http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=93887&page=1
"There's no question that they don't stop school shootings," said Mark Soler, president of the Youth Law Center, an advocacy group based in Washington, D.C., that seeks alternatives to incarceration for underage offenders. "I don't think anybody would agree that a change in state policy is going to deter an adolescent — a child — from doing anything. What the laws have done is substitute a broad statement of policy for individualized justice."
This article addresses the debate of how to charge teens and how to prosecute violent crimes. As this article addresses, there is no clear easy way. But this does present that the way we are treating juveniles who commit crime is not benefiting the system or their option for rehabilitation. My opinion is that prevention and being proactive is better than being reactive. I cant imagine working with a family who has lost someone or suffered a violent crime but do we create a system of recidivism by charging youth as adult and sending them to adult facilities.
So, they offer a suggestion of just severely charging violent juvenile offenders and not other crimes, what do you think?
(Another article I enjoyedhttp://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/trying-to-fix-americas-broken-juvenile-justice-system-20150122)
I agree, it's all about prevention. I wonder how this ruling will trickle down to other juvenile justice issues.
ReplyDeleteI agree that prevention is the key. The evidence clearly states that prevention programs work. However, the debate on how to rank the crimes is intriguing to me. I think that brings a whole new debate on what is considered a violent crime to some and not to others as well as which violent crime is worse than another. And what charges are deemed severe enough but not too severe?
ReplyDelete