Trying minors as adults

[prawn_86]

This is another pet hate of mine that is present in western 'democracy' style governments.

I dont see why minors should be trailed as adults. There is an implied 'line' at a certain age at which one becomes and adult. Sure a 17yo might be capable as the same level of thought as an 18 yo, but why should he be trialed as an adult if he is not above the 'legal age requirement'.

If someone under 18 (used for example) wanted to drink or vote it would be illegal, so why does the court system and the government shift the boundaries only when it suits them? (dont i answer, i know why)

So do you agree with trialing minors as adult? Why/why not?

 

[Nyden]

Re: Trailing minors as adults

This is another pet hate of mine that is present in western 'democracy' style governments.

I dont see why minors should be trailed as adults. There is an implied 'line' at a certain age at which one becomes and adult. Sure a 17yo might be capable as the same level of thought as an 18 yo, but why should he be trialed as an adult if he is not above the 'legal age requirement'.

If someone under 18 (used for example) wanted to drink or vote it would be illegal, so why does the curt system and the government shift the boudaries only when it suits them? (dont i answer, i know why)

So do you agree with trialing minors as adult? Why/why not?

Been hitting the drink prawn? You're spelling is appalling :

I voted yes - but I believe only so in certain situations, and certain age brackets. I believe a 17 year old in certain circumstances should be, perhaps even a 16 year old. Why? Because many this age commit certain crimes because of their age; in the hopes of far lighter sentences. Such premeditation warrants them to be treated as someone a year older.

The main reason for my voting yes - is that everyone develops at a different rate, and I believe that it should cut both ways (as in some 18 year olds being trialed as minors) - as you can have a 17 year old with the maturity of an average 24 year old, and vice versa.

I don't however agree with the whole penal system as a whole though

 

[prawn_86]

Re: Trailing minors as adults

Been hitting the drink prawn? You're spelling is appalling :

I may have had a couple drinks :

 

[Nyden]

Re: Trailing minors as adults

I may have had a couple drinks :

Grammar too. At least when you sober up, you'll be able to edit your own thread; what with your mod-powers

 

[gav]

Re: Trailing minors as adults

There are other areas it applies to as well. Correct me if im wrong, but if you fly on a plane and your 12yrs old, you have to pay adult price! Can you imagine if a 12yr old asked for a beer on the plane? "No, your not an adult". But they charge as if they are!

 

[bluelabel]

Re: Trailing minors as adults

wow prawn, this is a little deep i think, and i have also had a few drinks (my mate john is here with me).

I really think it depends on the crime and the circumstances surrounding the entire incident, but first i must seek clarification, (i may be a little cut, but still wish to responding to the right facts) being tried as a minor/adult is a difference in the sentencing not the proceedure right, apart from the open court thingy.

:bier:


blue

 

[Prospector]

I dont really think this is a problem prawn, people under 18 years are rarely tried as adults. I thought your gripe was the opposite, that they should be tried as adults in some crimes

 

[2020hindsight]

I knew some minors once up on the gemfields. One of em put soap suds in the well. Should have been hung.!

PS They shouldn't get off scott-free obviously.

 

[prawn_86]

I really think it depends on the crime and the circumstances surrounding the entire incident, but first i must seek clarification, (i may be a little cut, but still wish to responding to the right facts) being tried as a minor/adult is a difference in the sentencing not the proceedure right, apart from the open court thingy.

To be totally honest im not quite sure how it works, but i do know there is a youth court and a 'normal' court. So i assume the 17yo being tried as an adult for murder will attend the 'noraml' (criminal, supreme, whatever) court rather than the youth court.

And for example, in the US, it means that those under legal age (18 or 21 depending on state), can receive the death penalty, but are not entitled to other adult rights (extreme scenario)

I dont really think this is a problem prawn, people under 18 years are rarely tried as adults. I thought your gripe was the opposite, that they should be tried as adults in some crimes

I agree that they are rarely tried as adults P, but that is part of my gripe. Govs and courts only to it to try and appear tough on crime, when all they are doing is erroding our rights.


PS - Its a pretty close poll so far...

