Should a Teenager be Sentenced for Life?

A teenager should not be sentenced for life regardless of the crimes committed. It is

because their brain functioning differs from that of adults. Thus, the changes that take place in

the brains of the teenagers make them impulsive and unable to make sound decisions.

Should a Teenager be Given Second Chance, when the victim’s Family Opposes the Decision?

Should the Parole Board Grant Release when the Victim’s Family Forgives the Offender?

The teenager should be given a second chance even though the family opposes the

decision. It is because teenagers’ brains are not fully developed to understand many right or

wrong in society.

Besides, the parole should grant a release when the family forgives the offender. A parole release

should be offered once the victim's family pardons the offender. It is because teenagers can

change despite committing a heinous crime as kids.

Should the Parole Board have a Complete Discretion over the Release Decision?

The parole board possesses complete discretion over release decisions of juvenile cases.

The parole board is often made up of numerous individuals, which necessitates their involvement

and freedom to decide if the teenage criminals should be released into society.

Should Criminologists and Social Scientist be held Accountable for the Trends they Create by

Introducing Speculative Concepts?

Both criminologists and social scientist should be held accountable for the trends they

create in the criminal justice system. It is because the insights borrowed from the individuals

play a role in shaping the handling of juvenile cases in today’s society.

Why would the trend punish more harshly young teenage black and Latino kids?

The trend would punish more harshly the black and Latino kids because they encompass

the minority groups in the US. Thus, there are limited instituted laws and legislations to protect

them.

General Questions

The necessary elements of punishment must contain the following, first, the

consequences that are typically thought to be unpleasant. These consequences must be validated

for an offence against legal right rules. Besides, they must be imposed on the offender in case of

a crime. Also, they must be administered intentionally by individuals other than the offender.

Finally, it must be imposed by an authority constituted by a legal authority against which offence

was committed.

In philosophical reasons for sentencing, retribution holds that those with criminal charges

be punished based on the severity of the crime. Deterrence assumes that the criminals weigh the

cost of punishment versus the benefits of their acts; therefore, punishment should be severe.

Incapacitation aims at preventing crimes by detaining wrongdoers in prisons. This reduces their

criminal opportunities. The philosophy of rehabilitation holds that rather than punishing

wrongdoers, they should be given resources needed to change their behavior patterns to better

the society.