Stricter punishment is the answer to juvenile crime

[jesse]

I belive it is an effective way, yet there's still talk about emotional scars, humilation and so on. Under what conditions and how should it be administrated? Or is it morally wrong altogether?

[Simon_Peter]

Ok let me just do the research... because your not speaking rationally as your not quoting fact! i am trying to make you see the real picture, and get passed your personal bias towards social sciences


In 2007 juvenile courts handled 2,500 criminal homicides committed by children, and over a million cases of lesser crimes.

The new legislation

Checks will be made on all children to identify potential criminals under an extension of the "surveillance state" announced by Tony Blair. A Downing Street review of law and order also foreshadowed greater use of sophisticated CCTV, an expanded DNA database and "instant justice" powers for police. The review is intended to chart a course for the next 10 years by focusing more "on the offender, not the offense". Most crime is committed by a small number of offenders who could be identified almost from birth, ministers believe.

After 10 years focusing on tougher sentences, the review paper said it wanted to tackle the "underlying causes through better targeting". Vulnerable children and those at risk will be identified by "trigger" factors such as parents in jail or on drugs. They will be subject to measures including home visits from specialists.

But the Government says the net should be cast as widely as possible "to prevent criminality developing". The review document added: "These checks should piggyback on existing contact points such as the transition to secondary schools." The plan will be underpinned by a database for all children from next year. It will contain basic information identifying the child and its parents and will have a "facility for practitioners to indicate to others that they have information to share, are taking action, or have undertaken an assessment, in relation to a child."

The database was developed to prevent another tragic death such as that of Victoria Climbie, or jamie buldger cases. But now appears to be the basis for cradle-to-adult monitoring. The Government believes children can be prevented from becoming offenders if early intervention is targeted at those who displayed certain traits. These include having a short attention span or living in a deprived environment.

Some children who show signs of becoming criminals are already monitored. Those aged between eight and 13 may be referred to a Youth Inclusion and Support Panel if they are thought to be potential offenders and data about them is held on an information system. Other agencies target the 50 children and young people thought to be most "at risk" of offending, truancy or social exclusion

Mr Blair said the main aim of the policy was to tackle the "hard core" of criminals who commit about half of all crimes in England and Wales. Career criminals would be subject to prolific offender licences, punishable by three years in prison if broken, which would impose a range of restrictions on their activities.

"They are not an alternative to prison. They are in addition to prison," Mr Blair said when he launched the review at a conference in Westminster.

"But we have to ensure that, when people leave prison, they do not rebound straight back in."

I ask you the same, Are you even reading what I am writing?

Do I think social sciences has given way to many excuses for society in general to be excused for their actions. Yes. Would you like to say that is my own bias, fine. Is it relevant, no.

Justice does not always prevail.

So theres the answer, your personal bias matters! As the facts are that social science is not 'excusing' children....

You made some good points,

p.s i would hate to meet you in another discussion, its a compliment.

Regards
Simon

[Confused]

Ok let me just do the research... because your not speaking rationally as your not quoting fact! i am trying to make you see the real picture, and get passed your personal bias towards social sciences


In 2007 juvenile courts handled 2,500 criminal homicides committed by children, and over a million cases of lesser crimes.

The new legislation

Checks will be made on all children to identify potential criminals under an extension of the "surveillance state" announced by Tony Blair. A Downing Street review of law and order also foreshadowed greater use of sophisticated CCTV, an expanded DNA database and "instant justice" powers for police. The review is intended to chart a course for the next 10 years by focusing more "on the offender, not the offense". Most crime is committed by a small number of offenders who could be identified almost from birth, ministers believe.

After 10 years focusing on tougher sentences, the review paper said it wanted to tackle the "underlying causes through better targeting". Vulnerable children and those at risk will be identified by "trigger" factors such as parents in jail or on drugs. They will be subject to measures including home visits from specialists.

But the Government says the net should be cast as widely as possible "to prevent criminality developing". The review document added: "These checks should piggyback on existing contact points such as the transition to secondary schools." The plan will be underpinned by a database for all children from next year. It will contain basic information identifying the child and its parents and will have a "facility for practitioners to indicate to others that they have information to share, are taking action, or have undertaken an assessment, in relation to a child."

The database was developed to prevent another tragic death such as that of Victoria Climbie, or jamie buldger cases. But now appears to be the basis for cradle-to-adult monitoring. The Government believes children can be prevented from becoming offenders if early intervention is targeted at those who displayed certain traits. These include having a short attention span or living in a deprived environment.

Some children who show signs of becoming criminals are already monitored. Those aged between eight and 13 may be referred to a Youth Inclusion and Support Panel if they are thought to be potential offenders and data about them is held on an information system. Other agencies target the 50 children and young people thought to be most "at risk" of offending, truancy or social exclusion

Mr Blair said the main aim of the policy was to tackle the "hard core" of criminals who commit about half of all crimes in England and Wales. Career criminals would be subject to prolific offender licences, punishable by three years in prison if broken, which would impose a range of restrictions on their activities.

