Youth Crime In Canada:

[Greg]

Maple Leaf Web's newest feature,

The Youth Criminal Justice Act:

A New Strategy for Youth Justice

New legislation replaces the Young Offenders Act

In the 1960s, an upward trend in juvenile crime led experts to question the effectiveness of the 1908 Juvenile Delinquents Act. Since that time, the federal government has struggled to develop youth justice laws that have public credibility. In 1976, the youth crime issue received enough attention that Statistics Canada conducted a survey using data from several police forces. Subsequently, media coverage of violent offences committed by youth – such as the brutal stabbing of a thirteen-year-old boy in a Calgary schoolyard, and the savage beating and drowning of a fourteen-year-old Victoria girl - provoked a storm of criticism that the youth justice system was soft on offenders. Today, despite the fact that youth crime rates have been steadily dropping for nearly a decade, Canadians still view youth crime as a serious problem.

Read More >>

What is everyones feelings on youth crime? Are we handling it the right way? Is there something we can be doing to improve the situation in Canada?

[Lost in Manitoba]

When I was a kid, me and a few friends thought it would be cool to break into the local SportsPlex and go swimming at 2am. We were drunk, seemed like a good idea at the time . Anyway, we were busted. The crown wanted us tried as adults, and get 3yrs each. We were 15yr olds! We came from good families, we were all of us at the top of our class in school. It was a stupid thing to do, brought on by alcohol which is a pervasive dettriment to our society. Instead of time served the judge gave us 500hrs of community service, made us pay for the damage we caused to the SportsPlex's doors that we pryed open, and immediately after the sentencing, we were to stay 48hrs at the jail, to show us what we could expect if we screwed up again.

A lot of people may think that this is too lax. What would have been better? 5 kids with potential, losing everything and being criminalized in prison? We learned our lesson; understood there's consequences to our actions. In my mind, the judge made the right decision. The other guys are currently all work in the justice system, one as a Mountie and the other three are high-risk youth probation officers.

While I do wince when I hear about some sentencing being so lax, maybe it's a case where you have to understand all aspects of the case to understand why the judge ruled as he did.

[Pellaken]

untill we can create a device that can tell true intent, we can never have a good justice system, adult or youth.

if you skrewed up, like lost here did (drinking at age 15, eh?) then no, you shouldent get in deep doo-doo. but if severly injure or kill someone, then you should get harsher punishments.

my stance on youth crimes is the same as my stance on all crimes. harsher sentances for those who ment to do harm, and lighter sentances for those who just did something stupid.

[Lost in Manitoba]

When talking about youth justice, one should take into the fact that if you are unable to make rational and intelligent decisions due to alcohol, drugs, or insanity you are said to be not responsiblle for your actions; emotional immaturity should also be put in that category.

I would point out, though, that just because someone is not responsible for their actions, does not mean they should not be accountable for them. ie. A drunk man getting in a fist fight may not neccasarily need to be charged with assault and go to jail, but he should have to attend alcohol couselling, do community service, and swear to mantain the peace.

[Pellaken]

just last night I was reading some stuff I wrote 4 years ago, and I agree that emotional immiturity is a valid point. however, if you knowingly do something wrong, like kill someone for example, then you should get punished weather your sober, drunk, 15, or 50.

[Lost in Manitoba]

Oh, I agree Pelly. But do you think a 12yr old kid that kills someone is just as guilty as if YOU committed the same act? Or is it the same as if a Psych patient went off their meds and committed the act. I think the difference is that you knew with absolute certainty that you were doing something amoral and criminal and also knew that if you were caught you would be punished.

That 12yr old deffinitely deserves to be held accountable, but he also needs to be educated on what's right and wrong and the idea of morallity and consequences, or in other words, he should be guided to the point where we are at.

[theWatcher]

Do you think you should have the right to know that your 12 year old neighbor killed his neighbors in the last house they lived at?

At some point anonymity starts contributing to the kids problems instead of protecting them.

[Pellaken]

Oh, I agree Pelly. But do you think a 12yr old kid that kills someone is just as guilty as if YOU committed the same act? Or is it the same as if a Psych patient went off their meds and committed the act. I think the difference is that you knew with absolute certainty that you were doing something amoral and criminal and also knew that if you were caught you would be punished.

That 12yr old deffinitely deserves to be held accountable, but he also needs to be educated on what's right and wrong and the idea of morallity and consequences, or in other words, he should be guided to the point where we are at.

again, depends on intent. if I was cleaning my car, knocked it in neutral, and it rolled over someone, killing them, while the 12 year old broke into a gun-shop, stole a gun and some bullets, then shot that guy he's wanted to shoot for 3 years, then yes, he SHOULD get in bigger trouble then me. Unfortunatly, there is no way to be 100% sure of somone's intent, therefore any fair reforms to the justice system, youth or adult, are very complicated, if not impossible.

