with police and 14 criminal charges, including aggravated assault, assault with a weapon, robberies, and assaults on seniors."

IMHO, this is an animal which should be caged - permanently, or at the very least until he has demonstrated that he has utterly changed his ways. I have no tolerance and no forgiveness for this kind of "youth". If someone blows his head off during one of his robberies or swarmings I'd consider that pest control.

The law, unfortunately, does not seem to understand the difference between this kind of youth, and a normal young person who lets himself be goaded into stealing a car (for example).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Argus, you're a great poster and I agree with most things you say and were you advocating making adults sentences more strict I would agree with you now, but I can't agree with the youth thing.

You're absolutely right, that child has fallen into the hands of people that are moulding him into an animal, but somehow someone failed him. This kind of thing starts at home with parents taking personal responsibility for their actions and for raising their children.

I can't argue that a 12-18 year old doesn't have a clue what they're doing, but I can and will argue that they don't fully understand the long-term effects of what they do. It's also a fact that they have greater emotional swings than adults, which influences their behaviour beyond reason.

I find it terribly difficult to determine a 14 year old kid's fate when they've been on this planet for little more than a decade. To say we should try them as an adult and lock them up for the rest of their life is insanity to me.

These types of children have obviously been horribly neglected and allowed to fall into the hands of criminals that would worp them. It's a sad, sad deal and I think they need more help than punishment. That's not to say that they deserve no punishment, but I feel they need to be helped as well. Children need to be in school, not behind bars.

Come 18 years old, we're talking a whole different ball game.

[cybercoma]

says Jay Giedd, chief of brain imaging in the child psychiatric unit at the National Institute of Mental Health, who's leading the study.

For starters most psychiatrist's need one. They are so busy inventing mental illnesses to give bad people the excuses they need so that they are not held accountable for their actions, that they have not had time to realize that they are so full of it, their eyes are brown.

The article I posted was an excerpt from a study that wanted to raise the driving age from 16-18. This isn't from something that was being used as a tool to pass off responsibility.

I worked in the the system for over ten years and actually had youth's tell me they did what they did because they are ADD, or ADHD. Verbally and physically assualting teachers and other authority figures in many cases because this person called them on theri outrageous behaviour or attitudes. I had one youth who didn't want to live with his parents because they wouldn't let him do as he pleased, when he wanted to do it. He wanted to live in my Province with an aunt because she hadn't yet figured out that he was using her to be able to do what he wanted to do. She quickly found out one weekend what he was really all about when she picked him up for a weekend pass and she was told in front of him that under the terms of his weekend pass he was not to be out without being in her or her husband's company. Upon leaving the group home he demanded that she drop him off at his friend's place, a person he was not to have contact with, and when she refused his request he immediatrely became very violent and thank God it was the vehicle he took out his anger on instead of her. He trashed the inside of her vehicle by leaning back in the seat and kicked the dash of her vehicle to pieces. When he realized that she was mad he simply apologized the  asked again to be dropped off at his friend's. He was dropped off, but it wasn't at his friend's place, it was back at the group home. It was then that he threatened to kill her for being as he put it, "A rat!"

When he was charged and ended up back before a judge he was simply given more probation, and he had the nerve to ask this same aunt if he could take his passes at her home. Smartly she said definitely no. When he left the group home he was acting as an enforcer for one of our other client's who was dealing drugs. Last I heard he has graduated to the adult system. Without making these youth's responsible for the crimes they are committing they are setting them up for the adult system. The only reason youth crime statistics are down somewhat is because they are not being made responsible for their crimes when they first start down the path of criminal behaviour, and they are only showing up now in the system when they reach that magic age of 18 years. Even then they wind up committing numerous offences as adults before they finally wind up incarcerated behind actual bars. The new jail, House Arrest, commonly referrred to as Community Sentencing, is the next new joke bleeding heart reformer's are perpetrating on us.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Imagine a 32 year old without a serious mental illness having that kind of outburst.

Doesn't seem quite as normal as a 16 year old, does it?

[mcqueen625]

Cybercoma; The truth about this youth is that he knew exactly what he was doing, and his motivation was to intimidate his aunt to get the desired result. He knew enough that he didn't want to live with his mother and father in another Province, because as he said himself, he can't do what he wants to do when he lives with them. He would rather live in an atmosphere where intimidation gets him what he wants. I don't call that metally ill nor mentally immature. I call it what it is, someone who knows what he wants and is willing to do whatever he has to to get it. Take that attitude and behaviour a little farther and you have a sociopath. Simply who simply does whatever he pleases regardless of who they hurt in the process, The only thing that matters is that they get what they want. That is called a criminal mentality and nothing more. If we are going to give youth's an excuse to use for unacceptable behaviour, we better expect that they are going to use that excuse, and if we are not going to make youth's discover a little thing called natural consequences, then we had better continue to expect youths to make stupid choices. We all have choices in life, including youths.