"They are not an alternative to prison. They are in addition to prison," Mr Blair said when he launched the review at a conference in Westminster.

"But we have to ensure that, when people leave prison, they do not rebound straight back in."

I ask you the same, Are you even reading what I am writing?

Do I think social sciences has given way to many excuses for society in general to be excused for their actions. Yes. Would you like to say that is my own bias, fine. Is it relevant, no.

Justice does not always prevail.

So theres the answer, your personal bias matters! As the facts are that social science is not 'excusing' children....

You made some good points,

p.s i would hate to meet you in another discussion, its a compliment.

Regards
Simon

Is this an actual document you are quoting here? If so, can you cite your source?

[Simon_Peter]

Yes i have quoted real facts and presented them here,

below you will find the press release:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1772809.stm

Although this is British law, furthermore, will this type of database become stigmatized. Obviously the children who are listed on this database, have not committed any legal crimes. they are merely listed because of geographical profiling, finical circumstances, and past action of their parents, such as their farther being in jail. Plus these children will have no legal right to protect their identity's. Will this information be released to the potential employers to warn them of the risks of these children, furthering, a discrimination against the working class. Is this the answer, to prevent, crime. Or should we instead use stricter punishment, then what is already been in place.

There are currently 19 states that allow the execution of 16 and 17 year olds for the commission of capital crimes, in America. And 73 people are currently on death row for crimes they committed when they were that age. The U.S. Supreme Court has already banned the executions of 15 year olds and fewer states will now allow execution for all juveniles since that 1988 ruling.

So in one sense, the juvenile punishment is getting softer. Plus, Girls in the juvenile justice system exhibit more risks than do boys, for problem behaviors that may lead them to serious trouble, according to new research. Girls had more problems than boys in areas such as family and peer relations, physical health, mental health, traumatic events, and accountability issues. The results suggest that the juvenile justice system needs to devote more attention and resources to the problems of troubled girls, said co-author of the study and professor of human development and family science in the College of Human Ecology at Ohio State University.

So, is stricter punishment an answer, Well i dont think it is. Prevention is the answer. as most crimes committed are due to other problems in the child's life. As most children are almost predetermined to commit crime. The child is highly unlikely to think because he is a child, he will get less punishment, therefore i will commit crime. Most crime is not determined by this factor. Crime is usually forced upon children by personal circumstances, and or a social influence. Below please find the press release, of child crime being forced.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/berk ... 206476.stm

Obviously no one is held accountable of involuntary crime. But we need to tackle, the underlying problems that are present in a capitalist society. I believe the answer is to increase the rights of children. Allow them to get jobs of minim wage. Whilst in education, below the age of 16, and allow them to work substantial hours. So they can fuel their prepubescent lives, with the latest gadgets and gizmo's. And keep up with fashion, i believe this will be valuable life experience, and will lead them into being more responsive in school.

[Biker]

I belive it is an effective way, yet there's still talk about emotional scars, humilation and so on. Under what conditions and how should it be administrated? Or is it morally wrong altogether?

The answer to juvenile crime is
1 Faith and relationship with Jesus Christ being lived out before them in the family.
2 A mother and father who loves the child and doesn't exasperate the child by ignoring them and supports them emotionally and developmentally.
3 The child honoring the office (position) of mother and father
4 The child does not harbor unforgiveness and judgment against the mother and father for their short comings, which are many as a rule.

Everything else (secular means) has proven to NOT work.

Biker

[Simon_Peter]

Hey Biker,

Have you ever had adolescent children, or were you a disruptive teenager, in your past. How can you say that is the answer, to have faith

1 Faith and relationship with Jesus Christ being lived out before them in the family.

What does this mean, a relationship. With Jesus Christ. That is very deep, are you sure children can manage that level of thought.

2 A mother and father who loves the child and doesn't exasperate the child by ignoring them and supports them emotionally and developmentally.

Ideally yes, but what if the parents are like this, yet the child still argues, and eventually commits crime. Is it the failure of the parents ?

3 The child honoring the office (position) of mother and father

Ideally yes, what if they dont?

4 The child does not harbor unforgiveness and judgment against the mother and father for their short comings, which are many as a rule.

Ideally yes, what if they do?

[Antagonist]

I belive it is an effective way, yet there's still talk about emotional scars, humilation and so on. Under what conditions and how should it be administrated? Or is it morally wrong altogether?

I think it's morally wrong. Juvenile crime is often caused by a lack of attention or neglect by parents. when the children are neglected they start hanging around on the streets, form gangs and might get involved with crime.
punishment is not the answer. They should get a lot of guidance and attention. they should be teached about moral and right and wrong.

higher punishments don't help. it causes the children to reject society even more, it makes them feel like everyone is against them and that is not what we need. they need to be helped.

