Youth violence is not only a widespread social phenomenon but also a significant health problem. Homicide is the fourth most common cause of death among people aged 10-29 (Golshiri et al., 2018). Apart from this, the experience of violence may lead to other severe mental and physical disorders. Young people can also be involved in the process of violence as perpetrators, which raises the question of their psychological health as well.
Youth violence may be viewed as a cruel and harmful behavior “exerted by, or against, children and young people” (Seal and Harris, 2018, p. 23). However, it seems that similar reasons underlie the two sides of youth violence, and thus, their causes and effects may be examined together. This paper attempts to identify the main reasons behind the abuse among young people and its potential consequences for youth and society.
It seems evident that young people are heavily influenced by the community where they have grown up and live. People obtain their values and foundations of the worldview in childhood and adolescence. That is why youth violence can be caused by the background of those who perpetrate or experience abuse. The family has the most substantial impact on the behavior of young people, among other institutions. The family directly relates to youth violence considered as experience. Child abuse is one of the most popular forms of violence against youth. However, it is also clear that family life can lead to acts of violence committed by young people.
Bushman et al. (2016) argue that “interparental violence, chaotic family life,” and “inconsistent discipline” are among crucial risk factors of youth violence (p. 21). In other words, young people who were poorly treated in their family or witnessed some cruelty have a higher chance of becoming perpetrators. The neighborhood plays a similar role in the expansion of violence among people. Youth who live in poor areas with high levels of criminality face cruelty and abuse very often, and thus, may be severely influenced by them.
Although the awareness of a person’s surroundings can help in predicting his or her violent behavior, there are still some other factors that may contribute to youth abuse. It is impossible to omit the fact that the social surrounding does not influence some features of personality.
These traits are shared among the perpetrators and include “psychopathy, narcissism, and Machiavellianism” (Bushman et al., 2018). All of them are similar in the sense that people who possess them do not think about the feelings of others, and therefore, can sometimes be very violent. Finally, some people may have a mental disorder or congenital propensity for violence.
It is an undeniable fact that violence only leads to more violence. According to Lovegrove and Cornell (2016), those young people who were involved in some act of violence “have a higher likelihood of engaging in other forms of problem behavior” (p. 6). This means that if some person committed a crime during his or her adolescence, there is a probability that they will be involved in more severe crimes in the future.
Moreover, the experience of violence in adolescence can also be a reason for delinquent behavior in adulthood. Those who have been bullied or rejected in their schoolyears have a high chance of becoming perpetrators of abuse when they grow up (Bushman et al., 2016). Thus, both perpetrators and victims disseminate violence across society.
It was already mentioned above that youth violence is a significant health problem. It is clear that those people who experienced abuse suffer most of all. For instance, if a person was bullied in school, it can result in him or her experiencing psychological trauma for the rest of their life. Victimization may cause addiction to tobacco, alcohol, and illegal drugs (Lovegrove and Cornell, 2016). Thus, victimized people might become ill both mentally and physically. This example shows the consequences of non-fatal youth violence. The effects of abuse, which leads to someone’s death, are somewhat visible and even worse than in the case of non-fatal victimization.
On the other hand, it seems that young people who acted as perpetrators may also have health and mental problems due to their experience of violence. Some people may never regret harming others, but those who will repent their violent behavior are likely to suffer from it as well. This burden can be especially hard if they committed some severe crime, and nobody knew about it.
One can imagine a person who participated in bullying, which resulted in the death of the victim. If nobody revealed that this person was guilty of this crime, he or she would have to keep it to themselves to the end of days. If this person starts feeling sorry for this crime one day, he or she can, therefore, experience some serious psychological problems. The same as in the previous case, this person might become addicted to alcohol and drugs. Overall, it can be seen that the mental and physical health of both perpetrators and victims can be damaged by youth violence.
In the book Toting a Gun for Tomorrow by Jonie Michel, a fictional world is created where it is an accepted fact that youth violence occurs, and where teens kill teens in large numbers. The main idea in this book is that changes need to be made in order to deter teen violence, and when these changes do not occur chaos erupts. Michel s story does not just apply to the fictional world that she created; it also directly correlates with many problems occurring in American society. Youth violence has become an important issue in today s society, and many people looking for a way to downsize this teen violence surge.
However, as youth violence becomes more and more common many people are accepting the idea that kids will be kids, and that they will occasionally blow each other’s brains out, (Bromdon 2). In order to be assured that our society does not gain a lackadaisical look at teen violence, such as the fictional society in Michel s book, one must first look at youth violence in America today, secondly explore possible causes for youth violence, and finally find solutions that will help stop youth violence.
