Kitz Forum
Chat => Chit Chat => Topic started by: dave.m on October 20, 2007, 06:23:36 PM
-
What do you think should be the age when juveniles can be tried and sent to prison?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7053482.stm
I asked the question so I will start.....
I think 16
BUT
with the proviso that parents or guardians are held responsible for any crimes committed by under 16s in their care, and made to stand trial and serve any punishment that would be meted out to anyone older who had committed the same crime.
AND
Also made to recompense others who have been at the receiving end of any vandalism.
Right, let's have your opinions or experiences of juvenile crime!
dave
-
i read that particular story earlier and think its so sad this poor bloke died under such disgusting circumstances.
the boys involved shouldnt be sent to prison, they should be locked in a room with that poor blokes family to let them do whatever they want to them .... WHATEVER !
i think anyone over the age of 12 should be able to go to prison, depending on the crime of course.
-
I think the parents of all these children should be prosecuted for neglecting their parental responsibilities. What sort of upbringing must they have had to think it funny to throw stones and bricks at another human being?
Of course, they aren't really being sent to prison are they? but to some sort of establishment run by social workers, from which they will probably
emerge fully fledged criminals. If they were sent to a boot camp type of place, they might learn a bit of discipline and self respect, and recognise the error of their ways.
I'm not holding my breath for either of the above suggestions
-
I'm really not happy about making the parents responsible. Parenting is one of the most difficult jobs in the world, and it's made more difficult by the way society nannies children so that parents can't discipline them without being prosecuted themselves. Schools likewise have very limited disciplinary rights. If you're unlucky enough to have a wild kid who associates with other wild kids, you don't stand much chance of controlling their behaviour.
I believe that society needs to change in a way that makes children face the responsibilities of their wrongdoing. Patting them on the head and blaming the parents is never going to turn them into good citizens. Parents have a responsibility to make behavioural boundaries clear, but they have to have meaningful sanctions to enforce those rules when necessary.
-
A stint in the Services wouldn't hurt young offenders IMO - and a lot of older ones come to that!
-
I'm not sure you can have a sensible discussion on this as we have a criminal justice system which really isn't fit for purpose - but I'd best not go off down that road or you'll never shut me up :)
If you are asking about the point at which a child should know (or at least strongly suspect) that what they're doing is illegal I'd say 10 is about right unless their IQ is seriously below normal. If you are asking at what age they should be detained that's a different matter.
-
Sometimes I do think kids need a good hard sharp shot treatment. Theres too many that think they can (and do) get away with anything.. and think they are beyound the arms of the law.
A tough call to make - but I do sometimes think that sometimes the law is too soft.
-
Now they are debating whether prison officers should be allowed to use batons in YOI's... it's my opinion that once inside the youngsters should expect it to be tough, even if for some of them it's the closest thing they get to a holiday... prison should not be a holiday camp.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7054605.stm
-
Firstly let me say I have a criminal record - possession of 0.67g of cannabis (grass, not hash so not even enough for one joint) when I was 19. I was fined £120 in 1987 for that. I am therefore somewhat biased in this matter.
In theory that record no longer exists (rehabilitation of offenders act) but in practice if someone does an enhanced criminal records check on me then it WILL appear. I also have a security clearance of Secret UK Eyes A (in theory I can see cabinet papers - that sort of level). Had my conviction happened in 2007 rather than 1987 my life would have been VERY different.
Now here's the employers own figures (2006) :
25% of employers throw your CV in the bin instantly if you have any conviction;
45% of employers throw your CV in the bin instantly if you have been to prison;
60% of employers throw your CV in the bin instantly if you went to prison for an offence involving dishonesty;
80% of employers throw your CV in the bin instantly if you went to prison for an offence involving dishonesty and violence.
Now you may think "serves them right" - god knows papers like the Daily Hate* (Daily Mail) do. Think a little further and you'll see that someone exiting prison for the first time is stuffed. Roughly 50% of employers will NEVER look at you again. You get a grant of £40 when you walk out and that's it. No benefits until you have an address, which you can't get without cash - a hell of a lot more than £40. Its not rocket science is it?
England is following the USA again on this. The USA locks up and executes more people per head of population than EVERY OTHER "democratic" country on the planet put together. Even if you add China they're still the worst. Works for them does it? Well it certainly doesn't work for California which now spends more on locking people up than all of the other public expenditure (education, health, transport etc etc) put together.
Prison REALLY doesn't work. Not the UK/US versions anyway. Other EU countries have reoffending rates that are one quarter of ours.
I think everyone has an opinion on this but unfortunately it is the people who have no experience of crime/criminal justice systems who shout the loudest and are most ill-informed. I am not referring to anyone on this thread but I'm sure we all know some idiot who reckons that the police taking someone round the back and giving them a good kicking is the way to go? I've seen it happen to a 14 year old friend and all it did to us is make us distrust and despise the police. I still do.
Edit - before someone asks I tell my children that policemen are NOT their friends, they are there to arrest people (dunno about the rest of you but Leics police get a £1000 bonus for meeting their arrest quota - if you don't find that scary then I give up). I teach them to treat people with respect - even the police - and to treat people as they would wish other people to treat them. It works for me :)
*I refer to a quote from the founder of the Daily Mail - "You must give the people something to hate each and every day"
-
My views have changed on this matter since the time (a few years ago) when I found myself on the wrong side of the criminal justice system... something I'm not proud of, but having seen things from the 'other side' has somewhat opened my eyes to the kind of cranky society we live in.
