As usual, what should be obvious if you think about it for half a second took a study to prove.
Violent Justice: Adult system fails young offenders
State laws that send some individuals under age 18 to trial and prison as adults have achieved the opposite of what the policy’s proponents intended, a new research review concludes. Transferring young people into adult systems yields substantially higher rates of later serious crimes compared with youths handled by juvenile-justice systems.
Moreover, there’s no evidence that shifting some young offenders to the adult-justice system prevents or reduces violence in the general population of children and teenagers.
These findings come from the 14-member Task Force on Community Preventive Services, an independent group funded by federal and private sources. It’s reviewing the effectiveness of various efforts to lessen violence committed by and against youths.
The task force reports that young offenders transferred to the adult system are later arrested for violent and other crimes 34 percent more frequently than are their peers sent to juvenile courts and facilities.
“The politics of crime are far behind the science of criminality,” Fagan says.
What else are we to do with a 17 year old who already has 3 felony convictions?! That’s why I strongly support the three strikes law. There’s no chance for recidivism when you’re never going to see the light of day again!
1,
You may have a point, but that three-time loser was created when he was treated as an adult for his very first crime.
How about attacking the real problem: I propose the three strikes and your nuts are cut off law. If you have three felonies you’re balls are removed to ensure your genes are not passed down.
Kill them.. Less food is wasted that way. They are already born so there would be no problem from the right.
4. “Kill them.. ”
Agreed. But only if it’s a part of a reality TV show where they are hunted down like on the Running Man.
5> …Or the new Stone Cold movie.
6. Heck, making them watch the movie would probably be torture enough!
8. “Ever have any compassion at all?”
What sort of compassion should I have for the guy who broke into my house years ago and stole my 68′ strat? How about for the guy who broke into my wife’s car to steal some CDs to pawn, breaking the windshield in the process? How about for the guys who shot a five year old girl for absolutely no reason on a drive-by?
Only an idiot would feel compassion for the perpetrator of the crime.
Why is it that no one ever tries adults as juveniles? I mean, I know some young adults who are so mentally stunted that they hardly qualify as adults.
#9, Aahh, so it’s revenge you want. I knew it wasn’t justice. But then I bet you have never done anything wrong. For someone so perfect, I wonder how you got the moniker “jerk face”.
Commenting on just the news story as presented, the thought that perhaps the seriousness of the offence that got the adult conviction would be a better indicator of future offences. A youth that breaks into a car may just be a young idiot, but assult, weapons crime, the most dangerious crimes, indicate a hardened adult criminal nature they are likely to follow throughout their lives. Perhaps this is why the youths that are convicted as adults are more repeat problems, rather than the other way around.
Peace to you all.
11. “Aahh, so it’s revenge you want. I knew it wasn’t justice. ”
Wow, I’m thinking you should go back go school and learn to read. I never used the word “revenge” and never even brushed the concept of it. (Unless you were referring to my comment in 5, where I was clearly kidding.)
“But then I bet you have never done anything wrong. ”
Well, I never stole anything from anyone, I never broke into someone’s house or car, and I never killed anyone in a drive-by. Maybe you think those things are worthy of compassion, but I certainly do not.
Speaking for all liberals: WE TOLD YOU SO!
14. “Speaking for all liberals: WE TOLD YOU SO!”
It’s only because we listened to you that this problem is happening. If these kids were locked up for life we wouldn’t have any problem with recidivism. But, we have to be compassionate to people who kill five year olds for no reason, right? I’m still not entirely sure why. Maybe one of the liberals around here can explain it to me. Thanks in advance. (Don’t worry, I won’t be holding my breath waiting for a logical answer.)
#13 – Wow, I’m thinking you should go back go school and learn to read. I never used the word “revenge”
He can read and judging from what you are saying, he was right.
It sounds to me like justice isn’t your concern. You are definately in the revenge camp… and that’s why the justice system is supposed to work as it does, so that hot headed mob mentality won’t factor into the system… But sadly, now, it does.
