Essay on Juvenile Death Penalty

One of the most controversial questions in the juvenile justice system today is, "Should the death penalty be applied to juveniles?”. A lot of people think that the death penalty for juveniles is cruel and unusual punishment and should only be used for adults. The crimes that juveniles commit are as dangerous and as violent as adult crimes. People argue that the adolescent brain does not mature until the late teens or early twenties, and that death penalty should not be the resolution. Some studies show that childhood abuse or neglect can causes the child to commit crimes when they grow to adulthood. Debate about the use of the death penalty for juveniles has grown more intense because of the crimes they are

Today, we live in a society faced with many problems, including crime and the fear that it creates. In the modern era, juveniles have become a part of society to be feared, not rehabilitated. The basis of the early juvenile justice system was to rehabilitate and create safe havens for wayward youth. This is not the current philosophy, although the U.S. is one of the few remaining countries to execute juveniles. Presently, our nation is under a presidential administration that strongly advocates the death penalty, including the execution of juveniles. The media and supporters of capital punishment warn of the "superpredator," the juvenile with no fear, remorse, or conscience. Opponents of this view encourage

Juveniles should not receive severe adult sentences for the murders they commit due to their underdeveloped prefrontal cortex not allowing them to fully process decisions and consequences at a young age. In fact, the prefrontal cortex is the part of the brain where decision making originates and does not fully develop until the age of 25. Furthermore, sentencing a juvenile as an adult while they are at an impulsive age and subject to peer pressure is resulting to cruel and unusual punishment as defined in the eighth amendment of the United States Bill of Rights. Eventually, imposing an adult verdict over a juvenile would inhibit a proper rehabilitation for the convicted juvenile. Hence, it is recommended that states that currently have life without parole or the death penalty laws, ratify a new law for juvenile convicts for proper sentencing and rehabilitation.

The Death Penalty in America has been a talked about issue for some time now. Americans have their own opinions on the death penalty. Some people feel it is too harsh of a punishment, some believe if you take a life you should lose your life. I myself do not believe in the death penalty. To me it goes totally against what Americas was built on God. Even though over the last fifteen years or so we have slowly drifted away from “In God We Trust”. Looking at the death penalty in a whole it was never something that the United States came up with. It was adopted from Britain. (Bohm, 1999)The first ever recorded death penalty in United States history was that of Captain George Kendall in 1608. He was executed for being a spy. The death of Captain Kendall started a chain of other colonies jumping on board for the death penalty. In some colonies they were sentencing people to death for petty crimes, such as steeling, or trading with Indians. Over the years after the death penalty would be reformed and revamped numerous of times. Until it was only used when murder or treason occurred. Matter of fact Pennsylvania was the first state

There are many controversial issues in our world today, and each of those issues is well debated by people who either support it or absolutely loathe it. One of those highly debated controversial issues is the juvenile death penalty. Since the Roper v. Simmons case in 2005, sentencing juveniles to death is considered illegal on the grounds that it violates the Eighth Amendment rights (Babcock 6). Although it is considered illegal in the United States, it is still a highly debated problem. There are people that believe the juvenile death penalty is an effective punishment and should not be illegal. On the other hand, many believe that the juvenile death penalty is an extreme punishment and should not be an option when it comes to sentencing juveniles. With such a critical issue, it is only considered fair to understand both sides opinions about the juvenile death penalty.

When it comes to kids, we tend to baby them. We organize their lives and set limits on everything. If they want to do something outside those limits we tell them they are not old enough or they have not experienced enough of the world yet. After all, what can they possibly know about love, major decisions, and what is best for them? Yet somehow, despite all this, when they commit a crime we turn into hypocrites. Magically, they are geniuses who know everything about the world. In society’s eyes, they are no longer a child, but a monster.

Supreme Court ruling Graham v. Florida (2010) banned the use of life without parole for juveniles who committed non-homicide crimes, and Roper v. Simmons (2005) abolished the use of the death penalty for juvenile offenders. They both argued that these sentences violated the 8th Amendment, which prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. While these landmark cases made great strides for the rights of minors passing through the criminal justice system, they are just the first steps in creating a juvenile justice system that takes into consideration the vast differences between adolescents and adults. Using sociological (Butler, 2010) and legal (Harvard Law Review, 2010) documents, this essay will explicate why the next such step to be taken is

KENTUCKY, 492 U.S. 361 1989) The Court later ruled in Atkins v. Virginia (2002) that, “mentally retarded persons were exempt from the death penalty as well, a further sign of society’s changing standards.” (ATKINS v. VIRGINIA, 536 U.S. 320 2002) The decision in Atkins explained that due to their impairments, “it is highly unlikely that such offenders could ever deserve capital punishment.” (ATKINS v. VIRGINIA, 536 U.S. 320 2002) The reasoning in Atkins is applied to the Simmons decision. Kennedy argues that because individuals under 18 are categorically less culpable than the average criminal, they should not deserve the death penalty. Kennedy adds that there are three differences between juveniles under 18 and adult offenders. First, “juveniles often lack the maturity found in adults, a trait that is understandable among the young and adolescents are overrepresented statistically in virtually every category of reckless behavior.” (ROPER v. SIMMONS, (03-633) 543 U.S. 551 2005) The second difference is, “that they are more vulnerable to negative influences or outside pressures and this could lead to deviant behavior.” (ROPER v. SIMMONS, (03-633) 543 U.S. 551 2005) Lastly, Kennedy asserts that “the character of a juvenile is not as well formed as an adult and that personality traits in adolescents are transitory.” (ROPER v. SIMMONS, (03-633) 543 U.S. 551 2005)

In August of 2004, Robert Acuna was sentenced to the death penalty. His crime? Shooting his two elderly neighbors, James and Joyce Carroll, "execution style" and then proceeding to steal their car (Liptak). This heinous crime only adds to the current debate: should juveniles be sentenced as adults? The answer is yes, there should be no leniency displayed towards minors who commit the same serious crimes as adults. Although young, juveniles should be capable of understanding the serious extent of the crime they commit. Sentencing juveniles as adults will prevent perpetrators of major crimes, such as mass murder, from walking free. Furthermore, judges have enough experience to know whether to try a minor as an adult or not. Juvenile sentencing as adults is not a wrong but rather a form of justice in the face of rising teen violence.

Capital punishment for juveniles is one of the most controversial topics to ever be explored in society and in the criminal justice system. The death penalty is a rare occurrence amongst juveniles since it is so arguable as to whether they should be tried as adults. Lynn Cothern from the Juvenile Justice Resource Center suggests that “the primary purpose of the juvenile justice system is to hold juvenile offenders accountable for delinquent acts while providing treatment, rehabilitative services, and programs designed to prevent future involvement in law-violating behavior” (Cothern). The juvenile death penalty has been argued over for centuries and has stirred enough people to still be around today. While juveniles have been known to commit heinous crimes, sentencing a juvenile to death is an inhumane and cruel fate to serve someone who is incapable of making rational lifelong decisions, and should not be allowed in the juvenile justice system.

“The court, drawing on psychological and brain science indicating that people under age 18 are not yet fully capable of controlling their behavior, abolished the juvenile death penalty and greatly restricted life without parole sentences for crimes by juveniles.” Many juveniles are incarcerated for life over crimes they’ve committed in their youth when there brains were not fully developed. In the article, Don’t Treat Young Adults As Teenagers, written by the New York Times, “Research indicates that a hypersensitivity to reward causes teenagers to focus on the short-term consequences of their actions and assign less importance to the future.” Juveniles don’t deserve to spend their life in prison for a crime they committed when they were immature.

     In 1643 a sixteen year old boy was put to death for sodomizing a cow.

On March 4, 2005 the law that minors could not be put on death row for their actions was set into place. The new laws say, “They cannot punish a minor by death penalty and they cannot punish someone for a crime they committed as a minor.” For example Christopher Simmons was sentenced to death row until 2005 when the laws were changed. He stole seven dollars, kidnapped, tied up, and pushed his neighbor off a railroad trestle; killing the young woman. He should have been sentenced to death row, but because of his age, seventeen, he was not put on death row. In fact he was not even sentenced to life with parole. He got re-sentenced to life without parole. The new laws helped a total of seventy-two juvenile offenders. it helped twenty-nine in Texas, fourteen in Alabama, five in Mississippi, four in Arizona, four in Louisiana, four in North Carolina, three in Florida, three in South Carolina, one in Nevada, and One in Virginia. They were all taken off death row and sentenced to life without parole.

It appears that the most prominent question that comes from the juvenile death penalty is whether executing juveniles is uncivilized and unjust. It is important to realize that judicial opinion and mandatory statues have played a significant role in this developing facet of the capital punishment debate. However, what is often overlooked is the role public opinion can play on the outcome have some cases that may be presented to the Supreme Court even if the judiciary view might be the opposite. The central question examined is the culpability of the juvenile. Now those who may be in favor of the juvenile death penalty could feel as though the culpability of a minor should be based on a case by case basis and not consider the culpability level of one offender and applying that to all. On the other hand, as mentioned earlier, those against the juvenile death penalty

  The punishment of juvenile criminals, specifically those between the ages of 13 and 18, in the event that they commit crimes of murder, is not severe enough. Minors between these critical ages in the teenage life who commit crimes of murder should be prosecuted as adults in all situations and locations.