There is a person in my state (Washington) being charged as an adult for murder, but he was only 12 when he is alleged to have killed the victim. So my question to everyone is how old do you think people should have to be to be tried as an adult as opposed to being tried as a juvenile?? Do you think that at the age of 12, someone is old enough to be considered an adult in criminal court or do you think they should be older??? Or younger???
By law in this country you cannot be deemed responsible for your actions until you are 18. Therefore the kid should be put in juve and rehabilitated (while there's still time)Not Entirely Sane wrote:
There is a person in my state (Washington) being charged as an adult for murder, but he was only 12 when he is alleged to have killed the victim. So my question to everyone is how old do you think people should have to be to be tried as an adult as opposed to being tried as a juvenile?? Do you think that at the age of 12, someone is old enough to be considered an adult in criminal court or do you think they should be older??? Or younger???
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
ahhh we are only seeing the cover story here. There may be midigating events that may change your mind.
Personnally, if someone kills someone on purpose they should be tried as an adult. I've seen so many shows and talked to people who know that in a urban setting its often the minors that do the killing (for gangs) just because they are slapped on the wrist and out in 2 to 5 years.
Do you have a link to the story?
Personnally, if someone kills someone on purpose they should be tried as an adult. I've seen so many shows and talked to people who know that in a urban setting its often the minors that do the killing (for gangs) just because they are slapped on the wrist and out in 2 to 5 years.
Do you have a link to the story?
Legally the person accused can't drive, drink, or have sex, but somehow he is capable of making a rational decision of whether or not to kill someone?
Exactly. Young kids are not developed enough yet to reason, rationalise and make a decision of this nature, and often they may do it out of sheer anger. He should be kept in prison, however, until it is shown that he can fully understand the consequences of his actions.Not Entirely Sane wrote:
Legally the person accused can't drive, drink, or have sex, but somehow he is capable of making a rational decision of whether or not to kill someone?
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
link
Last edited by Not Entirely Sane (2006-04-09 23:35:07)
At the age of 12, I don’t think you are mature enough to make such a decision. But I could be wrong.
When your 12 it's if you're all there.. You know weather not to kill someone or not.. You understand the differences between good and bad (of which we have set). This is defitnitely a dangerous kid, unless he has a VERY rational explnation for it...
Exactly.raz wrote:
When your 12 it's if you're all there.. You know weather not to kill someone or not.. You understand the differences between good and bad (of which we have set). This is defitnitely a dangerous kid, unless he has a VERY rational explnation for it...
Depends on the specific kid we're talking about.