Justice for Juveniles The supreme court ruled that juveniles who committed murders could not be sentenced to life in prison on June 25,2012. This ruling was because of the injustices of breaking the eighth amendment. The position of abolishing this sentencing is the best choice certainly because of the age of the people doing the crimes. Any one who does a crime should be punished, but at an age where you're still growing and developing you should be given a chance to rehabilitate yourself later in your life. Adolescents are being sentenced as adults all over the United States, but don’t get treated as an adult on normal occasions. It’s not fair to give guidelines and rules for kids to follow that separate them from adults, but as soon as they slip up that separation no longer exists. With this type of thinking it proves the counterargument that there shouldn’t be a separation …show more content…
In Juveniles Don’t Deserve Life Sentences Garinger says “Brain imaging studies reveal that the regions of the Adolescent brain responsible for controlling thoughts, actions,and emotions aren't fully developed.” This proves that even though them committing crimes is wrong it needs to be taken in consideration that they are still developing basic concepts. Not all teens commit violent crimes with this instability in the brain, but everyone is different and has different upbringings, surroundings, and influences while growing up. Your environment and the people you surround yourself with influences the decisions you make in your life some good and others bad. In Juveniles Don't Deserve Life Sentences it also mentions that the supreme court realized “ juvenile offenders cannot with reliability be classified amongst the worst offenders”. If this is the realization of teen killers then why should they be getting the same punishment as an adult if they have different