By: Blakely Greenwell
Almost everyone will agree that someone who commits murder should be punished in a way equal to this crime. What makes this line a little bit shaky is when the murderer in question is only a child. Sure, the crime is the same, but now the circumstances have changed.
Maturity levels of each human being varies drastically not only depending on age, but on the way they were raised and events that affected their growth. Considering this, it is hard to understand how anyone can set an age to be tried as an adult. For example, there may be two 15-year-old kids who both committed murder. The first one with a much lower maturity level and unable to comprehend the results of his/her actions, and the second fully capable of understanding what they did intentionally. Trying these two kids the same way would be unjust. Age is just a number, which means that each person should be evaluated individually.
Not only should criminals be evaluated individually, there should be more consideration when sending a person away for life. It is questionable to believe that at such a young age, a kid’s actions can determine what they will be like for the rest of their lives. Of course every mistake a child makes should be punished. For example, a second grade student tells their teacher to shut up, then they have to miss recess that day. A murder is much more extreme, but a punishment that last, for the rest of their lives seems uncomprehendable.
Kids should not be tried as an adult as long as their intentions weren’t in adult context. If a child is evaluted and their mental status is not on the same level as an adult, they can not be punished on the same level as well. Putting a baby behiend bars for life is unjust.