Analysis Of On Punishment And Teen Killers
On June 25, 2012, the Supreme Court ruled that juveniles who committed murder could not be sentenced to life in prison. A few justices believed life in prison without parole for a juvenile prevents consideration for their chronological age and its features. But four justices disagreed saying that heinous crimes committed by juveniles should be punished with a sentence of life in prison, or a 17-year-old would be released to society after he had gun down his fellow classmates and teachers. I disagree with the Supreme Court ruling. I believe that every juvenile who has committed a heinous crime should be sentenced to life in prison without parole. The victims of the crime would get the justice they deserve, they are at the age where they should know what they are doing, and brain development does not play a fact to juveniles committing heinous crimes .
…show more content…
Jenkins states “The nationwide campaign to end JLWOP has spent millions of dollars advocating for these convicted murderers to be set free. Not a dime has been allocated for victim outreach or support.” While the teen killer gets set free the family of the victims do not get any closer. The killer gets a second chance in life but the victim had their life taken away from them. We can not turn a blind eye to the victim’s family just because the person who took their life was under the age of
Jenkins states “The nationwide campaign to end JLWOP has spent millions of dollars advocating for these convicted murderers to be set free. Not a dime has been allocated for victim outreach or support.” While the teen killer gets set free the family of the victims do not get any closer. The killer gets a second chance in life but the victim had their life taken away from them. We can not turn a blind eye to the victim’s family just because the person who took their life was under the age of