When I grew up talking back to teachers or other authority figures was not only not acceptable, but was not tolerated. Today we have youth's who start out taking back to parent's because parents are not willing to let these youth's live with the consequences of bad decisions. Instead we go out of our way to make sure that they do not have to live with the consequences of bad decisions. IE: The natural consequence of not attending classes, failing to study or pay attention in class is to fail th3e course and not be promoted. In many school settings today, that consequence is not there because some social engineer has decided that it will hurt little Johnny's psychological upbringing to hold little Johnny back, so they promote him/her to the next level even though he/she does not have a passing knowledge of the work, so that he/she will be in an age-appropriate setting, and then we wonder why we are graduating functionally illiterate graduates. Go figure. Again a case of social engineer's who live in some utopia making decisions that have bad consequences in the future. Come to think of it, many of these socially promoted individuals are taking up space in our jails and prisons. Society cannot function without laws and consequences for not following those laws, but in our modern society somehow we think we can avoid the consequences of not making our youth comply with rules, and laws. Myself I think we need to get back to the basics, and stop making excuses for our youth who do not want to follow rules and laws. We need to make them accountable for their decisions, especially when those decisions are bad ones.

[mcqueen625]

I can't argue that a 12-18 year old doesn't have a clue what they're doing, but I can and will argue that they don't fully understand the long-term effects of what they do.

Many 14 year old know exactly what they are doing and that it is wrong. I once had a 14 year old who was involved in approximately 25 B & E's. His accomplice was an adult and the judge ruled that the 14 year old was the ring leader. The adult was rather slow, and all of the B&E's were planned by this youth. When he entered the group home he immediately set about attempting to manipulate one staff against the other, He disliked anyone who called him on his inappripriate behaviour, and sucked up to those he felt he could influence. He lived with a Grandmother rather than his mother, because his mother had finally had quite enough of his criminal behaviour.

He once cursed and swore at his Grandmother on the phone because she wouldn't sign a consent to allow him to smoke at the group home, and he swore at her when she refused to drive 2 hours to bring him cigarettes, after he talked her into giving consent to allow his smoking. (The group home has since gone non-smoking for everyone, including staff) He would curse and swear at staff that refused to purchase tobacco products for him, even though to do so was against the law for the staff members. He did however manage to convince one smoking staff member to quietly sneak cigarettes to him.

As for his B & E's he had absolutely no remorse for his victims. In fact his comment was that if they were stupid enough not to have insurance that was their problem. He also stated that the cops would not catch him again because he would get a smarter partner that would not rat him out, as he put it.

True to his word when he was finally released from the group home after 4 months, he did get himself another partner, but regardless, he was promptly caught and charged with a further 15 B & E's, and several breeches of probation. He was sentenced to secure custody although he did ask the judge to be returned to the group home, because he liked some of the staff there. My manage who was quite taken with him once asked me what I thought a success case was from the group home, and I responded that it was a youth who came into custody, followed the rules, got respect and gave it, left the group home, returned home and stayed away from crime, the police and the court system. She asked my specifically if I thought that this youth was a success, and I told her he was one of the worst failures that ever left our group home. She looked genuinely puzzled by my response,and asked why I didn't think he was a sucess case. I answered he question with one of my own, which was, "Where is he right now?" I tehn proceeded to answer my own question since she did not seem to want to, I said, "He's where he belongs. In jail for doing the very crime that got him time in the group home, in the first place."

If my sources are correct he is spending his life in and out of jail for various offences. Yes, I do remember having many successes from the group home, and I have had many adults come up to me on the stret, and thank me for the respect that I gave them when they were in custody, and for the direction I gave them to turn their life's around. I have had other former staff tell me they have had similar experiences with former client's Some I often wonder about, but I guess if I am not reading their names "In The Courts" in the local papers, they must be doing alright. Unfortunately I have read at least four names of former client's who have since committed murder. One of them was originally charged with manslaughter, ended up being released early and has since been involved in another killing, been convicted of murder and is doing life. The sad fact is that particular kid was really messed up from an early age due to sexual abuse within his own family.

