Age and The Legal Hypocrisy
May 11, 2008
Along with the healthcare conundrum, I have been forced lately to deal with another sticky situation that I don’t really like. The law is supposed to be equal across the board. However we have of late taken a very murky view of the subject when it comes to kids and their offenses.
For years now the legal age of adulthood in the US has been 18. We say if you aren’t 18 then you aren’t old or responsible enough to do anything. You can’t sign a binding contract, you can’t vote, you can’t smoke, join the military or marry without parental permission. Hell even after 18 we tell people they aren’t responsible enough to drink, gamble, or be considered independent students even if they are the only one paying for their college. (That last one varies from state to state and college to college, but the majority hold to that understanding)
If 18 is where we are going to set the limit for what is and is legally adult, then we need to stick to it. Picking and choosing to charge people under 18 with crimes as adults simply to slap harsher punishments on them might make us feel better. On the other hand it makes us and the entire legal system out to be nothing but hypocrites.
We don’t decide on a case by case basis if a fourteen year old is responsible enough to vote or any other adult activity. On the flip side we can’t do the same for a crime, without jeopardizing the entire basis for our supposedly fair legal system. While I am not for letting juvenile offenders off scot free, there comes a time when we have to say kids of a certain age are either dumb kids who aren’t mature or responsible enough for adult activities, or they are and should be entitled to all the same rights and protections adults are accorded under the law.
If a 14 year old is old enough to stand trial as an adult for murder, then by all rights they are responsible enough to join the military and shoot people and be shot at for a living. If 16 year olds are mature enough to appreciate the consequences of raping another person and thus stand trial as adults, then 16 years olds are mature enough to understand our political system and should get a chance to vote on which politicians will fuck us all in the ass. If an 18 year old can gamble away their life by joining the infantry, then they sure the hell should be able to walk into a Vegas casino and throw down a roll of change at a slot machine.
Related posts:
- Reproductive Rights vs Responsibilities In the modern age, the latest roaring battle cry from...
- Quit Bitching About China Birth Policy It is time for everyone to quit bitching about China’s...
- Our Economic Woes and How To Fix Them I was linked to this morning through a completely unrelated...
- Health Care: A Right or Privilege? Do you as a person have a right to healthcare?...
- Something Has Gotta Change Another sign that we should be bringing our troops home...
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
Comments
3 Responses to “Age and The Legal Hypocrisy”
Got something to say?
[...] Age and The Legal Hypocrisy (tags: Age Discrimination Law) [...]
I think that using murder as the example was a bad idea. Hardcore crimes like murder should not be treated differently in my opinion, if you kill someone that person is dead and they are never coming back.
And there is no doubt that underage individuals are treated differently when it comes to petty crimes, as they should be. I don’t see that as a bad thing.
Charles Lumias last blog post..The Best Bands That You Don’t Know: Aloha
The problem is we can’t let the law be a gray area, especially with murder. Deciding after a crime to treat a particular kid differently than their kid status would normally allow is no different than looking at a crowd of adult criminals and deciding after they have all been convicted to hang the dark skins and just tell the white ones to be good.
Every time it comes down to a discriminatory practice, the law is supposed to be about equality and justice, not getting vengeance.