ye i should of put a "not sure" option cuz im not sure either! cuz it seems young but really at ten a child does know the difference between right and wrong but they may not be emotianally ready for the same punishments for crime. like the two children in teh James Bulger case but then they obviously had quite disturbed childhoods. on the other hand there will always be exceptions, so im not sure!
Technically if you aged 17 or under your a Juvenile. And are thus likely to recieve reprimands and then a final warning before you ever appear before the Youth Court (yes theres a separate court for Juveniles).
And even then being sent to a detention facility is used as a last resort and in strict specified circumstances.
SeraphimTechnically if you aged 17 or under your a Juvenile. And are thus likely to recieve reprimands and then a final warning before you ever appear before the Youth Court (yes theres a separate court for Juveniles).
And even then being sent to a detention facility is used as a last resort and in strict specified circumstances.
So for the moment its adequate imo.
What about for 14 year olds who go around stabbing people for fun?
I know people like that. They don't stab me cos I'm a top shotter (not really, it's cos I've known them since they were in nappies).
I still think they should be locked up, or at least if they had more to threaten them with.
No it's 10 years old. when you are responsible for your crimes and will be punished according to the law.so if you done a really bad crime e.g murder you could go to prison but not if you were younger than 10 when you commited it.
Are you thinking islamically?
then the answer is u are countable for your actions from puberty.
I just wanted to say why i put "it should be younger" as an option.
we were discussing this and in a european country the age is/used to be 8 years old and some people were saying that 8 is a good age. this is because children these days are growing up quicker and satrt being involved in crime at younger ages therefore the the responsibility age should be younger too. at eight i think children do know the difference between right and wrong unless they live in a bad environment. but like i said earlier there will always be exceptions whether they are ilnesses, disabillities, bad parenting, bad friends or whatever.
I think these exceptions are acutally in the majority for 10 or 8 year olds who have committed crimes. Should we really out the full force of the law on them? Or is it better to look at why they committed those crimes and look at the roots of the problem?
There was a kid who brought a knife into school, and his mum didn't even check his bag, he was 6! How many of us made our own bags or lunch when we were 6?
Re: Should the age of criminal responsibility, in England, ...
sbf (not verified) — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 - 16:40
Im not sure.
Re: Should the age of criminal responsibility, in England, ...
TPOS — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 - 17:28
ye i should of put a "not sure" option cuz im not sure either! cuz it seems young but really at ten a child does know the difference between right and wrong but they may not be emotianally ready for the same punishments for crime. like the two children in teh James Bulger case but then they obviously had quite disturbed childhoods. on the other hand there will always be exceptions, so im not sure!
i dnt think i can add another option on though :S
Re: Should the age of criminal responsibility, in England, ...
You — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 - 17:26
What should the option be called?
"To the gallows I say" ?
Re: Should the age of criminal responsibility, in England, ...
TPOS — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 - 17:33
errrrm :S ?
Re: Should the age of criminal responsibility, in England, ...
Seraphim — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 - 17:50
Technically if you aged 17 or under your a Juvenile. And are thus likely to recieve reprimands and then a final warning before you ever appear before the Youth Court (yes theres a separate court for Juveniles).
And even then being sent to a detention facility is used as a last resort and in strict specified circumstances.
So for the moment its adequate imo.
Re: Should the age of criminal responsibility, in England, ...
Ya'qub — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 - 18:03
What about for 14 year olds who go around stabbing people for fun?
I know people like that. They don't stab me cos I'm a top shotter (not really, it's cos I've known them since they were in nappies).
I still think they should be locked up, or at least if they had more to threaten them with.
Re: Should the age of criminal responsibility, in England, ...
TPOS — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 - 18:41
and then they will also be referred to the Youth Offending Team. consisting of Police, Social Services, Education and probation officers.
(they are less formal and the public is not allowed in to hear the case)
(FYI 🙂 )
Re: Should the age of criminal responsibility, in England, ...
You — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 - 18:47
British law? Islam?
In Islam its from puberty (though there are earlier stages where discipline has been suggested by.)
Re: Should the age of criminal responsibility, in England, ...
TPOS — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 - 18:47
No it's 10 years old. when you are responsible for your crimes and will be punished according to the law.so if you done a really bad crime e.g murder you could go to prison but not if you were younger than 10 when you commited it.
Are you thinking islamically?
then the answer is u are countable for your actions from puberty.
did that help at All?
Re: Should the age of criminal responsibility, in England, ...
TPOS — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 - 18:57
I just wanted to say why i put "it should be younger" as an option.
we were discussing this and in a european country the age is/used to be 8 years old and some people were saying that 8 is a good age. this is because children these days are growing up quicker and satrt being involved in crime at younger ages therefore the the responsibility age should be younger too. at eight i think children do know the difference between right and wrong unless they live in a bad environment. but like i said earlier there will always be exceptions whether they are ilnesses, disabillities, bad parenting, bad friends or whatever.
Re: Should the age of criminal responsibility, in England, ...
The Lamp — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 - 11:04
I think these exceptions are acutally in the majority for 10 or 8 year olds who have committed crimes. Should we really out the full force of the law on them? Or is it better to look at why they committed those crimes and look at the roots of the problem?
There was a kid who brought a knife into school, and his mum didn't even check his bag, he was 6! How many of us made our own bags or lunch when we were 6?
Re: Should the age of criminal responsibility, in England, ...
You — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 - 12:54
Read more @ BBC News