[cybercoma]

Cybercoma; The truth about this youth is that he knew exactly what he was doing, and his motivation was to intimidate his aunt to get the desired result. He knew enough that he didn't want to live with his mother and father in another Province, because as he said himself, he can't do what he wants to do when he lives with them. He would rather live in an atmosphere where intimidation gets him what he wants. I don't call that metally ill nor mentally immature. I call it what it is, someone who knows what he wants and is willing to do whatever he has to to get it. Take that attitude and behaviour a little farther and you have a sociopath. Simply who simply does whatever he pleases regardless of who they hurt in the process, The only thing that matters is that they get what they want. That is called a criminal mentality and nothing more. If we are going to give youth's an excuse to use for unacceptable behaviour, we better expect that they are going to use that excuse, and if we are not going to make youth's discover a little thing called natural consequences, then we had better continue to expect youths to make stupid choices. We all have choices in life, including youths.

When I grew up talking back to teachers or other authority figures was not only not acceptable, but was not tolerated. Today we have youth's who start out taking back to parent's because parents are not willing to let these youth's live with the consequences of bad decisions. Instead we go out of our way to make sure that they do not have to live with the consequences of bad decisions. IE:  The natural consequence of not attending classes, failing to study or pay attention in class is to fail th3e course and not be promoted. In many school settings today, that consequence is not there because some social engineer has decided that it will hurt little Johnny's psychological upbringing to hold little Johnny back, so they promote him/her to the next level even though he/she does not have a passing knowledge of the work, so that he/she will be in an age-appropriate setting, and then we wonder why we are graduating functionally illiterate graduates. Go figure. Again a case of social engineer's who live in some utopia making decisions that have bad consequences in the future. Come to think of it, many of these socially promoted individuals are taking up space in our jails and prisons. Society cannot function without laws and consequences for not following those laws, but in our modern society somehow we think we can avoid the consequences of not making our youth comply with rules, and laws. Myself I think we need to get back to the basics, and stop making excuses for our youth who do not want to follow rules and laws. We need to make them accountable for their decisions, especially when those decisions are bad ones.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree with everything you said. What I don't agree with is making a minor serve a sentence equal to an adult for the biological reasons I stated. Children need proper guidance and upbringing, something they're severely lacking as is evidenced by this type of defiant "I'll do whatever I want" (Napolean Dynamite...sorry) attitude. Teachers should be allowed to be harsher on students, but this litigious society we live in has shackled the teachers and tossed them in the river.

I'm telling you, children do know the difference between right and wrong; however, they react to situations based MOSTLY on emotion and for this we can't possibly try them as an adult who is able to reason on a different level. The healthy adult mind (unlike the healthy teenagers mind) is able to appreciate the long-term consequences of their actions and as such they should be tried more severely since they choose to ignore it.

I can't argue with you that children need better upbringing, stricter discipline and defined consequences; however, I can and will continue to argue that they're unable to make decisions in the same way as an adult and should therefore, not be punished on the same level.

[cybercoma]

All of your examples only further exemplify the idea that these kids are more likely to do things based on their emotions than what they would logically think.

[Guest eureka]

I have to agree with your premises, Cybercoma. Youngsters have to be judged by different standards and there is no doubt any more about the "brain" immaturity that you write about.

There are always exceptions in those who are sociopathic for reasons that science has not yet answered. They, like similar adults, are another story. Identification and treatment are the problem with those.

[Argus]

Let me read to you a small paragraph from yesterday's paper:

"A profile of one gang member indicated that the 14 year old has had 42 contacts with police and 14 criminal charges, including aggravated assault, assault with a weapon, robberies, and assaults on seniors."

IMHO, this is an animal which should be caged - permanently, or at the very least until he has demonstrated that he has utterly changed his ways. I have no tolerance and no forgiveness for this kind of "youth". If someone blows his head off during one of his robberies or swarmings I'd consider that pest control.

The law, unfortunately, does not seem to understand the difference between this kind of youth, and a normal young person who lets himself be goaded into stealing a car (for example).

Argus, you're a great poster and I agree with most things you say and were you advocating making adults sentences more strict I would agree with you now, but I can't agree with the youth thing.

Note that I'm not advocating treating youth the same as adults (who I also want tougher sentencing for). What I'm saying is there needs to be some acknowledgement that just because little Johnny is only 14-16, does not mean little Johnny isn't bad to the bone and a danger to anyone around him.

Can little Johnny be changed, his mindset turned away from his current behaviour pattern? I dunno. And I don't mind if you try. But, current laws do not acknowledge the danger to the public little Johnny represents, and assume that he must be capable of change because of his age. In reality, someone like the person above is unlikely to change - ever. He's a hard core street gang member now and he's not suddenly going to discover the error f his ways when he turns eighteen.