First off, in order to curb the rise in youth violence, it is necessary to realize how serious this problem truly is. According to the Chicago Tribune, There are three million crimes committed on school campuses every year. That’s sixteen thousand crimes per day – one crime every six seconds. Even more frightening is the fact that thirty-five percent of high school students in high crime areas report carrying a firearm regularly.
Juvenile arrests accounted for thirteen percent of all violent crimes in 1996, and thirty percent of all juvenile homicide arrests occurred in just four cities: New York, Chicago, Detroit, and Los Angeles. The number of juveniles arrested for non-traffic related offenses, in the past five years, has risen fifty-eight percent, according to the afore-mentioned Chicago Tribune article. These statistics show a drastic increase in youth violence, and they show, quite clearly, how serious this problem truly is.
Due to this dramatic increase in youth violence, many questions have arisen. Namely, who is accountable? And, mostly, no one is really sure. Many different groups have been blamed. Schools, the home, and the media are all accused perpetrators of youth violence. Still, it seems as if a complete picture is found only when examining all three of these pictures and placing blame on them individually.
Concern about school violence, crime, and victimization has permeated the education system since the 1950s (Ausmussen 31). The problem of violence at schools persisted and increased to the point that in 1974 Congress mandated a national survey on school violence. This mandate resulted in the Safe Schools Study, which revealed some disturbing trends in the nation’s schools.
The results of this early survey were somewhat unexpected, and they spurred continued interest in the nature and extent of school crime and violence, as well as their impact on students and school staff and their economic and social costs. One major concern was how students are affected by violence at school. According to the Safe Schools Study, many students reported high levels of fear and concern about their safety and security, (Ausmussen 31).
These concerns prompted several efforts to stop school violence, and convinced the National Crime Victimization Survey to include questions about school violence in its annual survey. A National League of Cities study (1994), found that nearly one out of every twenty high school students (4.4 percent) said they had missed at least one school day because they did not feel safe at or on the way to school.
Younger, rather than older, students were more likely to miss a day because of fear for their safety. Nearly twelve percent of students (18 percent of boys and 5 percent of girls) reported carrying a weapon to school at least once during the thirty days preceding the survey, and seven percent said they had been threatened or injured with a weapon at school in the past year. Sixteen percent said they had been in a physical fight in the past year, and nearly one-third said they had property (books, clothing, or a vehicle) deliberately damaged or stolen at school in the past year. An interesting find in this study is that school violence is not an entirely urban problem.
Thirty-eight percent of the seven hundred responding cities reported noticeable increases in violence in their schools over the previous five years, and only eleven percent reported that school violence was not a problem in their communities. Nearly two-thirds of the cities that responded had fewer than 50,000 residents and nearly half were suburbs. What these percentages show is that violence is pervasive in the education system and this violence might lead to more violence.
Another area that has received a lot of blame is the media. In the June 10, 1992, edition of the Journal of the American Medical Association, Dr. Brandon Centerwall states, every violent act is the result of an array of forces coming together–poverty, crime, alcohol and drug abuse, stress–of which childhood exposure to television is just one, (18).
Nevertheless, the evidence indicates that if hypothetically, television technology had never been developed, there would be ten thousand fewer homicides each year in the United States, seventy thousand fewer rapes, and seven-hundred thousand fewer injurious assaults. Dr. Centerwall also notes in his article that as many as 1/3 of the young male prisoners convicted of violent crime say they were consciously imitating techniques they learned from television (18). Another statistic that has been linked to the introduction of television is the fact that fifteen years after the introduction of TV, homicides, rapes, and assaults doubled in the United States.
In 1982 the National Institute of Medical Health released a study that stated, “Violence on television does lead to aggressive behavior by children and teenagers who watch the programs.” The NIMH cited overwhelming evidence that children tend to imitate the behavior they see on television. Dr. Leonard Eron, who chaired the American Psychological Association Commission on Violence and Youth for several decades, has spent thirty-six years researching TV violence.
His unique studies (beginning in 1960) traced the same group of eight hundred and seventy-five boys and girls from age eight to thirty, examining crime rates and personal characteristics. He found that those who watched more violent TV were convicted of more serious crimes, were more aggressive under the influence of alcohol, and more often used violence to punish their own children. Eron states, “What one learns about life from the television screen seems to be transmitted to the next generation,” (276).