 

[Julia]

I think the basis for not trying juveniles in adult court was originally that brain development in adolescents is incomplete and as a result physiologists and sociologists suggested they had a diminished capacity to sort out right from wrong.

Sounds a bit esoteric - and a bit of a cop out - to me.

 

[son of baglimit]

taken from a small british film from the 70's - some of you know it.......

BRIAN
What will they do to me?

BEN
Oh, you'll probably get away with crucifixion.

BRIAN
CRUCIFIXION ?!

BEN
Yeah. First offense?

BRIAN
Get away with crucifixion? It's...

BEN
Best thing the Romans ever did for us.

BRIAN
WHAT?!!!

BEN
Oh yeah. If we didn't have crucifixion, this country'd be in a right bloody
mess!

BRIAN
GUARD!

BEN
Nail 'em up, I say!

BRIAN
Guard!

BEN
Nail some sense into them!

 

[skyQuake]

Children's Courts in each state will handle Criminal matters; its slightly different from a 'normal' court (different procedures i think), there's a degree of leniency and you'll see a fair bit of judicial discretion.

 

[It's Snake Pliskin]

I think the basis for not trying juveniles in adult court was originally that brain development in adolescents is incomplete and as a result physiologists and sociologists suggested they had a diminished capacity to sort out right from wrong.

Sounds a bit esoteric - and a bit of a cop out - to me.

Sorry Julia that is a bit too leftish. Children by the time they can talk reasonably well are able to discern right from wrong - their communication abilities help them learn this. Have you ever noticed when a kid asks "why" to a problem that an adult cannot even begin to answer? But the kid knows it is wrong.

Trial all young people as adults if they commit adult crimes I say. There are no excuses for stabbing people and bashing the aged or other young people.

 

[Naked shorts]

I know there where things when i was young that i didnt think where all that bad. With age I have learnt why things are the way they are. You cant just expect a 15 y/o to appreciate the seriousness of murder when they haven't lost a family member/friend.

 

[It's Snake Pliskin]

I know there where things when i was young that i didnt think where all that bad. With age I have learnt why things are the way they are. You cant just expect a 15 y/o to appreciate the seriousness of murder when they haven't lost a family member/friend.

Sorry, that is wrong. As a kid I knew murder and death were bad and not be committed. According to your comment if that is the way people think nowadays we are in for a rough ride in the future. Perhaps it explains the violence that is happening.

 

[Prospector]

Sorry Julia that is a bit too leftish. Children by the time they can talk reasonably well are able to discern right from wrong - their communication abilities help them learn this. Have you ever noticed when a kid asks "why" to a problem that an adult cannot even begin to answer? But the kid knows it is wrong.

Trial all young people as adults if they commit adult crimes I say. There are no excuses for stabbing people and bashing the aged or other young people.

I think that is what Julia was saying, that the explanation doesn't fit!

I think the reason is actually more pragmatic.

One of the reasons that juveniles are rarely brought to adult courts is that it would require a very serious offence (like murder) with a heavy penalty if found Guilty, and also jury trial. And given it was a young person, a jury might be more likely to find them 'not guilty', given the enormous ramifications of sending a 16 or 17 year old to an adult prison for life! So they would be released. At least if they are tried in a Juvenile system, it has to be heard before a Magistrate and that would usually result in a detention.

I think that rape for instance, could be one of those crimes that it takes an adult brain to get around, because of the complexities of understanding when a female says no, when she doesnt actually say no. Like on a date. Although if the victim was an older person (esp elderly) or they had broken into a home etc, then that changes the context.

 

[mayk]

Definition of minor is a bit arbitrary. I think above 16 a person should be considered as an adult in the court of law.

Children aged between 10-15 should not be treated as adults.

 

[xoa]

Send the little punks to the gas chambers, I say. The final solution to the teenage problem.

 

[prawn_86]

Send the little punks to the gas chambers, I say. The final solution to the teenage problem.

Just like all old people should be put down at birth, hey?

 

[xoa]

Just like all old people should be put down at birth, hey?

Amen. Let's be equal opportunity misanthropes.