Boot Camps Revisited
It turns out that the youth discussed earlier in my post "Boot Camp" did not die of natural causes. The autopsy indicated that he was not a victim of a sickle disease, rather, perhaps he was a victim of the boot camp.
It is the time to look into the juvenile detention centers, the juvenile justice system, the education system and the general treatment of children in society. In cases such as Kent v. U.S., In re Gault, and In re Winship the Supreme Court has developed a set of procedural rights for youths. This past year, in Roper v. Simons, the Supreme Court decided that executing those who were juveniles (under 18) at the time of their offense violates the 8th Amendment, and thus awarded juveniles one more right.
This progress is fantastic, but it isn't enough. Most juveniles (thankfully) are not tried for capital offenses. Drugs, violence and theft dominate the juvenile docket. Often they are removed (by prosecutorial discretion or judicial waiver) to adult court and can then recieve adult punishments.
Even when juveniles are tried as juveniles, however, there seems to be a misconnect between the "rehabilitative" services they are supposed to be getting in theory and what they recieve in practice. Perhaps boot camp can really change people's lives. Maybe there is nothing better, but I find that hard to believe.
Is the real disservice to these youth their experiences before they get themselves into trouble? Are they bored, in need of adult influence/supervision, or could it be that some kids are just bad? It seems that the way to resolve the issue of juvenile crime is not to focus solely on awarding procedural safeguards, but maybe to take a look holistically to relaize that the problems at home and in school compound and eventually helps the youth to end up in boot camps.
It is the time to look into the juvenile detention centers, the juvenile justice system, the education system and the general treatment of children in society. In cases such as Kent v. U.S., In re Gault, and In re Winship the Supreme Court has developed a set of procedural rights for youths. This past year, in Roper v. Simons, the Supreme Court decided that executing those who were juveniles (under 18) at the time of their offense violates the 8th Amendment, and thus awarded juveniles one more right.
This progress is fantastic, but it isn't enough. Most juveniles (thankfully) are not tried for capital offenses. Drugs, violence and theft dominate the juvenile docket. Often they are removed (by prosecutorial discretion or judicial waiver) to adult court and can then recieve adult punishments.
Even when juveniles are tried as juveniles, however, there seems to be a misconnect between the "rehabilitative" services they are supposed to be getting in theory and what they recieve in practice. Perhaps boot camp can really change people's lives. Maybe there is nothing better, but I find that hard to believe.
Is the real disservice to these youth their experiences before they get themselves into trouble? Are they bored, in need of adult influence/supervision, or could it be that some kids are just bad? It seems that the way to resolve the issue of juvenile crime is not to focus solely on awarding procedural safeguards, but maybe to take a look holistically to relaize that the problems at home and in school compound and eventually helps the youth to end up in boot camps.
posted by eponcz at 3:32 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home