By Andrea Banda
Assistant Opinions Editor
A teenage boy tiptoes up to his parent’s bedroom. He pushes the door open slowly, trying not to make a sound. His dad’s snoring and his mother’s quiet breathing assure him that they are sound asleep. He stands in front of their bed, closes his eyes and pulls the trigger.
Situations like these have recently sparked a debate within our American justice system and the American public. Should juveniles be tried as adults for certain crimes? If so, which ones?
Personally, there isn’t really much to decide. If juveniles commit murder, then they should certainly be tried as adults. Whether a person is 12 years old or 30 years old, he is fully aware of his choice to intentionally cause harm to or take another person’s life.
In recent years, Florida courts tried three different juveniles on counts of murder. Two were convicted and handed long-term sentences in adult prisons. Lionel Tate faces life in prison with no chance of parole for killing a 6-year-old playmate when he was 12 in 1999. Nathan Brazill faces up to 28 years in prison for killing a teacher at Lake Worth Middle School in 2000 when he was 13. The fates of Derek and Alex King, 12-and 13-year-old brothers charged with killing their father, have yet to be decided.
Although these sentences may seem extreme, in a murder trial the juveniles’ behavior in taking the life of another person should not be ignored because of their age. If the Columbine killers had not taken their own lives, I doubt the American public would settle with them being tried as juveniles.
Children’s rights advocates and organizations have recently stirred up the debate regarding this issue. They argue that children do not deserve to serve adult time in adult prisons.
The line at which juveniles are tried as adults certainly must be drawn. Obviously, stealing a classmate’s lunch money and murdering someone are two completely different things. Along the same lines, if children are committing adult crimes, they should, without question, serve adult time.
If juveniles are tried and convicted as minors in murder trials, then they will use that as an excuse to kill other people. They may think that it isn’t too heavy a price to serve a few years in a juvenile prison for killing someone they really didn’t like. What is the lesson in that?
Florida courts have been under heavy criticism for the frequent number of juveniles that they try as adults. The Los Angeles Times reported that in Florida state prisons, about one in 13 of 70,000 prisoners entered the system as adults for crimes they committed when they were under 17.
Despite this criticism, the mindset of judges in the Florida court system is understandable. The United States judicial system is intact to maintain civil order within the nation. In order to sustain a degree of civil peace, courts must mandate and execute criminal punishment to all people regardless of their demographics. It may seem harsh to sentence a teenager to serve time in an adult prison for stealing, but it is up to the courts to decide. After all, these decisions are the ones that look out for the greater good and protect the American people.
There is no better way to prevent crime than to stop it when it begins. The juvenile who steals from the gas station down the street should be given an effective punishment to teach him not to do it, or other crimes, again. And it is the government’s responsibility to decide what that punishment is. Although the court system isn’t perfect, surely the courts have enough experience and sense to know which sentences are effective and which aren’t.
October 24, 2002