WELCOME TO OUR WEEKLY DISCUSSION BOARD OF ALL THINGS PSYCHOLOGY.
Children Who Murder: Jordan Brown, Eric Smith and Others
Who is to decide whether or not the aforethought was with malice, at what age do children become responsible for an action such as murder?
6 comments:
Anonymous
said...
I think unless it was somehow an "accident", they should be accountable at any age even as young as five. We like to think children "don't understand", but we forget that we were once young children too and we understood more than people gave us credit for. We certainly knew that stabbing or shooting someone could result in their death and we certainly knew that it was wrong. I don't think there is such thing as a murder without malice unless it was somehow unintentional, like I was playing knivsies and someone walked by and got in the way. (Still disturbing, but accidental none the less). Its very difficult to accidentally murder. Also, if we let young murderers off easy, they are probably going to kill again. When you get off doing something once, it's easier to do it a second time. Not to mention most murderers don't snap until they're in adulthood, so if someone snaps well before then I wouldn't consider that a good sign of what's to come.
I agree with Cristina's point in saying children should be held responsible for their acitons regardless of age. When it comes to commiting a crime like murder, it doesn't matter how old the child is because chances are the child will end up remembering what they did and they'll most likely do it again sometime when they get older. This won't prevent them from killing more people and commiting more murders. Anyone and everyone can get hurt when it comes to the wrong situation, and it doesn't matter how old the responsible person is; they should definitely be held responsible for what they've done. The people who are best at controlling that to a good level are the childrens' parents since they raise them up and they're the ones who see their children the most throughout their lives. If they raise the child to a responsible level, the child will know better when they get older. Otherwise, nothing can stop the child from commiting something bad, even murder.
I feel this topic is very controversial. I do agree with Luke and Cristina when they said that everyone is responsible for their actions but on the other hand five years old is, i feel, a young age to hold someone responsible for murder. yes it is totally wrong to murder someone but look at society in general these day. Kids watch cartoons where people shoot each other and then all of sudden the character that got shot comes back to life. certain things is society are being put into kids minds to where they feel somethings we find unacceptable, okay to do. When a child is that young they are very impressionable as we all are but more so when we are younger so things they watch and see makes them believe its okay to do.
I agree with Cristina and Luke in that everyone no matter what age should be held responsible for murder. Like Cristina said, we understood a lot more than were actually given credit for at a younge age. My younger siblings are 10 and 7 and I know that they know murder is wrong and (not that this would ever happen) if they killed someone then they would absolutely have to be held responisble. Unless a young child has some sort of mental disorder where it wasn't in their control to not do something stupid, or if they were playing with something dangerous like fire or knives an accidentally killed someone, then they should be held responsible. If you let anyone get away with murder than they will not learn their lesson and they will just do it again. And like Cody said, children are at an impressionable age, so if they kill someone and you don't do anything about it, that will cause them to believe it's an okay thing to do in the future.
I believe that in today's day and age children are exposed to extraordinary amounts of violence. This could very well teach children that violence is okay from an early age. I would not hold a child under the age of twelve responsible for murder, unless the circumstances were extreme. I would never want a child, whose mind is far from developed and whose decision making skills are hardly polished, to spend life in prison. I believe that there can always be reform, in anyone or anything, especially at a young age when children's minds are ripe for fine tuning. It's disgusting, yes, but consider the child's environment. Perhaps if they grew up in an environment similar to Danielle's(from Oprah), would this not be a justified act? She was abused and severely underdeveloped for her age, would it truly be her fault if she had stabbed her mother after several more years of captivity? I'm not saying that there aren't circumstances in which the child should be held responsible-in most cases they should be-but it's the level of said responsibility that is important. If a child's parents buy her everything she ever asks for and at age eight she turns out to be a little brat is it her fault? Is there not still time for change? I don't believe in absolutes, it could go either way. But for some reason, I see imprisonment of ten year olds fairly cruel.
