Juvenile offenders are a major concern for the criminal justice system, considering that they commit up to a quarter of all criminal offenses. Young offenders engage in various crimes, most notably shoplifting, vandalism, underage drinking violations, and assault. The juvenile courts have the responsibility of reducing crimes by rehabilitating and punishing them. Over the years, the courts have adopted tougher policies when dealing with young criminals to reduce crime rates by this faction of the population. A focus on this category of offenders aims to establish if the existing policies are equitable and effective.
Discussion of juvenile crimes
Juvenile offenders engage in a series of offenses, with the most common ones being theft and assault. Juvenile theft is the most common form of delinquency, considering that children will participate in it at least once. This crime is seen as a dominant aspect of a peer group value system, which the participants will grow out of by becoming adults. However, for a small percentage, theft becomes a crucial part of developing a criminal lifestyle. Assault is the second most common form of crimes that are committed by juvenile offenders. The Office of Juvenile System and Delinquency Prevention (2019) notes that assault has an arrest rate of 382. 3 per 100,000 youths, and it is associated with interpersonal violence targeting peers.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Theories that may explain juvenile crimes
Anomie, differential opportunity and subculture theories could be used to explain why most adolescents chose to steal or be violent to their peers. The anomie theory establishes that youths engage in criminal activities to attain their goals, which would not have been possible if they used lawful means (Schepers, 2017). Differential opportunity theory establishes that individuals with limited opportunities for success are likely to become criminals to seek validation. On the other hand, the subculture theory asserts that juveniles who fail to align with the existing social standards will turn towards a subculture. The subculture, in this case, would be a collection of other delinquents who do not meet the criteria and form the culture as a way of seeking validation.
Assessment of whether juvenile courts and corrections been adequate in the prosecution and punishment of minor persons accused or convicted of these crimes
The juvenile courts and juvenile corrections have a crucial role in ensuring that crime rates are low by prosecuting and punishing juvenile offenders. These courts have been improving their policies to ensure that the offenders understand the consequences of their actions. The courts have implemented policies that include depriving the offenders of some protections provided by the juvenile justice system. The adoption of these tough measures has been instrumental in changing young criminals' perspectives on the nature of their crimes. While the juvenile system's main objective is to rehabilitate offenders, some states have severe punitive measures that include death, life imprisonment without the possibility of parole, and incarceration with adults. Basto-Perreira et al. (2017) establish that these policies have led to a significant decrease in juvenile crime rates as they have instilled fear in would-be offenders. While these policies are effective, they translate to the violation of children's rights, as they do not consider the psychological effects they have on perpetrators and their families.
Do you feel that legislation needs to be changed to influence either the punishment or rehabilitation of suspects accused of these crimes?
There is a need to change the existing legislation to ensure that the juvenile criminal system is more rehabilitative than punitive. Janetta & Okeke (2017) note that most young people, who engage in criminal acts are in their teens, will reform when they become adults. In this case, the criminal justice system should focus on strategies that facilitate this transition instead of impeding it. The juvenile justice system players need to understand that youth who engage in crime have trouble transitioning to adulthood. The insistence on punishing juvenile offenders as outlined in the existing legislation arrests their development by interfering with their social competence, sense of direction, and autonomy. Instead, the legislation should be adjusted to reduce the severity of sanctions on low-level offenses and adopt non-justice options to promote the delinquents' well being.
Do you feel the victims or their families would support the legislation changes you are proposing?
The victims and the families would support the legislative changes that have been proposed since it guarantees their well-being. Most of the offenders exposed to stringent punitive measures engage in misdemeanors, which do not result in grievous harm or loss. The need to reduce the severity of sanctions on low-level offenses would help minimize adverse effects on the victims and their families. Most of them are drawn from poor neighborhoods, would have a chance to improve their outcomes with less severe punishments (Janeta & Okeke, 2017). The legislation change that involves adopting non-justice options such as school discipline policies and mental health interventions would be a step in the right direction. Victims and their families would support this legislation change, as it is a preventive strategy for reducing crime rates.
Do you feel that this legislature targets one group more than others?
The legislation is highly skewed as it targets gang populations and members of lower-socio-economic status populations and minority ethnicities. These groups are more likely to engage in criminal activities to seal the inequality gaps that are widespread in society. According to Young, Greer & Church (2017), victimization and crime disproportionately affect young people and most vulnerable communities. The existing legislation seems to exacerbate the challenges associated with structural inequities by targeting minority communities. The ruling relies on labelling and stereotyping to classify members of specific communities, ethnicities, and economic backgrounds as criminals. This association means that all efforts are directed at these groups, which places much pressure on the groups paving the way for increased crim e.
Conclusion
Young people are prone to committing a crime just like their adult peers with theft and assault being the top two most offenses associated with this group. The juvenile criminal system has implemented policies to reduce the number of crimes. While the system has implemented strict measures, which include incarceration, death and life imprisonment without parole, the crime rates are still high. The reason for this trend is the fact that the measures disproportionately target minority and vulnerable groups. There is a need for a change of policy by reducing sanctions placed on low-level offenses and adoption of non-justice options to address delinquency.
References
Basto-Pereira, M., Ribeiro, S., & Maia, Â. (2018). Needs and Achievements of the juvenile justice system: Insights from two empirical studies with Portuguese young adults. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology , 62 (7), 1787-1805. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X17690450
Janetta, J., & Okeke. C. (2017, November). Strategies for reducing criminal and juvenile justice involvement . Urban Institute. https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/94516/strategies-for-reducing-criminal-and-juvenile-justice-involvement.pdf.pdf
Office of Juvenile System and Delinquency Prevention. (2019). Statistical briefing book: Juvenile arrests . https://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/crime/qa05101.asp
Schepers, D. (2017). Causes of the causes of juvenile delinquency: Social disadvantages in the context of situational action theory. European Journal of Criminology, 14 (2), 143-159. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477370816649622
Young, S., Greer, B., & Church, R. (2017). Juvenile delinquency, welfare, justice, and therapeutic interventions: a global perspective . BJPsych Bulletin, 41 (1), 21-29. https://doi.org/10.1192/pb.bp.115.052274
