Amongst people there are two controversial claims regarding to the level of punishments. I completely disagree with those, who advocate the Idea of requiring identical levels of penalty for the young as adults.
The most vivid and perticulary prevalent nature of breaking rules and laws is due to the lack of life-related knowledge and experience. Youngsters, under the age of 16, are not mature enough to analyze all their actions or anticipate side-effects of their discriminate behaviours. The figures of the authorities should allow young offenders to gain serious lessons from their mistakes by alleviating the seriousness of their sentences. Surveys among young law-breakers also reveal that the most widespread, post-crime excuses are associated with absence of adequate knowledge or intelligence.
From the psychological point of view, we should admit that, the young’s resistance to severe types of penalties is not high enough. Their moral well-beings prone to be easily damaged unless, officials accentuate the lessening the severeness of the punishments. If they face unforeseen penalties, they become vulnerable to commit death related issues like a suicide. This kind of approaches to the problems result in emergency of some negative attitudes among commiters’ parents. Recent example has happened with my brother’s acquaintance. Several years ago he had been sentenced with the serious punishment but as a lack of resistence to the life of prison he killed himself with a knife.
Taking everything into consideration, I assert that the strength of punishments for young people or adults must be discrepantsince former ones have less matureness and tolerance.