There are concerns about the rise in crime in many communities. Some people support the opinion that adolescents should be sentenced as older people, regardless of age. I disagree with this idea because young people lack moral knowledge and critical thinking skills.
It is undeniable that punishing juveniles with adult punishment could minimize minor crimes in some ways. In society, most crime is often committed by children. Certainly, if major cases are practiced as adults, these crimes would be reduced. Under the laws enacted in many countries, the adult’s penalty is harsher, meaning offenders face years in prison, which would deter them from reoffending. In parallel, such measures would serve as a good lesson for their peers, preventing them from following in the footsteps of offenders. As a result, this potentially leads to a decrease in the number of criminals.
However, this idea does not apply fairly to teenagers. Based on human rights and moral principles, they are under 18 years old and therefore do not yet understand right from wrong. While there are many cases where teenagers commit crimes, sometimes it may be unintentional or under the influence of peers. These should not be punished in the same way as older individuals because their level of awareness is different. Therefore, such punishment would violate the fundamental rights of children and is inconsistent with the purpose of child protection laws.
In conclusion, despite the fact that the crime rate might slightly decrease if children followed the same rules as adults, this is unjustified for children because they are below 18, and it violates their fundamental rights. I would suggest that adults and young people should be judged according to their age, which would be fair to both sides equally.