egafd.com

Kids under ten know that even throwing stones at a window is wrong,(why else run off ?)so mutilating someone sure as hell must register,even if without understanding the consequences....Im sad to say theres an awefull lot of people out there not fit to even keep pets,let alone children-I often feel the parents should be made accountable aswell........ and as for the human rights brigade, to a point fair enough but when prisoners can sue for breaking a leg absconding over a wall( as has happened) its time to tear it up and start afresh...

There's a difference between knowing what you're doing is wrong and being responsible for your actions. If we are going to treat kids like adults then surely they deserve all the same freedoms and rights adults have. They can drink, drive, decide what subjects to take and how many hours they do in school......sign binding contracts and have sex with whoever they wish (yes....including adults because the excuse is 'they know full well what they're doing)...maybe book themselves a fortnight in Ibiza away from the parents.

No one would think that a sensible approach because in most of these scenarios we accept that children, while knowing what they're doing, aren't yet mature and confident enough to have the responsibility of deciding and undertaking such actions.

One of the main things that defines an adult from a child is responsibility. You can't give it them and take it away depending on the situation and how it suits you personally.

Going slightly off topic, I've always had the belief that 16-18 year olds should not be made to pay taxes from their earnings. They are not deemed mature enough to vote by society and so should not be eligible to pay taxes. If governments want the money they should be given these teenagers the right to vote. Considering some of the adults on here I'm sure these young adults are just as capable.

Sam Slater wrote:

> There's a difference between knowing what you're doing is wrong
> and being responsible for your actions. If we are going to
> treat kids like adults then surely they deserve all the same
> freedoms and rights adults have. (snip)
>
> No one would think that a sensible approach because in most of
> these scenarios we accept that children, while knowing what
> they're doing, aren't yet mature and confident enough to have
> the responsibility of deciding and undertaking such actions.

I think murdering two year olds should be treated differently to letting down the tyres on the teacher's car. It's quite common for kids now to boast that they can't be prosecuted because they're kids. To the immature mind, this creates a feeling of being disconnected from the consequences of your actions.

[quote]I think murdering two year olds should be treated differently to letting down the tyres on the teacher's car.[/quote]

I don't think they were 'let off the hook' completely. It's not like they got a slap on the wrist and returned to their old life as if nothing happened. I don't think you're understanding my points at all. You cannot say someone doesn't have the same rights as everyone else based on age but then say that age is irrelevant when it comes to responsibility.

[quote]It's quite common for kids now to boast that they can't be prosecuted because they're kids. To the immature mind, this creates a feeling of being disconnected from the consequences of your actions.[/quote]

To the 'immature mind'.....................exactly my point. This is why they aren't given the same rights as adults, and why they're not expected to take on the same responsibilities.

If a two year old kid gets eaten by a bear, I wouldn't advocate killing the bear because it's just doing what bears do. But in this case I think even 10 year olds have a very clear idea that bashing a two year old kid to death is wrong.

Children's classic fairy tales are full of easily recognisable good and bad characters based on what they do. They have been told for hundreds of years because kids understand them. A ten year old can be forgiven for ruining your prized wood saw by trying to cut steel with it, but horribly bashing a toddler to death is a sign that they are wired up wrong.

They simply have to be kept out of circulation.

[quote]If a two year old kid gets eaten by a bear, I wouldn't advocate killing the bear because it's just doing what bears do. But in this case I think even 10 year olds have a very clear idea that bashing a two year old kid to death is wrong.[/quote]

You've either not read a word I've said, or have but fail to comprehend my meaning. I've specifically said, more than once, that 'knowing what you're doing' is NOT the same as responsibility'.

Meting out punishments/rehabilitation/therapy is open for debate; my point is that we cannot expect minors to have the same responsibilities as a mentally and emotionally mature adult.

Can you tell me who classifies somebody as a mentally and emotionally mature adult ?. I would expect it to be a doctor but given the power of some social work departments I don't know. Not a dig Sam but genuine curiosity.
You rarely hear such terms unless some crime has been committed.

If there's any suspicion/evidence that an adult criminal is emotionally/mentally dysfunctional in any way our justice system takes these things into consideration when judging a criminal's actions (or they should).

Maybe some teenagers are capable of the responsibilities we adults have, but the point is that they're not treated so when it comes to their freedoms etc. They're an underclass who cannot have sex, work, vote, drink alcohol, drive, etc, etc, etc...you get the idea. If we do not give them full citizen status, so to speak, with the excuse that they're not fully mature enough to handle the responsibility such liberty comes with then we cannot all of a sudden expect them to have an adult-like responsibility when the odd kid commits a crime.

If you want to treat them like full adults under law then they should have the same freedoms and voice as adults too.

Not exactly the precise answer I was looking for, but thanks for the reply.

Oh, sorry, your question!

Yeah.....someone with the relevant medical qualifications, obviously.