Teens aged 14+ should be tried as adults

I believe the juvenile court system is a sound way to handle juvenile violations of criminal statute. The government defines juvenile delinquency as an otherwise criminal act, but the criminal offender is under the age of 18. Most states regard children 14 and older as capable of forming criminal intent, so the majority of cases involving young people from 14 to 18 years of age are adjudicated in juvenile court. In certain circumstances, a juvenile can be tried in adult criminal court. However with that being said, there still should be a standard to abide by. If the bar is lowered to 14 it lowers the marginal view of who is viewed as an adult. If the crime is serious, it will be tried as an adult. There are 3 different cases for the juvenile system: Juvenile delinquency cases. These cases involve minors who have committed crimes -- meaning that if the crime had been committed by an adult, the matter would be tried in regular criminal court. Juvenile dependency cases. Cases involving minors who are abused or neglected by their parents or guardians -- called "juvenile dependency" cases -- are also heard in juvenile court. In a juvenile dependency case, the judge will ultimately decide whether or not a minor should be removed from a problematic home environment. Cases involving status offenses. A status offense is a violation that only applies to minors. Examples include truancy (skipping school), curfew violations, running away, and underage drinking. The course of action my opponent proposes are as follows "Not guilty due to immaturity (no punishment, the crime does not go on the record) Juvenile guilty (modified punishment, the crime does go on juvenile record) Guilty (adult punishment, the crime does go on the record and can be seen by everyone, for those aged 14+)" Issuing a "not guilty due to immaturity" court decision seems to contradict your initial assertion that the juvenile justice system is a "free pass. " This proposed idea says that if someone convicted and claims "they are too immature" then the court will be overruled. This would be an expected reoccurring plea and there is no way to measure truth to this. Juvenile courts already factor this into their decisions anyway, so make it a "get out easy" card seems illogical. Your proposed "juvenile guilty" proposition seems to resemble the original intent of the juvenile court system, therefore contradicts your argument against the juvenile court system and in ways would make court cases more complex because there would be debate about who gets this plea. When moving kids in adult court rooms, you are not only inviting them to adult court rooms, but an adult convicted criminal has the same chance as a 15 year old kid. Therefore it lowers the bar for adults. Finally, the "guilty" proposition is technically already in effect in today"s juvenile court systems. Assuming this is the harshest penalty for your propositions, this would be similar to a juvenile ending up being tried as an adult. My last words, juveniles can already be tried as adults. The only "getting off easy" is those who interpret the law. If a kid violates a criminal statute to such a severe degree, he or she will be tried as an adult.