[Biker]

Hey Biker,

Have you ever had adolescent children, or were you a disruptive teenager, in your past. How can you say that is the answer, to have faith

1 Faith and relationship with Jesus Christ being lived out before them in the family.

What does this mean, a relationship. With Jesus Christ. That is very deep, are you sure children can manage that level of thought.

2 A mother and father who loves the child and doesn't exasperate the child by ignoring them and supports them emotionally and developmentally.

Ideally yes, but what if the parents are like this, yet the child still argues, and eventually commits crime. Is it the failure of the parents ?

3 The child honoring the office (position) of mother and father

Ideally yes, what if they dont?

4 The child does not harbor unforgiveness and judgment against the mother and father for their short comings, which are many as a rule.

Ideally yes, what if they do?

Have you ever had adolescent children

Yes, two boys, they are now 37 and 32 years old respectively. And I had very little trouble with either, as adolescents or adults, thank God. I didn't provoke them to anger (most of the time) , but brought them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord as best I could. ( Eph 6:4)
I might add I didn't shove religion down their throats and gave them plenty of space to arrive at their own faith and lived mine unashamedly in front of them being patient and keeping a sense of humor, as God does with me.

Were you a disruptive teenager, in your past.

Yes. Wasn't raised in a Christian environ, at home. More along the lines of heathen with a father who didn't pay me any attention and provoked me and drank. So, I grew up angry, and stayed angry until around 5 years ago.

How can you say that is the answer, to have faith

Because I tried everything else and it did not work. I was the walking poster child for Eph 6: 1-3, especially the part where it says: "So that it may go well with you".
Hopefully I repented early enough where the second part will be averted "And that you may live long on the earth."
I made the very serious mistake of not observing the spiritual Law which is one of the 10 Commandments which is: "Honor Your Father and Mother."
Break it and "It won't go well for you." I know, from experience.
It is not meant to honor bad things they may have done or mistakes they made toward you, but one must give proper respect to the position or office of parent and actually give the due to the position they hold in your life. This is very difficult, it demands "faith".
If, things are not well with you, take an honest look here at this Law. This Law is as real as the physical law of gravity. Walk off the edge of a roof and see what happens. Dis-honor the office of mother and father and see what happens.
Same thing is true with the office of the heavenly Father. It takes faith, as He is unseen. But many things you place faith in are quite unseen.

What does this mean, a relationship. With Jesus Christ.

It is quite simple, If you confess Jesus as Lord with your mouth, and believe in your heart God raised Him from the dead you will be saved from the coming judgment.
This merely starts the relationship, from then on it takes personal effort, the same as any relationship with any mortal.

Are you sure children can manage that level of thought.

Yes, in fact, Jesus said: "Truly I say to you, unless you are converted and become like children, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven." Matt 18:3.
"Then some children were brought to Him so that He might lay His hands on them and pray; and the disciples rebuked them. But Jesus said, 'Let the children alone, and do not hinder them from coming to Me; for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.' After laying His hands on them, He departed from there." Matt 19:13-15.
"Sitting down, He called the twelve and said to them, 'If anyone wants to be first, he shall be last of all and servant of all.' Taking a child, He set him before them, and taking him in His arms, He said to them, 'Whoever receives one child like this in My name receives Me; and whoever receives Me does not receive Me, but Him who sent Me.'" Mark 9:35-37.
So, in answer to your question it seems we are to become like a child so perhaps we should be listening to them, not the other way around.

Biker

[Simon_Peter]

If anyone wants to be first, he shall be last of all and servant of all.'

I understand whats being said.

'Whoever receives one child like this in My name receives Me; and whoever receives Me does not receive Me, but Him who sent Me.'" Mark 9:35-37.

This I do not understand. Will the fact that i fail to see whats being said, mean that i cannot enter heaven?

[Biker]

If anyone wants to be first, he shall be last of all and servant of all.'

I understand whats being said.

'Whoever receives one child like this in My name receives Me; and whoever receives Me does not receive Me, but Him who sent Me.'" Mark 9:35-37.

This I do not understand. Will the fact that i fail to see whats being said, mean that i cannot enter heaven?

Meditate on it, it will come to you.

Biker

[Confused]

Ok let me just do the research... because your not speaking rationally as your not quoting fact! i am trying to make you see the real picture, and get passed your personal bias towards social sciences

And you are qualified to present me with the real picture? And you are qualified to identify my "personal biases"? And you are qualified to suggest I am not speaking rationally?

You say we should be focusing on prevention, right? Tell me, what preventive measures would you employ for the ODD child? What preventivie measures would you employ for the 13 year old who decides they want more money than their parents can afford to give them so they rob a store?

You say I am not thinking rationally. I think you are missing the bigger picture, but hey, that is only my opinion. As such, however, it doesn't make it based on irrationality. Only observations.