In #9 – you listed three crimes. Two that happened to you and were minor and certainly don’t need to be met with a throw away the key attitude. Your wife’s Celine Dion collection is replaceable and your attitude precludes your right to play a Fender.
The third, was off the scale, not related, and didn’t happen to you. And no one is suggesting compassion for child killers… But the point that we imprison far more of our population is valid and bears asking why. Who are we putting in jail? What did they do? We have people in jail now for crimes that shouldn’t even be illegal in the first place, and you seem to want to throw keys away.
But we don’t want to release child killers. We want to address the problems that lead to these crimes in the first place, and the conservative idea of authoritative clampdown isn’t the answer. Oh, it will seriously reduce the crime rate, but it will reduce our quality of life to near nothing.
And in #5, why would we think you were joking. It isn’t obvious in context of your other posts, and we live in an era where our society’s bloodlust is pretty high. People suggest things like that with all seriousness quite often.
16. “It sounds to me like justice isn’t your concern. You are definately in the revenge camp… ”
It “sounds” to you? You’re hearing voices?! Try using your eyes, read the words, and point out where I said revenge. Thanks.
“Two that happened to you and were minor and certainly don’t need to be met with a throw away the key attitude.”
I was asked to feel compassion for the people who perpetrated those acts. You’ve still not explained why I should.
“The third, was off the scale, not related, and didn’t happen to you.”
Once again, I was asked to feel compassion for criminals, no one specified that I should only feel compassion for those who perpetrate crimes against me.
“But the point that we imprison far more of our population is valid and bears asking why. ”
It’s simple. Our prisons are not tough enough. If they were, the recidivism rate would be a lot lower. Criminals know that at the very “worst” they go to prison, where they get to hang out with their friends, watch TV, work out. It’s like a vacation but with anal sex.
“We have people in jail now for crimes that shouldn’t even be illegal in the first place”
If you’re talking about drug crimes, I agree with you 100%. The government should not have the power to control what we do with our bodies, as long as we’re not harming anyone else. If someone steals for his drug fix, arrest for the theft, not the drug fix.
“And in #5, why would we think you were joking.”
Because it made reference to a crappy Schwarzenegger movie. I thought the pop culture reference was a clue.
“People suggest things like that with all seriousness quite often.”
Yep, 4 did and I made fun of it. Justice is imperfect. There is absolutely no way we know for certain whether someone is truly guilty. Accordingly, I’m against the government having such a power. It’d be too easily abused. E.e., see the new posting about Chicago.
“We want to address the problems that lead to these crimes in the first place”
I’ll let you in on a little secret. Criminals commit crimes because they want something without having to work for it. Really, it’s that simple. Talk to a real criminal about correcting their underlying basis for his criminal past and he’ll laugh at you.
I’ll let you in on a little secret. Criminals commit crimes because they want something without having to work for it. Really, it’s that simple. Talk to a real criminal about correcting their underlying basis for his criminal past and he’ll laugh at you.
Comment by Jerk-Face — 4/24/2007 @ 9:49 am
Are really that simple?
Gee, I think the photo says it all about where the real problem is.
Not exactly Normal Rockwell’s America, is it?
Duh.
#15 But, we have to be compassionate to people who kill five year olds for no reason, right? I’m still not entirely sure why. Maybe one of the liberals around here can explain it to me. Thanks in advance. (Don’t worry, I won’t be holding my breath waiting for a logical answer.)
I will readily confess that my personal compassion for criminals comes from a Christian ethic and a modeling after Jesus rather than logic.
When one of these small children commit murder or some other horrible crime, I do feel sorry for them. I assume that they have been horribly mistreated themselves — otherwise they’d be out riding bikes and playing like the other kids.
As for locking people up for life — most of we liberals support that in the worst cases. I certainly do. The conservatives claim we want to let dangerous criminals out, but this is a big-fat-lie, like most of what conservatives say about liberals.
But trying a twelve year old as an adult and locking them up forever? Most liberals think that’s just a waste of a life and a huge waste of our tax dollars (not that the latter ever bothers conservatives.)