Juvenile Delinquency: The Age of Majority

The other day, I had one of the most productive days of my young career.  Because I was in such a great groove, I ate lunch at my desk.  As I sat there, I began reflecting on my career and how thankful I was to be employed.  I browsed a few of my favorite websites and then began reading an article on cnn.com about a challenge to an affirmative action policy at the University of Texas.  The student challenging the policy argued that race should not be a factor in determinng whether a student is admitted into the university.  The outcome of the case has the potential to eliminate affirmative action in college admissions.  That said, I hope the Supreme Court renders the correct opinion.

 

When I left the office around 6:15 pm, I was in a pensive mood.  As I arrived at the meeting, I was pleasantly surprised because I had a chance to speak with one of my mentors, who happens to be a judge.  After our brief conversation, it was time to eat, and then time for the program to begin.  The program was about juvenile delinquency and the age of majority in the state of North Carolina.  During the first presentation, I learned that North Carolina is one of only two states where the age of majority is sixteen years old.  Essentially, that means that a sixteen year old accused of a crime can be tried as an adult.  In about ten states across the United States, the age of majority is seventeen years old and in the remaining states, the age of majority is eighteen years old.  When I think about the implications of the age of majority, I cannot help but think about a sixteen year old child being saddled with a criminal record for the remainder of his life.

Proponents of the law argue that sixteen year olds are capable of making decisions.  They argue that all sixteen year olds understand the difference between right and wrong.  They believe teenagers must be accountable for their actions.  This group also believes prosecuting sixteen year olds will act as a deterrent for other young children who may at some point commit crimes.  Individuals supporting this law believe it is “tough” on crime. 

Opponents of the law argue that a sixteen year old child does not have a fully developed mind. Moreover, they argue that the teenager is not capable of understanding the consequences of their actions.  They argue that juvenile delinquency is about more than children committing crimes.  They argue that the problem begins with their parents’ lack of involvement in their children’s lives.  They also argue that if a sixteen year old commits a crime under this system, that crime will follow them for the remainder of their lives.  They believe that is too tough of a result.

 

What do you think?

  Follow the Gentleman's Report
Pinterest
Instagram

Peace