Resolved: In the United States, juveniles charged with violent felonies ought to be treated as adult

As a road map for the judges, first I will defend my case then I shall attack my opponents. My sources are quotes from people. I don't need a link to provide arguments. If you really want to verify my sources, then Google them. It's not required for me though. Oh, and by the way, Phoenix Wright for the win. DEFENSE: Killing and mutilating a 4 year old after being bullied doesn't classify as mental problem. He murdered someone. The murder is serious considering the victim is a 4 year old boy and since he was 13, he SHOULD be knowing whats right and wrong and that murder is an evil thing. For such an unacceptable crime, we should treat them as adults. Really? How does it not? My opponent makes no argument against the sanity state of Eric Smith, which is a main point of that argument. He murdered someone because he needs mental help. In fact, this was a key point of defense for Eric's attorney. Just because he SHOULD know something doesn't automatically mean he DOES. DEFENSE 2: "Murder however is a different story since you ends someones life. As i said, you are TAUGHT to know whats wrong and right. The mentality of the newer generations are generally higher then the children from 30 years ago. Murder is wrong and if juveniles knows its wrong and still commits murder, why should we still go easy on them and treat them as juveniles." It being murder doesn't change ANYTHING. It's still hypocritical BS. Also, my opponent completely ignores the main argument again. "Scientific studies have determined that the human brain undergoes continuous development up to the age of about twenty-one. "Because the brains of juveniles, particularly the frontal lobes, are not fully developed, youths lack the ability to perform critical adult functions, such as plan, anticipate consequences, and control impulses," DEFENSE 3: "Are you even sure that it doesn't work? Some states now treat crimes from juveniles and adults the same way and what was the results? Crimes from juveniles dropped. It seems Gorski was wrong after all for some part." That's only FEAR from the punishment, not the punishment itself. The argument is that punishing doesn't help the offender sort out any problems he has, which by the way, CAUSED THE CRIME IN THE FIRST PLACE. DEFENSE 4: "I think this is an exception. If a certain person was stealing and you saw it, making you think its ok, then you are influenced by that person. Note that stealing isnt a serious felony." That was one simply case, my friend. This applies to instances of abuse and violence in a bad environment, which are no doubt off the carts in this age. The kid is then offhandedly taught that this is 'OK', even if it wasn't intended by the parents. DEFENSE 5: "You are absolutely correct, they shouldnt be having access to weapons. However, since the gun doesnt tells you to pick it up and fire at people, the juvenile is at fault for taking the gun. Kids watches tv most of the day. They should be knowing what a gun is." They know a gun can get them what they want, and that's enough reason for parents to KEEP THEM OUT OF SIGHT, which apparently doesn't happen enough. That's not even mentioning that some kids don't even understand the concept of death until a certain age. For me, it was when I was 12 when I was forced to realize that there is no coming back from life we see so much in cartoons and kid's programs. Juveniles apply to 10 and up, so we're literally dealing with the fact that it's possible to throw a kid in jail WHO DOESN'T EVEN UNDERSTAND THE CONCEPT OF DEATH YET. So from the kid's Point Of View they can get whatever they want and the person they shoot can come ck from the dead, so everything is A-OK. DEFENSE 6: "Why do we put those children in jail in the first place? Because they committed a crime. Was it serious? Of course since he got life sentence for it. Neither the police nor the victims family will show you mercy if you commit a murder. If we punish juveniles for their crime, how is it immoral i ask you?" Oh, really? Here I bring in my trump card for the family argument: The MAMA organization. Victim's families understand the concept of redemption. ANGELA WILLIAMS Founder of MAMA (Mothers Against Murderers Association) Inc, a remarkable support group in West Palm Beach. Seventy-three women, all of whom have lost a child to murder, meet at this storefront office every other Thursday. The walls are lined with the photographs—the mother with her lost child. "That's one thing I tell my moms all the time: the only way they're going to move on, they're going to have to learn to forgive, you know, and if they don't learn to forgive, then they'll never be able to move on to the next step." And Angela Williams should know. "I lost seven. I lost five nephews and two nieces in my family, and that motivates me to keep going to help others. Gun violence — all killed by guns." MAMA is supporting a petition for clemency on the premise that any child should be given a second chance, even for murder. ATTACK *Cracks knuckles* I hope your ready for a spanking, Mr. Edgeworth. 1. With this response, it feels as though my opponent has ignored my entire case. There is no 'should' in the mind of a child. How a child is brought up in the present completely changes him in the future. And it's not like when you are' treated as an adult you aren't punished AT ALL. Your just getting a second chance to make up mistakes, something the Affirmative side cannot do. Yes, I agree, kids SHOULD know that killing someone is wrong, but that doesn't mean they always DO, which is why a child specialized psychologist will do wonders for a child that doesn't know right and wrong. 2. We don't allow children to smoke and drink alcohol because it's bad and unhealthy? Really, bro? Then why can Adults do it? I'm 15 man, and I want a job badly. Why? Because I want to buy and save up for important things in the future. I don't think I'm one wanting one when I get on Facebook and half the posts are "I NEED A JOB." But anyway, lol. I never said that abuse and bad environments force you to commit crimes. Do they influence you to? Your damn right, they do. My opponent seems to not understand the fact that violent felonies don't only apply to murder, but they apply to cases such as Robberies as well. They broadens the horizon greatly in terms of bad influences. Morals aren't the same for everybody because everybody was raised a certain way. I don't see why someone should be punished FOR THE WAY THEY WERE RAISED. And, I don't mean to be a jerk, but it would help if my opponent used spell check. I hate having to correct them when I copy and paste his arguments.