In a world where the crime rate has reached epidemic proportions, people have differing views on whether juvenile offenders should receive the same punishments as their adult counterparts when they commit serious crimes. While some are in favor, I strongly disagree with this statement.
Proponents of penalizing young people cite various reasons to support their stance. When law enforcement agencies enforce the same strict laws for young criminals, they have the opportunity to inform them about the negative consequences and outcomes of committing a crime, thereby reducing the possibility of juvenile crime. In addition, these deterrent punishments could help rehabilitate their character traits, including patience and determination, which could be beneficial later in life. In a world where the crime rate is increasing more than ever before, particularly among young people, a zero-tolerance approach takes on added significance in terms of reducing crime in the short term.
Nonetheless, in my opinion, young inmates should be treated differently. This is because when younger wrongdoers are punished like adult criminals, they are likely to face debilitating feelings, such as disenfranchisement, isolation, marginalization, and low self-esteem due to social stigma, which can lead to mental health disorders like depression and anxiety. As a result, this can negatively affect their behavior, including aggressiveness and stubbornness, thus perpetuating this condition even further or causing them to reoffend. The zero-tolerance approach is especially challenging for emotionally unstable children, who often struggle to regulate their feelings and cope with stressful situations effectively.
In conclusion, although punishing younger wrongdoers the same way as adults may reduce the crime rate by acting as a deterrent, I believe it does more harm than good, as it takes a heavy toll on their emotional and mental well-being.