[westcoast99]

I do find the anonymity aspect troubling.

Edited August 12, 2015 by Gugsy

[Moderate Centrist]

"I say scrap the "Youth Criminal Justice Act" and stop this nonsense of letting kids get away with murder."

Source: Gugsy

Although I agree with most of your posts I'm going to have to take issue with this one, in particular the above quote.

Firstly kids are not getting away with Murder.

Second there is no reason that I'm aware of to scrap the Young Offenders Act.

But I'll give you a chance here. Please get back and let us know which sections in the young offenders act you object to and why.

It's important to realize crime rates in Canada and the United States have been dropping for the past twenty years.

Crime coverage has more to do with selling newspapers and getting T.V. ratings and little to do with real news.

[westcoast99]

Johnathan Wamback was 17 or so when he was beaten to within an inch of his life. The offenders were other young people. Under the Young Offenders Act (now called Youth Criminal Justice Act), the offenders were undisclosed.

Edited August 12, 2015 by Gugsy

[Pellaken]

Have you heard of Johnathan Wamback? He was 17 or so when he was beaten to within an inch of his life. The offenders were other "youth". Under the Young Offenders Act (now called Youth Criminal Justice Act), the offenders were undisclosed and to this day it is not kept on record who almost killed this guy, because they were 17 years old.

This is what bothers me. Anonymity is the issue, youth must be held accountable for their actions and not have the benefit of their names being undisclosed when they rob a bank or rape someone.

Also, when people (even young people) commit crimes, they have to go to jail. Not a summer camp where they rock climb and go bowling....for free.

- Gugsy

I'll use this to strengthen my point.

all of the crimes you guys point out, are ones where intent is there. I'm pretty sure this guy dident "fall" on that guy's fist 100 times. he intended to hurt him pretty bad.

where intent to do harm is in the mix, then anyone, 12 or 50, should be held equally accountable.

this changes when intent is NOT in the mix.

lets say you are 30, and are "playing" with a gun, that goes off, and blinds your best friend.

well, your 30! you should know better

however, if you are 13 and doing this, then the punishment should be way different. I'll bet you learned your lesson, and will probably be traumatized to the point of joining the NDP to support gun control (no joke intended) Intent is like a fork in the road, leading to 2 radically different paths. We cannot even discuss Anonymity unless we define weather or not we have intent.

[theWatcher]

From Stats Canada

Stats Can - Persons accused of Homicide, by age and sex

Persons accused of Homicide by age

_Year_____1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

Male______ 440 _464 _437 _413 _422 ( total Accused)

0-11 years 2 0 1 0 0

12-17 years 44 54 36 38 25

Female 75 65 48 56 63 ( total Accused)

0-11 years 0 0 0 1 0

12-17 years 11 3 9 5 5

Note: Includes murder, manslaughter and infanticide.

So for 2001 there were 30 kids under the age of 17 accused of murder, out of a total of 485, about 6.1% of the total. In many years it was as high as 10 or 15%.

[Pellaken]

still. those stats do not say anyhting about intent

[Lost in Manitoba]

Pell, typically the difference between murder and manslaughter is intent.

[RB]

i find that today’s youths are irresponsible and are getting idiotic by the minute and are cost burden to society. so what does the youth have to say about this, well they are into a phase of blames

blame the parent:

real example now the young one could not figure a risk of hurt if they rollerblade on a sloping rail that is 2 feet high and only 1 inch width, just another something to do I guess and the parent ….well just looking on – result head concussion

blame the education system:

perhaps the education system is not doing enough, but these are the same kids that do not know the difference between bring (like bring you up short) and take (like take leave of your senses), come (like c’mon sense) or go (like go places), here (like hear me out now) and there (like there's nothing to it), or deer, or dear

blame the youths themselves

Ok think now they become the thinking independent, and rational, so that for every action they take there is a consequence?

blame the legal system

now they calculate the weigh in punishment what is reasonably fair, but not take away anything from the youth

blame society

you are taking away redemption of tradition and filling our young minds with unorthodox liberties

blame god

well we are trying to shift our responsibilities and actions to god or history – they are the same you know

blame choice

there are too many choices to deal with

Well to the youths I say the choices you make in this life are the ones that eventually shape who and what you become. Choice I say define all of us.

i have a solution for the youths…you want them to do well, give them some abstract thinking to deal with, good grief....kids, HERE have a concussion:

BECOME AN IDEA

[Pellaken]

Pell, typically the difference between murder and manslaughter is intent.

manslaughter is still harshly punished, while murderes walk away free.

there should be a minimum of 50 years without parole (even for good behaviour) for all intentful murderers

there should be a maximum of 5 years, with parole, for all non-intentful murders.

while I wont quote these numbers, and they perhaps are an over-exaderation, they do prove my point quite well.