I think that if a kid kills some one and they planed it out then yes they should be trailed as an adult and should recieve help and not be put in jail but given a chance to be helped. cause if u think about it if u put them in jail then theyill just learn how to be worst and learn badhabits. so they shouldn't be jailed but hospitilzed. Michal oldziej
6 comments:
I think unless it was somehow an "accident", they should be accountable at any age even as young as five. We like to think children "don't understand", but we forget that we were once young children too and we understood more than people gave us credit for. We certainly knew that stabbing or shooting someone could result in their death and we certainly knew that it was wrong. I don't think there is such thing as a murder without malice unless it was somehow unintentional, like I was playing knivsies and someone walked by and got in the way. (Still disturbing, but accidental none the less). Its very difficult to accidentally murder. Also, if we let young murderers off easy, they are probably going to kill again. When you get off doing something once, it's easier to do it a second time. Not to mention most murderers don't snap until they're in adulthood, so if someone snaps well before then I wouldn't consider that a good sign of what's to come.
Per 2 Cristina Theriault
I agree with Cristina's point in saying children should be held responsible for their acitons regardless of age. When it comes to commiting a crime like murder, it doesn't matter how old the child is because chances are the child will end up remembering what they did and they'll most likely do it again sometime when they get older. This won't prevent them from killing more people and commiting more murders. Anyone and everyone can get hurt when it comes to the wrong situation, and it doesn't matter how old the responsible person is; they should definitely be held responsible for what they've done. The people who are best at controlling that to a good level are the childrens' parents since they raise them up and they're the ones who see their children the most throughout their lives. If they raise the child to a responsible level, the child will know better when they get older. Otherwise, nothing can stop the child from commiting something bad, even murder.
Luke Dola, Period 2
I feel this topic is very controversial. I do agree with Luke and Cristina when they said that everyone is responsible for their actions but on the other hand five years old is, i feel, a young age to hold someone responsible for murder. yes it is totally wrong to murder someone but look at society in general these day. Kids watch cartoons where people shoot each other and then all of sudden the character that got shot comes back to life. certain things is society are being put into kids minds to where they feel somethings we find unacceptable, okay to do. When a child is that young they are very impressionable as we all are but more so when we are younger so things they watch and see makes them believe its okay to do.
-Cody Burghoff
I agree with Cristina and Luke in that everyone no matter what age should be held responsible for murder. Like Cristina said, we understood a lot more than were actually given credit for at a younge age. My younger siblings are 10 and 7 and I know that they know murder is wrong and (not that this would ever happen) if they killed someone then they would absolutely have to be held responisble. Unless a young child has some sort of mental disorder where it wasn't in their control to not do something stupid, or if they were playing with something dangerous like fire or knives an accidentally killed someone, then they should be held responsible. If you let anyone get away with murder than they will not learn their lesson and they will just do it again. And like Cody said, children are at an impressionable age, so if they kill someone and you don't do anything about it, that will cause them to believe it's an okay thing to do in the future.
Danielle Gagnon
I believe that in today's day and age children are exposed to extraordinary amounts of violence. This could very well teach children that violence is okay from an early age. I would not hold a child under the age of twelve responsible for murder, unless the circumstances were extreme. I would never want a child, whose mind is far from developed and whose decision making skills are hardly polished, to spend life in prison. I believe that there can always be reform, in anyone or anything, especially at a young age when children's minds are ripe for fine tuning. It's disgusting, yes, but consider the child's environment. Perhaps if they grew up in an environment similar to Danielle's(from Oprah), would this not be a justified act? She was abused and severely underdeveloped for her age, would it truly be her fault if she had stabbed her mother after several more years of captivity? I'm not saying that there aren't circumstances in which the child should be held responsible-in most cases they should be-but it's the level of said responsibility that is important. If a child's parents buy her everything she ever asks for and at age eight she turns out to be a little brat is it her fault? Is there not still time for change? I don't believe in absolutes, it could go either way. But for some reason, I see imprisonment of ten year olds fairly cruel.
David Rawolle
Per. 2
I think that if a kid kills some one and they planed it out then yes they should be trailed as an adult and should recieve help and not be put in jail but given a chance to be helped. cause if u think about it if u put them in jail then theyill just learn how to be worst and learn badhabits. so they shouldn't be jailed but hospitilzed. Michal oldziej
Post a Comment