Here's an ethics question: Should juveniles be treated as adults in the criminal justice system? At first I thought it was affirm "no," but upon closer examination of the topic, things have wavered. For instance, under the juvenile system, youths are not accorded the right to an attorney, trial by jury, or knowing what they are accused of. All of these are Miranda rights for adults, which are supposed to lead to more just proceedings. I don't think it's moral at all for juveniles to not receive these rights. Then again, putting youths in an adult prison is infinitely more damaging to their well-being.
PS. The answer to the riddle two posts ago is: the man had a toothache, so he went to his dentist to get the tooth pulled. The dentist didn't have anesthesia, so he strapped the patient to a chair before operating, so tightly that the man couldn't move. But just before he was about to operate he had a heart attack and died. It was late Friday so the man was still for 48 hours before the janitor came in late Sunday and found him.
7 comments:
I wouldnt trial them as adults, I'd prefer to see those rights extended to meet the needs of juveniles.
I don't really understand much about the justice system so I don't really have an opinion on this, sorry!
Thanks for stopping my blog though. The issue you asked about was that I liked a guy that I worked with but i knew he was intensely private, he asked me out but then was having issues with the whole work thing. Rather than letting him string me along, I just talked to him about it (something i have never done with anyone in the past) and we agreed to leave things. Not the answer I wanted, but at least I now know!
And apologies for clogging up your comments with something completely unrelated to the post.
Just to let you know I'm not ignoring you, Maria. It's just that this subject has a few too many angles for a simple comment. Define 'juvenile,' for example.
P: Aw that stinks. I guess it would've been worse if it had escalated into something both of you couldn't handle though.
JJ Beazley: Juveniles are anyone under 18. But apparently if you're below 14 or 10 in some states you can't be tried at all.
Jeff: sorry, I forgot to call you Jeff.
That's the point though, I think. Drawing an arbitrary demarcation line at somebody's birthday is a very blunt instrument. I've known 15-year-olds who were more mature (and intelligent and wise etc, etc) than some 25-year-olds. I suppose lines have to be drawn for legal purposes, but it muddies the argument. And that's only one of many variables.
I'm sure there are some clever juveniles out there who would be able to make the most of the Miranda rights for adults.
Why don't juveniles have a Miranda rights equivalent anyway?
Post a Comment