I think the same should apply to youth crimes, but as you get younger and younger, a child can "intend" to do something, but not really understand what he's doing.

[theWatcher]

Moderate Centrist asked to look at portions of the act specifically and comment on them. Having looked at it, I think you need a law degree to make any sense of it:

Bill C-7

"presumptive offence'' means

  (a) an offence committed, or alleged to have been committed, by a young person who has attained the age of fourteen years, or, in a province where the lieutenant governor in council has fixed an age greater than fourteen years under section 61, the age so fixed, under one of the following provisions of the Criminal Code:

(i) section 231 or 235 (first degree murder or second degree murder within the meaning of section 231),

  (ii) section 239 (attempt to commit murder),

  (iii) section 232, 234 or 236 (manslaughter), or

  (iv) section 273 (aggravated sexual assault); or

  ( a serious violent offence for which an adult is liable to imprisonment for a term of more than two years committed, or alleged to have been committed, by a young person after the coming into force of section 62 (adult sentence) and after the young person has attained the age of fourteen years, or, in a province where the lieutenant governor in council has fixed an age greater than fourteen years under section 61, the age so fixed, if at the time of the commission or alleged commission of the offence at least two judicial determinations have been made under subsection 42(9), at different proceedings, that the young person has committed a serious violent offence.

something called "presumtive offense" for all of the really bad stuff that could be done. This is just a definition at the beginning of the document.

(iii) enhanced procedural protection to ensure that young persons are treated fairly and that their rights, including their right to privacy, are protected,

"presumptive offence' can still be reported, as mentioned later

q) order the young person to serve a sentence not to exceed

(i) in the case of first degree murder, ten years comprised of

(A) a committal to custody, to be served continuously, for a period that must not, subject to subsection 104(1) (continuation of custody), exceed six years from the date of committal, and

( a placement under conditional supervision to be served in the community in accordance with section 105, and

(ii) in the case of second degree murder, seven years comprised of

(A) a committal to custody, to be served continuously, for a period that must not, subject to subsection 104(1) (continuation of custody), exceed four years from the date of committal, and

( a placement under conditional supervision to be served in the community in accordance with section 105;

6 year max for 1st degree, 4 year max for 2nd degree

61. The lieutenant governor in council of a province may by order fix an age greater than fourteen years but not more than sixteen years for the purpose of the application of the provisions of this Act relating to presumptive offences.

Imposition of adult sentence

62. An adult sentence shall be imposed on a young person who is found guilty of an indictable offence for which an adult is liable to imprisonment for a term of more than two years in the following cases:

(a) in the case of a presumptive offence, if the youth justice court makes an order under subsection 70(2) or paragraph 72(1)(; or

( in any other case, if the youth justice court makes an order under subsection 64(5) or paragraph 72(1)( in relation to an offence committed after the young person attained the age of fourteen years.

somewhere in the range of 14-16 to be tried as an adult, depending on the province, for the heavy crimes.

110. (1) Subject to this section, no person shall publish the name of a young person, or any other information related to a young person, if it would identify the young person as a young person dealt with under this Act.

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply

(a) in a case where the information relates to a young person who has received an adult sentence;

( subject to sections 65 (young person not liable to adult sentence) and 75 (youth sentence imposed despite presumptive offence), in a case where the information relates to a young person who has received a youth sentence for an offence set out in paragraph (a) of the definition "presumptive offence'' in subsection 2(1), or an offence set out in paragraph ( of that definition for which the Attorney General has given notice under subsection 64(2) (intention to seek adult sentence); and

in a case where the publication of information is made in the course of the administration of justice, if it is not the purpose of the publication to make the information known in the community.

It appears that names can be published for presumptive offences if they were tried as an adult, not sure about the youth sentance part, i think it means if they tried to impose an adult charge, not sure.

(4) A youth justice court judge shall, on the ex parte application of a peace officer, make an order permitting any person to publish information that identifies a young person as having committed or allegedly committed an indictable offence, if the judge is satisfied that

  (a) there is reason to believe that the young person is a danger to others; and

  ( publication of the information is necessary to assist in apprehending the young person.

After having read through the document, I feel that it is better than the Young Offenders Act.

The silly, non threatening crimes are still protected, heavy stuff can be punished. Names can be released under certain conditions. A tiny bit of thought has gone into the victims.

[Guest The Pope]

When I was a kid, me and a few friends thought it would be cool to break into the local SportsPlex and go swimming at 2am. We were drunk, seemed like a good idea at the time . Anyway, we were busted. The crown wanted us tried as adults, and get 3yrs each. We were 15yr olds! We came from good families, we were all of us at the top of our class in school. It was a stupid thing to do, brought on by alcohol which is a pervasive dettriment to our society. Instead of time served the judge gave us 500hrs of community service, made us pay for the damage we caused to the SportsPlex's doors that we pryed open, and immediately after the sentencing, we were to stay 48hrs at the jail, to show us what we could expect if we screwed up again.

