The author wants the reader to feel that the ruling is fair. Smith does this by filling the article with facts to back up the argument. For example, psychology professor Laurence Steinberg states the "Ninety percent of teen offenders do not become adult criminals," which is why not all teen cases should be tried as adult ones. Patricia says that the crime rate in teens have gone decreased because those who have committed crime are in jail. This suggests that most teenagers do not commit crime as a daily activity. Most time spent behind bars is a result of small mistakes in their childhood. The author uses an example of Rebecca Falcon, who has been sentenced life without parole.When she was 15, she and her friend who owned a gun, got drunk one night and one or the other shot a taxi cab driver. Although it was unclear the actual events, Falcon is now 30 and still in jail. She wishes and is hopeful that she will be tried again. Smith states that a person's actions at 13 or 14 are a poor sign of the kind of adult he or she will become.
Could the cruelness and hate be of the same level, if a 14 year old murders someone, or a 30 year old murders someone? My point of view on the topic overall is quite mixed. It is clear that adults have to be independent and make their own decisions. But in class, we were discussing that sometimes, children have to make their own decisions too. And in very few cases do the parents allow their child to kill or commit crime. Teenagers always complain that they should be treated as adults, but when in court they beg not to be. Does this mean they should? Yes, kids make the mistake of doing drugs and drinking, but adults can make mistakes also. Why should a murder be let go opposed to another murder?
Then again, I feel like a crime done by a child may most likely be an act done by impulse. Have teenagers fully matured enough to realize the repercussion of their actions? If many struggle to think before they speak, how can one manage to think before they act? I believe that the court's ruling is fair, because they aren't suddenly letting thousands of prisoners free. They are allowing them the privilege of a second chance, to think over their cases from more than one point of view. Why should one mishap rule ones life? All in all, I thought the article was extremely informative, but I can't quite place a firm opinion.
Bibliography:
- Smith, Patricia. "Crime and Punishment." New York Times Upfront 17 Sep. 2012: 8-11.
This is really good! I can understand both points of view. Children who commit a crime will most likely realize what they have done and feel terrible about it by adulthood. But we do not know which children will come to the realization. And the children that don't shouldn't be aloud to go free. Its a very difficult issue, but you worked on this really well! great job!
ReplyDelete