People have different news weather criminal children should be purish or they should be eduented has sparcked much debate. While, there are some benifits of punishing chillneon under 18 when they commit ermenime, I would argue that educateting them has more significance.
On the one hand, there are some benifits of punishing punishment for criminal children. When low-makers would give them striet punishment they migh worried to commit crime farther Addationaly, strict punishment can be effective more, however some chidren became dangeniou criminal atten having punishmet more speically when they go to jail.Iail is the place whare most of criminal spends thein lives. When a children go therre for commiting crime they teach them how they can commit more crime. However, Punishmet work well too. Aceroding nesearch condeeted by Univercity of Dhaka punishment prevent farther commiting crime. more the 60% children who who went to this proces they never commited crime again. There fore punishing children when they commit crime is not a bad theowny.
On the other hand, edueating childrean who commited crime can be better option. When low-maken may teach childrean about case and effect of commiting crime. Addatioraly, from that the time they might not commit crime. Sometimes, children force to commit crime therefore educating they wonk perteetly. Childrean are not macture enoag to understand which is crime which is not, for that reason Once in a blue moon they might commit crime. Following that reason they could get a secnd chance to improve thein life. Nowaday, numerious first world country started edueating chidren under 18 when they commit crime. Aceroding to Minstory of Creaminal Justice United State mone then 60000 children being educated and less the 4% of the commited crime again.
In conclusion, I belive both argaments have thein menit. On blance, however. I fell that children under 18 when they commit crime they should be educated. This is because they may hot commit crime farther.