Juveniles Should Be Tried As Adults Essay

Should Juveniles be charged as adult criminals? The debate on whether or not child offenders should be tried as adults has been highly controversial. The arguments that are brought up in this topic include factors such as an underdeveloped brain, signs of remorse, and justice for the victims. It is debated that juveniles who commit serious crimes should be charged as adults because they have permanently damaged the lives of the victims, and they should understand the full culpability of their actions.
Juveniles should be tried as adults because it would bring justice to the victims. According to the article, “Should teen school shooters spend the rest of their lives…” (Cox 2019), a boy named Cam Miller, who was a victim of a child offense,

Cox states that, “[Miller] keeps attending the hearings, each one forcing him to relive his life’s worst day, because of the risk that Spencer could be set free” (Cox 2019). This example demonstrates the trauma and PTSD that have affected the victims' lives forever, especially if the offender has not been guaranteed a life sentence. On the other hand, some may argue that child offenders are not fully capable of understanding the severity of their actions, because their brains are not fully developed. Therefore, it would be fundamentally tragic for a child to be incarcerated in an adult jail cell. While it may be true that an underdeveloped brain is a factor in child offenses, there have been studies that reveal children showing no remorse for their actions, therefore they would likely continue killing people if they are set free. For instance, Jesse Osborn, a child killer, has been discovered to have strategically planned his murderous crimes for weeks. He stated in court that he was aiming to slaughter ‘50 or 60’ children – “if

According to the article, “Should Teen Shooters Spend the Rest of their Lives…” (Cox 2019), professional sources have claimed that there is a concerning risk of recidivism for child offenders once they are released from juvenile prison. Cox describes the situation of two boys, Andrew Golden (age 11) and Mitchell Johnson (age 13), who were both under the age of fourteen when they shot 5 people. Cox then states that both of those boys were tried as juveniles and released at the age of 21. When they were released, “Johnson was convicted on a federal gun charge in 2008; the same year, Golden attempted to obtain a concealed handgun permit” (Cox 2019). This example highlights that there might be a threat to society once the juveniles are released, because of the chance that they could resort to recidivism. Some may argue, however, that juveniles deserve a second chance at redemption because they could have actually regretted their actions, and they may have matured over time to understand the cruelty of their behaviors. This perspective, however, does not take into account the fact that there is a high risk of recidivism when juveniles are released from prison, meaning that it is more than likely that the juveniles have not been ensured full accountability for their horrendous actions. Another example of re-offense is from the James Bulger case, a