Life Sentence Of Juveniles Essay

Morality of the Life Sentence of Juveniles The 8th Amendment of the Constitution states that the Federal Government is prohibited from imposing excessive bail, excessive fines, or cruel and unusual punishment. Now, if an adult was sentenced 30 years to life for an attempt of robbing a liquor store that would be a prime example of cruel and unusual punishment. A more “just” punishment would something like 3 years of prison and 3 more years of parole. If an adult shot and killed 20 people in a movie theatre and pleaded guilty with mental illness would it be just to sentence the criminal 30 years to life? Many of you might say that this is a just sentence. Here’s a different perspective. If a “mentally unstable” 16 year old committed the same crime and was sentenced 30 year to life,

Is that moral? I believe so. “If you do the crime, you have to do the time”. On June 25, 2012, the Supreme Court rules that juveniles who committed murder could not be sentenced to life in prison because they were protected from cruel and unusual punishment through the 8th Amendment. However four justices strongly disagreed by stating that juveniles that commit heinous crimes should always be held accountable by being sentenced to life in prison. Although there are many variables that takes account of as of why the child may have committed the crime such as, mental instability, brain development (impulsive actions), or the aroma of the family and how the parents treated the child, I continue to believe that a child should still be held accountable. You may ask why? And I would answer with, what if the victim of the aggressor was your child or a loved one? Would you truly be willing to let a mentally instable murderer, butcher, gunman, and killer back into society giving him the benefit of the doubt with being able to change? Let’s take a look at Tristan Jenson who was brutally murdered by a 15 year old bully named J.P. Remsen. They were