A lot of people may think that this is too lax. What would have been better? 5 kids with potential, losing everything and being criminalized in prison? We learned our lesson; understood there's consequences to our actions. In my mind, the judge made the right decision. The other guys are currently all work in the justice system, one as a Mountie and the other three are high-risk youth probation officers.

While I do wince when I hear about some sentencing being so lax, maybe it's a case where you have to understand all aspects of the case to understand why the judge ruled as he did.

could you not plead insanity because you were not at the right state of mind at that moment?

[Guest The Pope]

Well, in some places 13 year olds are being treated as Adults, i don't even think there is Youth management anymore. I think most are being chanrged as Adults, which could result to a problem as the Youth program for underage was brought in for a reason...who knows...

[Mr. Chater]

Well, in some places 13 year olds are being treated as Adults, i don't even think there is Youth management anymore. I think most are being chanrged as Adults, which could result to a problem as the Youth program for underage was brought in for a reason...who knows...

true, i know what you mean by 13 year olds treated as adults. And yes, we do have a Youth thing going on, though it does not seem to effect anything...

[theloniusfleabag]

I believe that the entire judicial system, both in Canada and the US, must be revamped for the betterment of society, and that statement must therefore include the Young Offenders Act.

Criminals must repay society, not the other way around. Their repayment should also be twofold. Not only should reparations be made (such as Lost in Manitoba's post about the value of community service) but also they should earn their keep in prison. I find it ridiculous that it costs the taxpayer money to keep dangerous criminals in prison, to the tune of $50,000 plus per year, when that is more than my household brings in! After taxes, it probably takes 3-4 average working Canadians ENTIRE wage to keep 1 violent offender in prison.

The watchword (or phrase) of today's society is 'dodge the responsibility' for one's actions, when the only real way to avert future generations from crime to to place responsibility where it belongs. On the individual. That must include young offenders.

My solution would be to 'job out' corrections Canada to the military. Many agree that the worst kind of prison, a prison one would not like to go back to, is military prison. Not because they abuse prisoners, but because they tolerate no abuse from prisoners. Boot Camps, such as the ones being experimented with in the US, are merely an extension (or first line of defence for society) of this notion. If I must work to earn my daily bread, when I have not wronged society, why should those who have done so be paid by society?

Gulag is a harsh word, yet Canada has many nothern islands that could be used to 'set people on the right path', to one of self-responsibility. If we want to reintegrate criminals into society, they must prove that they are capable. Make prisons and 'Juvy halls' into mini-societies, where if they can function in one, they can function in the other. No release until they pass. Whether that be a high-school diploma or a trade. Something that benefits and pays back society, and allows them to function, or they have greater problems that should be addressed by another format. Otherwise, the 'corrections system' has failed. It doesn't have to be cruel, just harsh reality. The rest of us have to face it.

[Cameron]

My feelings of crime are that of disgust with the criminal system. I find that there is too much lee-way with offenders. I live in Halifax, NS and there have been a rash of youth crime, swarming, gangs of teens beating up people (http://www.canoe.ca/ChronicleHerald/news3.html). There seems to be the problem of no consequences for actions taken. These teens are getting away with this kind of shit and nothing is happening. We had an incident awhile back where teens were going around in cars (their parents for all I know) and beating people up with bats and pipes...GIMME A BREAK! These kids should be sent to jail and corn-holed in prison! 16-18 year olds doing this king of crap! I know, and you know that they KNOW better!! It needs to stop and I do give cutos to the police for trying to stop this, putting out APB's and news broadcasts with descriptions...If I ever got my hands on one of those kids...hell would be dished out... :angry:

[Mr. Chater]

When talking about youth justice, one should take into the fact that if you are unable to make rational and intelligent decisions due to alcohol, drugs, or insanity you are said to be not responsiblle for your actions; emotional immaturity should also be put in that category.

You see, although you could plead insanity for such crime and actions. I believe this shouldn't make a difference as it was your decision to take these drugs and drink. Before taking these things, you should immidiatly look at the Consequences you will recieve by taking drugs and drinks before you take/drink them.

(sorry for the spelling.)

[Cameron]

http://www.herald.ns.ca/stories/2003/11/05...5/f183.raw.html

As we can see, there is a problem with the youth justice system. These type of events have been escalating in the last couple of years. This is the latest. They are getting more and more brazen about it. Time to stop shitting around and punish these kids!

The cop in the article said that he blamed this partially on video games. Well, I don't know what to say about that. I played Doom and Duke Nukem and I wasn't crazy! The parents and the Liberals are to blame for this. Lax parenting and a weak youth justice system. Same on them both!

PS - These kids need a good shit-kicking! :angry: