Capital Punishment vs Juveniles - Term Paper Example

«Capital Punishment vs. Juveniles» Since few decades, a rapid increment is observed in the rate of youth population in the United States that has affected hundreds of families associated with these youth offenders. Although it is necessary to handle lawbreakers in a punitive manner, studies have indicated that child imprisonment has not been very significant in achieving its objective of reducing the rate of youth crime. On contrary, crime rate has been increased with increase in the number of youth offenders confronting remand, custody, or detention. In specific, this paper will discuss different aspects of youth imprisonment, especially in the context of capital punishment, as if the Youth Justice System should be allowed to execute young offenders or not, and will endeavor to analyze available options of tackling youth offenders. It is a fact that every government has been giving significant importance to youth crime, in order to eliminate anti-social agents from the society from its roots; however, none has been able to achieve such objective due to a number of factors, such as unemployment, poverty, etc. On contrary, youth prison population has increased dramatically that has resulted in extreme criticism, as effects of youth imprisonment do not affect young offenders only, but families and communities as well. According to the US Government, tough penalties for young offenders cannot be avoided, as it is essential for a safe and healthy society; (Frase, pp. 348-349) however, studies have observed that these tough and punitive penalties have resulted in contrary results, rather than allowing offenders to recover and break their offending cycle. In this respect, execution is not an advisable step that can be taken to handle young criminals, as it may result in contrary adverse effects on family, as well as, the society. Although steps are being taken to prevent young individuals from falling into this black hole, capital punishment for youth offenders does not seem to be an effective option at all. Some of the policymakers (Williams, pp. 175) believe that innocent public stays protected by execution of serious young offenders; however, it is an agreeable fact that even imprisonment confronted by young offenders in prisons results in isolation from society that is adverse for children according to a number of child psychologists. Studies have noted that children are unable to acquire proper guidance in custody and remand and end up with getting opinions from wrong people, such as serious criminals and offenders, which seems to be quite true with the fact that a majority of youth offenders are convicted after two years of going from the police custody. In other words, juveniles are not equipped mentally and psychologically to deal effectively with right and wrong, ethical and unethical, and effective and non-ineffective agents on personal, as well as, social basis. According to some psychologists, states related to fear and reward play a dominative and crucial role in early stages of a human life that are experienced by adolescents. In this regard, capital punishment is not a proper way to handle young offenders, but an endeavor to avoid handling them. In other words, it is essential to draw a line between adult offenders and young offenders, when it comes to their punishment. Until now, a number of studies have been carried out to evaluate and compare the thinking and moral capabilities of children under 18 years old and adults. A majority of experts have observed that youth under 18 years old acts more often like a mentally disabled or a confused adult individual. (Williams, pp. 174-175) Every study has observed that adults play a vital role in decision-making processes of a young individual, and most of the adolescents acquire guidance while making bigger decisions. In context of law, it also orders a different and diverse treatment for children and juveniles in the country. In the year 2001, a study was carried out to identify different factors related to youth crime in different states of the country. Experts noted that family background played the most dominating role in emotional and psychological development of a young individual, as compared with other factors, such as peer pressure, negative attitude of society, etc. After this study, a number of experts condemned even a youth imprisonment, and suggested a parenting punishment in cases of young offenders, as they are more responsible in such an unconstructive behavior of their children. A number of examples are available to understand the limitations of youth and adolescents, and thus, criminal justice system should treat and handle young offenders in a similar manner, in order to keep a balance between different aspects of the society. Voting rights is a significant example of youth’s limitation, as individuals less than 18 years of age are not considered matured and culpable enough to make an effective decision of voting by themselves, as there are more chances that their voting decision would be influenced by some adult in the family, or in the neighborhood. Marriage, contract, driving license, and a number of limitations have been imposed on young members of the society. (Hood, pp. 116-118) Moreover, existence of a separate criminal justice system for youth is itself a proof of difference between young offenders and adult criminals, and thus, it is imperative that such difference should be maintained while dealing with young offenders and criminals as well. In terms of historical facts, first capital punishment for a young offender was observed in the year 1642 that began the youth executions in a gradual manner. Until the year 1972, more than 360 young offenders were executed in different states of the country. Until 2003, more than twenty young criminals were treated with capital punishment in different states of the country, particularly Texas that dominated such penalties. Studies have noted that a minimum age of eighteen has been considered eligible for a capital punishment by more than 20 jurisdictions, following by 17 years of age by 5 jurisdictions, and 16 years of minimum age by some 13 jurisdictions in the country. (Omaji, pp. 59-64) Until March 2005, the United States was the only country except Somalia that allowed juvenile capital punishments, as all the other countries prohibited such youth executions by agreeing with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. According to article 37 of such U.N. Convention, it is prohibited to execute a young offender below the age of eighteen years. However, juvenile capital punishment was abolished by the Supreme Court on March 01, 2005 that cited it as a cruel and ineffective act of dealing with immature and developing adolescents. (Samaha, pp. 392) Until the present day, a number of studies and researches have carried out to prove the immature and childish decision-making capabilities of young individuals and adolescents. Moreover, one of the most imperative objectives of juvenile justice system is to provide opportunities of rehabilitation and improvement, rather than treating young offenders indifferently. In international context, juvenile capital punishment and juvenile life imprisonment come under the framework of human rights, as young individuals are considered special and immature members of the society, and thus, they should be treated differently and specially. Even youth incarceration is considered an ineffective act of handling young offenders in a society. Some of the effective means of handling young offenders are provisions of rehabilitation services, community-welfare projects, and some other youth targeted services that allow young offenders to break their offending cycle by becoming an effective and constructive member of the society. Conclusively, the paper has discussed some of the significant aspects of youth capital punishments in context of the United States Youth Justice System, which is playing a vital and crucial role in tackling young offenders in different parts of the country. It has been indicated by a number of studies that youth capital punishment is not an effective means of tackling young offenders, and such action results in adversity and production of real criminals for future generations. It is hoped that the paper will be beneficial for students, teachers, and professionals in better understanding of the topic. Works Cited Franklin P. Williams. Youth Violence and Delinquency. Greenwood Publishing Group, 2007. Joel Samaha. Criminal Justice. Thomson Wadsworth, 2005. Paul Omaji. Responding to Youth Crime. Hawkins Press, 2003. Richard S. Frase. Sentencing and Sanctions in Western Countries. Oxford University Press, 2001. Roger G. Hood. The Death Penalty. Oxford University Press, 2002. Total Words: 1312 Words Read More