Quote:
Originally Posted by WOMBAI
Maybe if parents were prosecuted instead - they would be more inclined to supervise their children better!
|
Nice idea in theory, in practice it would be impossible to administer, who would you place the blame on in one parent families, the parent that is there or the absent member? What about when one parent works away a lot and the other isnt really the best at coping? What would happen if the child was actually full of devilment as they used to say? Not evil at heart just refused to listen to authority, and just did things to see why they shouldnt? Some kids are like that.
Also wouldnt bad parents who were prosecuted for failing to adequately supervise their children then simply lock their children in the house, or potentially worse just abuse the children even worse if they had to pay a financial penalty for the actions of their children. What about children in care who would you punish then?
Basically the idea comes down to punishment, its not about education or rehabilitation, its not even about responsibility for any crimes that children do commit, because lets face it children have committed serious crimes in the past and will continue to do so.
If you believe that children under the age of 12 or even 14 are not criminally responsible then why the outcry over the children involved in the Bulger case? It was stated in their defence during the trial that both boys were fully aware of right and wrong. It was their understanding of relating this basic principle to their own actions that they had problems comprehending. This was excused in part because they were as classified by psychologists as being educationally subnormal. Does this not then point to the educational system being at least part in fault?
If then they werent responsible for the murder, why do people insist that their identities, or at least the new identity of Jon Venables be made known? He has been accused of a serious crime and is awaiting legal proceedings for that crime. However if it does go to trial by jury, the knowledge that he was previously known as jon venables and his previous crimes will obviously sway any juror and prejudice his chances of a fair trial on the new allegations.
If they did raise the age of criminal responsibility from 10-12 it would also mean that Venables and Thompson would have had claims against the Ministry of Justice against their sentence and then for the lifting of their licences.
Children dont come with manuals, what works with one child can sometimes have a counterproductive effect on another.