Should We Protect the Identity of Young Criminal Offenders Convicted with Criminal Offences

Before I begin, I would like to point out that the caption system I used was only for R1. If you look at the other debates I have had on this website, I use the quote system. Furthermore, I didn’t drop any of my arguments, just refuted the arguments and rebuttals my opponent brought forth. The case of young offenders is usually different from that of older offenders, and hence merits different treatment. There is no difference other than age. Youth commit serious crimes, adults commit serious crimes, and there is no difference in crime. Why should youth be given special treatment? Young convicts are often themselves victims of circumstances and upbringing. This is quite true. Why though does this mean that we should protect their identities? Are you insinuating that it isn’t their fault and it’s their parents fault or their environment? This is clearly incorrect, they committed the crime, and they should be punished. If they are in a rough environment, social workers can sort that sort of thing out. With proper assistance chances of rehabilitation is greater. Quite correct, a family supported or community supported rehabilitation is far more likely to be successful. For example, in Canada a system of community correction (the youth are brought into a community setting with other adults, family etc) is far better than conventional methods of rehabilitation [1]. I called this the problem of stigma and prejudice. I have already addressed this. This argument is entirely based off an assumption that people will fear youth offenders and shun them. This is no more than a baseless assumption. Adult criminals in our world aren’t faced with this, why should youth be? This endangers rehabilitation efforts. Rehabilitation efforts are failing miserably right now. The UK’s toughest rehabilitation centre only works 10% of the time. [2]. I said that the chances of their rehabilitation are greater and hence they merit special consideration. I have just shown how rehabilitation is more successful if their community was involved so this point is negated. If my opponent knew that particular person is a convict, would he offer him an employment in his company? Potentially. You can’t just judge everyone on their past, if we accept this resolution, rehabilitation would be far more successful. Adult criminals are still given jobs, why should there be a difference in youth criminals? This is a baseless assertion offered without any evidence. This should be ignored by our kind voters. I have just provided evidence. Rehabilitation in the UK only works 10% of the time. 90% of kids who go through their rehabilitation go through it again, and again, and again. That’s not good enough. He says that employers would never find out about criminal history since crime records are destroyed at age of 18. First of all, the purpose of the destruction of criminal records is because those are records of crime committed as youth. As they are adults, they are given a new adult criminal record. Secondly, I have never said that I support the wiping of the criminal record. I had merely said that their criminal record won’t stop them from getting a job. In fact, employers responded to surveys saying that they would “probably” or “definitely” hire a criminal offender for jobs that don’t require college education [3]. Furthermore, employment rates have barely dropped for ex-felons and prisoners, their employment chances dropping 12% if they committed a serious crime. [4]. I am against the destruction of the records, yet I am merely pointing out that the employers would never officially know. I would like to humbly assert that in case of young offenders, the importance of rehabilitation triumphs over public safety. This is an absurd statement. In the UK, 90% of kids who go through their toughest rehabilitation program will offend again. They will hurt more people, steal more things, burn more things, and in general HURT MORE PEOPLE. My opponent somehow believes that we need to make this program even tougher and even tougher, even though I have shown that it isn’t working. If we release the identity of these kids, we can have more successful community oriented rehabilitation AND protect the public. It is clear that my opponent advocates a law designed to humiliate the young convicts as a deterrent. I never said such thing. I have insinuated that being on the news for something BAD would be embarrassing. Would being in a movie be great? Yeah it would, unless you’re the guy who does something bad or embarrassing. In the meantime my opponent has offered no proof that such deterrent are going to work. The media publishing of the penalties that these kids went through (jail etc) will obviously scare kids away from following in these footsteps. My opponent makes a curious statement that there is public is unlikely to worry since they are not repeat offenders. If this is correct, it destroys his public safety argument. This statement was made following your assumption as I said when I prefaced that statement. My argument is that it will be much more difficult. I have disproved this. I have shown how this resolution doesn’t at all lead to prejudice, stigma, or endanger rehabilitation. I have shown (with sources) how people are willing to hire convicts, how they are willing to give them a chance, and how community oriented rehabilitation is far more effective than conventional methods. I have shown how the use of media will effectively deter crime as they will show how crime does not pay. My opponent has provided no refutation to my argument of public safety, merely saying that rehabilitation should be the focus. I have on the other hand refuted all of my opponents points and defended my own. My opponent claims that he has found a contradiction in my argument, but he hasn’t. Thus, it is clear for Voters to VOTE CON. I remind my esteemed opponent not to bring forth new arguments in the next round. I thank my opponent for a though provoking debate! VOTE CON! . http://www.uc.edu... . http://www.guardian.co.uk... . http://www.irp.wisc.edu... . http://www.cepr.net...