The community is divided on whether they believe juveniles should be tried differently than adults in some or all crimes. I am a firm believer in the fact that a 15 year old knows what murder is. When someone plans to kill someone and fallows through with that plan, whether 15 or 50, that person understands what murder is and what he or she is doing. However, I also understand that impulse control isn’t fully developed in an adolescent’s mind. A teenager may see something he or she wants and take it on impulse and maybe he or she should have a different punishment. But where do we draw the line? Based on intent? That’s something that people can’t always prove.
Many specialists agree that the age 18 is a good age to be considered and adult. But are there any really big differences between a 17 ½ year old and an 18 year old? If an 18 year old and his 17 year old friends all decide to do something stupid one night, the 17 year olds will most likely get off with a slap on the wrist while the 18 year old could do hard time. For committing the same crime, just because he’s a little bit older.
Society chose to draw its lines at age 18, in most cases at least. But often it still has trouble drawing lines between rape and other violent crimes and whether to try someone as an adult or not. There are so many factors that it is difficult to decide what to do sometimes. I doubt that the law will change because many people are being the idea that because of the mental development in children, 18 is a good age for them to become adults in the legal system. But I know that if someone were to assault my best friend, I wouldn’t care whether it was a 16 year old or a 19 year old, I want that person to receive punishment to the fullest extent of the law.
