Spring Break
Life sentences for teens are cruel, unusual, unconstitutional
Megan Lynch
Issue date: 2/3/09 Section: Commentary
A question of the Eighth Amendment, which places a ban on cruel and unusual punishment, has recently caught the attention of the Supreme Court. This issue involves a 13-year-old boy who was convicted in 1989 for raping a 72-year-old woman. After a day-long trial, he was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. For any adult this sentence would be devastating, but for a 13-year-old child, life in prison sounds unfathomable - but is it cruel or unusual?
Unusual, yes. The New York Times reported that there are only eight people serving life sentences in prison for crimes they committed as teens. Now the Court needs to decide whether the punishment is cruel. That is what the lawyers of the 1989 case are trying to prove - and rightfully so. Teenagers, especially those under the age of 15, are still very immature. While this does not mean they cannot decide between right and wrong, it does mean they can be more easily swayed by peer pressure and their emotions. The same is true for 16- and 17-year-olds, but depending on the crime committed, life in prison may not be a fair punishment.
In those eight cases, teens are serving life sentences without the possibility of parole. This should have been seen as cruel all along.
Thirteen-year-olds are just barely teenagers. They're busy enough trying to deal with junior high and all the new people around them and all the zits on their faces. A 13-year-old who gets involved with some older kids and does something stupid does not deserve to be put in prison until he dies.
However, it is still very important that teen criminals face punishments fitting their crimes. Young teens are at a very influential time in their lives and must realize that, if they break the rules, they will be punished. Nevertheless, this punishment does not need to take away their lives before they have had a chance to live them.
Rehabilitation can save these teens and give them a chance at a normal life after they have served their time. The idea of rehabilitative prison time has been bounced around between criminal rights activists for years without finding any widespread solution. Teen convicts can be the perfect place to begin because they may still have a chance to acclimate to society.
For the sake of these teens and young adults facing the possibility of life behind bars without any possibility of parole, the Supreme Court must take the time to review this case and prove that it is indeed cruel and unusual punishment. Teens who don't have the right to vote, drive or make their own decisions should not be put away by the judicial system. Think of your little brothers or cousins and imagine them in jail until they die, without even the hope of probation. It truly isn't fair.
As students, we really need to keep track of what is going on in the nation - especially issues that will change the way we live. While thankfully many of us make it past the teen years with only a few speeding tickets, others have not done so well. The question is really whether or not the U.S. wants to give them a chance to right their wrongs. This is the time where we need to think about these issues and form our own opinions so we can be informed, responsible citizens.
Unusual, yes. The New York Times reported that there are only eight people serving life sentences in prison for crimes they committed as teens. Now the Court needs to decide whether the punishment is cruel. That is what the lawyers of the 1989 case are trying to prove - and rightfully so. Teenagers, especially those under the age of 15, are still very immature. While this does not mean they cannot decide between right and wrong, it does mean they can be more easily swayed by peer pressure and their emotions. The same is true for 16- and 17-year-olds, but depending on the crime committed, life in prison may not be a fair punishment.
In those eight cases, teens are serving life sentences without the possibility of parole. This should have been seen as cruel all along.
Thirteen-year-olds are just barely teenagers. They're busy enough trying to deal with junior high and all the new people around them and all the zits on their faces. A 13-year-old who gets involved with some older kids and does something stupid does not deserve to be put in prison until he dies.
However, it is still very important that teen criminals face punishments fitting their crimes. Young teens are at a very influential time in their lives and must realize that, if they break the rules, they will be punished. Nevertheless, this punishment does not need to take away their lives before they have had a chance to live them.
Rehabilitation can save these teens and give them a chance at a normal life after they have served their time. The idea of rehabilitative prison time has been bounced around between criminal rights activists for years without finding any widespread solution. Teen convicts can be the perfect place to begin because they may still have a chance to acclimate to society.
For the sake of these teens and young adults facing the possibility of life behind bars without any possibility of parole, the Supreme Court must take the time to review this case and prove that it is indeed cruel and unusual punishment. Teens who don't have the right to vote, drive or make their own decisions should not be put away by the judicial system. Think of your little brothers or cousins and imagine them in jail until they die, without even the hope of probation. It truly isn't fair.
As students, we really need to keep track of what is going on in the nation - especially issues that will change the way we live. While thankfully many of us make it past the teen years with only a few speeding tickets, others have not done so well. The question is really whether or not the U.S. wants to give them a chance to right their wrongs. This is the time where we need to think about these issues and form our own opinions so we can be informed, responsible citizens.
Viewing Comments 1 - 2 of 2
Toby
posted 2/03/09 @ 8:13 PM EST
"Teens who don't have the right to vote, drive or make their own decisions should not be put away by the judicial system."
What is the proposed punishment for the 13 year old who rapes someone's Grandmother then?
Conservative
posted 2/03/09 @ 10:40 PM EST
There's a big difference between youthful indiscretion (i.e. smoking drugs, guzzling alcohol, reckless driving) and the decision to assault and rape a 72 year old woman. (Continued…)
Post a Comment