Most of the people believe that youngsters less than 18 of ages should be re-educated rather than punished. I definitely disagree with that case, on my view teenagers who break the law must meet punishment to ensure that they have personal responsibility, if not it may danger for others who get an impact on their act.
Firstly, crime is a crime without any pardon especially based on age, gender, background, and etc. Once they do means that they should take a responsibility on what they have done before. Moreover, All the criminals should be offered accountable punishment based on their action. For the example, if someone who underaged do a violent crime means that they are not stable in emotion and physical harm. It may will dangers for others surrounded such as their family or neighbored. Consequently, this is the reason why age should not be the exception for someone who deal with crimes. On the other ways, if they only get re-educated which are be able to repeat it again due to the fact that they know if the harmful effects are happened again, they are not get a punishment. Obviously, in the future it increased their risk of long-term criminal behavior.
In conclusion, even though re-education may helpful in some cases, but I strongly believe that the youngster must be still punished because human right and public safety are the most priority rather than offer second or third chance for crimes. It will be an attention for all people including the one who less than 18 that they should be aware about their actions which have consequences.