So by all means, go and try shrinking his head. But keep him in a cage until it's been downsized sufficiently to let him out without endangering the public.

I can't argue that a 12-18 year old doesn't have a clue what they're doing, but I can and will argue that they don't fully understand the long-term effects of what they do.

That really isn't much consolation to the guy in a grave because some 16 year old wanted to show off for his friends and beat him to death, now is it? Some actions have consequences. It's too bad that there might be some sixteen year olds who are having mood swings and can't control themselves. But we, as a society, need to make it utterly clear that violence is not tolerated. And if that means slapping little Johnny in a cage until his gray beard reaches his ankles and his drive-bys have to be conducted by use of a walker that's okay with me.

[Riverwind]

Note that I'm not advocating treating youth the same as adults (who I also want tougher sentencing for). What I'm saying is there needs to be some acknowledgement that just because little Johnny is only 14-16, does not mean little Johnny isn't bad to the bone and a danger to anyone around him.

I agree. The were the system needs seperate the teenaged psychopaths from the normal problem kids. A kid who gets caught doing break-ins or even killing someone driving drunk is different than a kid who participates in a unprovoked beating of someone in a park.

[cybercoma]

Argus, the point is not that they're not a threat or that they don't deserve punishment or osme other form of consequence. When that person's brain develops they're going to further understand the ramifications of their actions in a rational matter, as opposed to simply responding to emotional stimuli. I wonder if there's any study showing the adult recidivism of child criminals. Some kids are simply abused beyond repair and its unfortunate but without serious work they'll never be a productive member of society...but I still wonder what the numbers are like.

[Argus]

Argus, the point is not that they're not a threat or that they don't deserve punishment or osme other form of consequence.  When that person's brain develops they're going to further understand the ramifications of their actions in a rational matter, as opposed to simply responding to emotional stimuli.

Then put them in a cage until that happens, preferably one far away from me.

[cybercoma]

Argus, the point is not that they're not a threat or that they don't deserve punishment or osme other form of consequence.  When that person's brain develops they're going to further understand the ramifications of their actions in a rational matter, as opposed to simply responding to emotional stimuli.

Then put them in a cage until that happens, preferably one far away from me.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Fair enough, but their sentence would still be different from an adults in that case and I think the point of the topic was to charge them as adults, which I'm arguing against and you're now agreeing with.

[Argus]

Argus, the point is not that they're not a threat or that they don't deserve punishment or osme other form of consequence.  When that person's brain develops they're going to further understand the ramifications of their actions in a rational matter, as opposed to simply responding to emotional stimuli.

Then put them in a cage until that happens, preferably one far away from me.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Fair enough, but their sentence would still be different from an adults in that case and I think the point of the topic was to charge them as adults, which I'm arguing against and you're now agreeing with.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I never disagreed with treating juveniles, as a group, differently from adults. I disagreed with your reasoning and your broadly spread excuses for youth violence. While I would not treat juveniles like adults I would, as I have posted earlier, come down like a ton of bricks on youth offenders in an effort to make them thoroughly aware that society disapproves of their actions. So in some cases that might mean treating juvenile offenders more harshly than we do adults. I also recognize there are lost causes, and "youths" who commit such violence that no matter the reasons we can only conclude they are failed humans and lock them away forever.

[RB]

I think that the young people voice are stifle based on the fact that adults make decisions and choices for them. Laws then reinforced these adult decisions. Conclusion: Adults discrimination against the youths.

Let me rephrase more gently, laws force adult decisions on the youths. I mean youths cannot carry their drinks, buy cigars, enter some establishments, watch X-rated film, etc.

Look at a message you are sending even our Charter of Rights and Freedoms would shiver, least I mentioned disadvantaged individuals or groups including those that are disadvantaged by age.

It is difficult for the kids to understand adult obsession with age-based rules, laws, when you also choose to neglect your own control of the rules and then you try to punish them as adults.

Besides being responsible parents and more involved in children lives I hope our school system can incorporate and deliver the Canadian justice system to the very young so that we share knowledge of what happens if a wrong is done.

MEN, I want to say to you that 97% of you who started law school finished your program. This is comparable to other programs such as business at 65%, engineering 65% etc. Arts 30%

So you see a connection and the disconnect. The assessement is that parents are pawns to instill rules in the young who never gets it anyway. Now those who practice law understand it to be a phenomenon to be hidden from view and only explained and punishable by the expert.

Not to mix up the expert - because they are certainly not the parents.

I would try teaching law to kids very early