[removed]

I have not watched the documentary. Sad to say but some kids commit crimes so horrible that they shouldn’t be placed in normal juvenile facilities. California used to have a prison that was designed specifically for the under 18 criminals in this category but it was converted to adults and eventually closed.

[deleted]

Anyone saying that kids should be placed in an adult correctional facility for any crime, even serious and violent crimes clearly has no idea what they're talking about. Both from the child psychology perspective and what really happens in prisons.

watch the documentary.

Watch the documentary

Thanks for your example of someone who has no idea what they're talking about.

[deleted]

A kid in adult prison will be abused A LOT.

You are writing off the kid as a lost soul who will be damaged forever.

Depends on age, crime, kids background and environment growing up. I’d say most times don’t belong with the adults.

Damn, it’s almost like the crime performed by the kid had to be pretty heinous huh? Such as a crime that would FOREVER effect the victim?(such as blowing your moms brains out with a handgun, because she didn’t buy you a VR headset).

And since the punishment should fit the crime…….

You make a good point, but the question had to be asked: was there a mental/psychological issue at the core of the act? Could the kid genuinely not understand the long term impact their actions will have?

I think if we had a better system for mental healthcare and socioeconomic reforms, we could help a lot of kids and adults. Sadly I don't see that happening any time soon.

“Punishment should fit the crime” is such a basic, biblical, out of date concept.

Outcome should promote society’s goals.

“The punishment should fit the crime” is an incredibly rational way to approach those kinds of situations.

I didn’t use any religious background rationale to support that phrase. Small crimes getting small punishments and big crimes getting big punishments is very understandable logic.

Can you explain what you mean? It sounds like you’ve just repeated your argument.

Imo, the justice system should not be punitive, but rehabilitative. Simple. All evidence points to the fact that modern prisons do nothing to rehabilitate, and have a net negative effect on society. They cost us, the tax payer, a stupid amount of money, and make private companies profit off of human suffering.

Anyone who advocates for putting a child into an adult prison is, in my opinion, sick.

(Source: worked for years in youth justice, juvenile detention, child protection, and psychology).

The idea of the “punishment fit the crime” is a religious one. It’s literally from the book of Exodus 21:24 “Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, hand for a hand”.

School shooters have no place to feel safe imo.

Well, let's throw a scenario at the wall.

I personally do not believe in rehabilitating school shooters -- if a child decides to murder their peers, regardless of age, that person should not be allowed back out into society.

Either way, it won't matter to most of us if they get put into adult jail or juvie, as long as the outcome is the same -- barring them from society for the rest of their lives.

When rehabilitation is not the goal, it matters a lot less HOW we deal with it -- keep them away from society in any way possible.

For lesser crimes, if rehabilitation is the goal, then I can see separating child vs. adult jails.

What would you have done with the murderers of the toddler James Bulger? He was wheeled away in his push chair while his mother wasn’t looking and sexually assaulted then tortured to death by two ten year olds.

They went to adult prison. I get that they’re children and capable of changing and reforming but is it ok that the occupants of a children’s detention centre who have committed much lesser crimes should be kept in with two child killers?

You said it’s an out of date concept. Why would something that is rational and reasonably applies to present day be considered “out of date”?

A purely “rehabilitative” justice system would merely be abused by just about every single criminal. There would be zero repercussions.

Many criminals perform a crime because they believe that there won’t be any repercussions. Literally changing the system so there are no repercussions would cause crime rates to explode causing a complete destruction of our society.

I find it humorous how you’ve altered my statement of “the punishment should fit the crime” and molded it towards “children deserve to go to prison with adults”, which is not what I stated.

This was great if it’s the one about juveniles facing life in prison.

I just remember the two kids who took a baby, covered it in paint to suffocate it and then left it on some train tracks to watch it get cut in half.

There are kids I don't think should have second chances. Psychopaths are psychopaths.

What’s odd is that the supposed ring leader at the time (Thompson) is said to have been successfully rehabilitated and has committed no further crimes. He now lives under a state provided new identity, and is said to live with a partner who’s the only person who knows who he really is (other than legal people).

The other (Venables) has become a life long sexual predator, and now has multiple convictions which will probably mean he’ll be never released again. He’s cost the UK hundreds of thousands in new identities which he’s then blown himself by committing more crimes.

Why have countries who moved to rehabilitative systems not had their societies destroyed and explode?

It’s interesting how, in all other aspects of society, we agree that children lack the ability to make rational decisions on their own. We don’t let them vote, we don’t let them sign contracts, we don’t let them drink or buy weapons, and we regulate their access to motor vehicles.

But as soon as a child commits a crime, we assign them total moral agency. In fact, the worse the crime, the more agency we assign them.

There is no way for a child to convince adults that they should be allowed to bypass age-based restrictions and gain access to, say, voting or alcohol. Yet our society seems happy to take crime as evidence of advanced decision-making capability.

Humans have a remarkable ability to react to situations in a totally individualised way.

Wtf? No...

Kids shouldn't even be sentenced to adult prison until 25 when their brain is done developing

I’m in Canada. We don’t have everything we need but socialized healthcare helps. America could use that. Some European countries are doing ok. Be nice to model some things they do.

Likely not reality

I watched it. What are you implying?

Who dis?

I have very mixed thoughts and feelings on situations like that. Mostly? I agree with you.

But I am hoping that we find some better way. Regardless, though, the fact of the matter remains that treating acts of violence like that as actions of a mentally ill person doesn't mean they get away with it. Contrary to what Hollywood likes to say, when you successfully employ the Insanity Plea, you're most likely never leaving the hospital they put you in.

With all that said, I've also had conversations about high profile serial killers like Ted Bundy and John Wayne Gacy. My views on the death penalty have changed a lot, but I still believe that execution was really the only reasonable way to deal with those two. The point with this semi-off topic tangent being that it's a really complicated issue, and I'm not sure what the right answer is at this point in time.

I do hope that, some day, we know enough about what makes kids do horrible things, how to identify the warning signs, and get them help ahead of time so that this isn't even a debate.

What country has zero punishments for committing crime?