In the United States, the juvenile justice system was founded with the purpose of focusing on rehabilitation rather than punishment when a juvenile has committed a crime [1]. Although the juvenile justice system continues to serve this purpose, there has been an ongoing conflict between protecting society from harm through equal punishment regardless of the perpetrator’s age, and rehabilitation goals regarding the juvenile in question [2]. Due to this ongoing conflict, the question of whether juveniles should be tried as adults for violent crimes is controversial, for one side claims that not doing so is unethical because it is unjust, whereas the opposing side claims that doing so is unethical because it violates the principle of least harm. …show more content…
This issue is important to society for multiple reasons, two being that public safety is at risk, for juveniles could recidivate if they have not learned from their crime(s), and that justice, which is defined by Rawls as being fairness [3], is essentially being violated if juveniles are not tried equally for violent crimes. This issue is important to the victim because if the juvenile is not being punished equally, then it is unfair, for the juvenile still committed a violent crime yet is receiving a not as harsh punishment due to their age. Secondly, this issue is important to the juvenile in question, for their future can be impacted significantly based on whether they’re tried as an adult or a juvenile. Thirdly, this issue is important to the juvenile and criminal court systems due to how changes in the law could lead to changes in these systems, such as the juvenile court system not being able to rehabilitate more juveniles, and the criminal court system receiving more inmates (which will affect them