-
Well Floydoid I think the issue really boils down to this :
a) do you simply wish to punish people or;
b) do you wish to rehabilitate them so they aren't likely to reoffend?
In the UK and US a) rules. In Europe b) does.
Perhaps people should do some reading of how European (I'd suggest Sweden and Norway) countries who have systems close to ours deal with this?
-
I'd go for rehabilitation... custodial sentences for non-violent offences are just a waste of time and money and do nothing for your personal esteem. Paying something back to society I think would be far more effective.
-
Some very interesting replies but my question was about the age of criminal responsibility and what age do you think it should be.
How would you deal with anyone under your suggested age who commits a crime?
dave
-
I genuinely don't know. It's not something I've looked into much - perhaps I should. I suspect that what happens to them now is largely determined by their postcode and how much funding the local authority has.
I know what'd happen to our kids at home but that's not what you're asking.
-
I think all discipline went out of kids when we banned caning in schools.even parents aren,t allowed to smack kids now.The kids of today know that when they do wrong all they get is a telling off so it doesn.t stop them.All this "Can't be named for legal reasons",is total rubbish.Name and shame them in newspapers,public places etc.Make parents pay for any criminal damage they cause.We are in a society of wanting to claim and sue somebody for nothing.Eg,kid falls of climbing frame in school,grazes knee, parents want to sue!!Teachers are a bag of nerves,no wonder they don't do school trips.
Bottom line is,If they do wrong they should be punished nomatter how old they are.
-
I have my own opinion where it "all went wrong" and I think it was the 1980s. Kids saw their parents out of work with no hope of ever working again. Then the same thing happened to them. Now they're the parents of the kids we're discussing. Eg - where I once lived, male unemployment stood at 58%. I know I was VERY bitter watching the "yuppie" south east of England on TV from Scotland where at the time it really didn't matter what qualifications you had - you simply weren't getting any sort of job unless you knew someone in that firm who could pull strings for you. Lots of people I knew then went right off the rails and plenty never really "recovered". I moved 700 miles for a job in 1989 - that's how bad things were.
Once upon a time I was naive enough to believe that Labour would reduce some of these social divisions. I've become much more cynical in the last ten years.
I fully agree about all the PC stuff regarding kids. I smacked ours when they were toddlers (and up to the age of about 6) - not so much because they were "bad" but if they did something dangerous. They still remember that but they know I'm not going to smack them now as they are old enough to understand a reasoned argument.
-
What really pees me off is teachers can no longer defend themselves against unruly pupils for fear of being charged with assault.
-
Well just to add to these comments,Got my living room windows 'egged last night'.That time of year I suppose.Do you remember some years ago the subway vigilante in New York going round topping all the no-marks,just turn me loose :shoot: People wonder why young kids get all this bad press.
-
What really pees me off is teachers can no longer defend themselves against unruly pupils for fear of being charged with assault.
I remember I was only young, in year 3 I think, and we had a VERY... violent member of the class. This boy threw a chair at the teacher, Miss Wilson, and she couldn't do anything. Tbh, I think that's a pile of crap. He was allowed to return to school the next day too!
In high school, however, I did have a teacher that was willing to take a chance. I won't name him, but he was a good teacher. One member of my class was, in short, a complete and utter ****. And said teacher got sick of it, and threw a board rubber at him. I think he intentionally missed, however. It was a great sight to see the pupils face, however! Nothing happened to the teacher, but the pupil stayed quiet in class after that!
-
Throwing board rubbers was quite normal in my day. I remember once I was talking in biology class to a mate. We were sitting on the back row... the teacher fired a piece of chalk at me which stung me on the end of my finger... I soon learned to behave in his lessons after that.
-
I remember being whacked on the head hard by a rather large and thick text book, simply for talking in class.
I was hardly the most disruptive of pupils and the punishment was dished out without warning as he was walking past.
No-one ever complained if teachers did this and it was accepted the norm... if you got caught then tough. I can imagine the riot if a teacher did that these days.
-
I also remember in junior school being rapped round the back of the knees with a ruler on several occasions (we wore short trousers in those days). It was just accepted as being normal.
-
I remember being made to bend over in front of the whole class while I was given 6 of the best with a plimsoll. The thing was, it didn't hurt at all, but it was damned embarrassing. :)
-
I got belted (on the hands) several times in secondary school. It was always preferable to them sending a letter home where I'd have been hearing about it for weeks :D
I can understand entirely why corporal punishment has been banned in schools. Violence solves very little - it certainly didn't stop me skiving off school, whereas a letter home certainly would have had my mother checking every damn thing I did for weeks.
Back to parents again - I'm damn sure I am a bloody awful parent compared to my parents' generation. I have always been primary carer too - well apart from the first few months where I lack the equipment to be useful :P
-
I have always been primary carer too - well apart from the first few months where I lack the equipment to be useful :P
I'm sure there's an operation that could be arranged if required... ;D
-
naw - much easier to use a bottle and milk formula :P