Juvenile Offenders
Within the framework of the current paper, juvenile offenders are reviewed based on a class-based theory (Marion & Oliver, 2012). The concept of this theory relies on the supposition that the majority of delinquencies are connected to the juvenile representatives of the lower societal class. This is supported by the idea that their poor performance at school serves as a trigger for delinquent behavior. Another reason to consider the class-based theory is the conflict between the classes which includes the difference in personal values (Marion & Oliver, 2012). What is also important, juvenile delinquency is often being contingent on the gang context. The teenagers develop a certain self-confidence context which majorly impacts their behavioral patterns.
The issues connected to serious juvenile offenders are considered to be one of the most complex criminal justice system problems. This occurred due to the low effectiveness of juvenile detention and the overall increase in the number of juvenile offenders all over the country (Gaines, 2014). Nonetheless, the vanity of the existing approaches helped juvenile justice practitioners to find novel ways to deal with teenager delinquencies. The majority of the developed programs emphasize the importance of helping juvenile offenders to withdraw into the community properly right after their release. One of the most prevalent suppositions is the hypothesis concerning supervision (Siegel, 2015). This hypothesis is based on the idea that the approach will allow the government to decrease the recidivism rates among juvenile offenders. In perspective, this would guarantee the absence of overcrowded prisons and a tangible cut in the costs of juvenile detention. Currently, this hypothesis is believed to be one of the reasonable ways to deal with serious juvenile offenders.
The issues with violent gangs should be decisively addressed, and some measures should be taken by the law enforcement agencies and juvenile courts. The joint efforts of these two parties should be aimed at reforming the current legal practice and developing effective strategies designed to disintegrate the gangs (Shoemaker, 2015). The latter poses a serious threat to society and should be tracked by police forces. The transfer of juveniles to the adult court is questionable. Considering the psychological background of juvenile delinquencies, one should take into account the nature of the offense first and then proceed to analyze it further. In other words, juvenile offenders may be tried in adult courts but only after several additional check-ups are completed. This step is necessary to minimize the chances of detaining juveniles who did not commit a crime that is worth being heard in an adult court (Shoemaker, 2015). Even though the future of this incentive cannot be predicted, there is no adequate evidence concerning the detention of juvenile offenders and their consequent trials in adult courts. Therefore, the decision should be based on the dynamically changing factors that become the dependent variables of the juvenile justice process.
Based on the information above, both the state and the federal governments should be allowed to execute juvenile offenders (Siegel, 2015). Nonetheless, before making such a decision, the government should scrutinize the case, evaluate the probability of recidivist activity, and then reach a verdict concerning the juvenile offender. Even though the gravity of the crime may be critical, there is no common ground for the judges to make a decision that presupposes the execution of juvenile offenders (Siegel, 2015). The duality of the circumstances and the situation as a whole can be identified as one of the pivotal issues in the US juvenile justice system.
References
Gaines, L. K. (2014). Homeland security: A new criminal justice mandate. In S. L. Mallicoat & C. L. Gardiner (Eds.), Criminal justice policy (pp. 67-87). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Marion, N. E., & Oliver, W. M. (2012). The public policy of crime and criminal justice (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Shoemaker, D. J. (2015). Juvenile delinquency. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Siegel, L. J. (2015). Juvenile delinquency: Theory, practice, and law. Albany, NY: Wadsworth.