posted by Jake Greenwood on .
This is a debate about the age of young offenders.I am saying that the age for young offenders should be 10 to 18, Iinstead of 12 to 17. Can someone give me some ideas?
I think it should 10 to 17 because there are some pretty young kids out there that can and would commit a minor to serious offense depending on their upbringing and home setting. At 18 your now by law considered an adult and now fully responsible for your actions. You should therefore be treated as one. However, now days kids about 14 and up depending on the judge and case are being sentenced as an adult. So does the law of age really matter if it's not always being implicated?
Just my opinion. Hope it gives you some ideas.
I think Taylor means "enforced" instead of "implicated."
Overall, I think Taylor's right.