This direct link from the T.V. screen into a person s life clearly shows the link between T.V. violence and actual violence. By the time a child leaves elementary school he or she will have seen over 8,000 murders, and more than 100,000 other acts of violence on broadcast TV alone. By age 16, the average American child has seen 200,000 acts of violence on TV, including 33,000 murders. As the video Hollywood s Captive Audience notes, in 1993, the APA released a landmark study outlying four major effects of media violence on real-life violence and aggression. In addition to copycat behavior, the study demonstrated that teens could also be negatively influenced through increased exaggerated fears, the removal of inhibitions, and desensitization.
Not only does TV affect the way youth interact with each other, but data published in the New England Journal of Medicine also shows that graphic depictions of suicide on television are often followed by a dramatic rise in teen suicides. Thirty-five boys and young men between the ages of 8 and 31 killed themselves playing Russian roulette while imitating a scene from Director Martin Scorsese’s The Deer Hunter, shortly after the movie aired on national TV.
Another issue that has recently been brought up when researching media and teen violence is the idea that video games teach kids how to kill. The FBI says that the average law enforcement person hits 1 in 5 moving targets. An eyewitness to the Paducah shootings said that Michael Carneal never moved his feet, put two hands on his gun, and hit 8 out of 8 kids most of them moving and diving targets. He fired 8 shots: 5 were headshots and 3 were upper torso. (He had arcade quality games in his house and was an avid player of point and shoot video games.) He had never shot a gun before that week. Police officers and officials say that type of accuracy is unprecedented.
May 1, 1999, CNN/Time Poll found that 81% of teens play video games. 40% have played ultra-violent games like Doom and Duke Nukem. 33% of these kids believe their parents know only “a little” about their games. 57% said their parents have not imposed any rules concerning their games. These video games not only encourage violence, some of them also teach a kid how to aim and pull the trigger. Therefore, it can be seen by looking at many different aspects of media, that media does influence youth violence
The final aspect that must be researched is the family’s influence on youth violence. Data has shown that children growing up in violent families are more likely to engage in youth violence. Child abuse and domestic violence often occur in the same family and are linked in a number of important. Research shows that the impact on children of witnessing parental domestic violence is strikingly similar to the consequences of being directly abused by a parent, and both experiences are significant contributors to youth violence, according to Shiela Smeltzer (1).
A study conducted by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention found that seventy percent of adolescents who lived in families with parental conflict self-reported violent delinquency, compared to forty-nine percent of adolescents from households without this conflict. This study also revealed that exposure to multiple forms of violence, including domestic violence, child abuse, and general family climate of hostility, doubles the risk of self-reported youth violence. Researchers have also found that men who as children witnessed their parents’ domestic violence were twice as likely to abuse their own wives than sons of nonviolent parents. A significant proportion of abusive husbands grew up in families where they witnessed their mothers being beaten.
Clearly, domestic violence and child abuse are spawning grounds for the next generation of abusers, as well as for violent juveniles. Also, a significant portion of violent juvenile offenders grew up being abused themselves and/or witnessing their parents’ domestic violence. However, exposure to child abuse or domestic violence as a child is not the only risk factor for juvenile violence. Living in an impoverished community that is rife with drugs, guns, and crime, having parents that use harsh or erratic discipline, and being isolated from the community, family, or school – all of these also put children at higher risk. Therefore it is obvious that a child s environment severely influences whether or not they will be violent.
Now that the influences of youth violence have all been explained it is necessary to look at how one can stop youth violence. Since some of the problems can be attributed to the home, school, and media we must also look there for solutions.
The biggest thing that parents need to do is to support their children. They need to be aware of what their kids are doing, who their friends are, and if their kid is making bombs, (28) according to a Newsweek article. Moreover, parents need to teach their children morals that will, in turn, influence a child s decision between right and wrong. Parents are the major factor considered when looking at a child s morals, Newsweek stated. Children learn what is right and wrong from their parents at a very young age, the article concluded.
Media also must take responsibility for its actions. The first step in doing this is that the media must admit that their programming influences youth. Tobacco has denied that tobacco is addicting for years, just as the media industry has denied the harmful effects of violent TV, (Garner 196). After making this admission, the media industry needs to avoid broadcasting violent television during times when the parents might not be home to turn the TV off.
While this does not seem like a viable solution, another thing that media should consider is promoting a widespread v-chip campaign. Not only would this help the media s image concerning television s influence on violence, but it would also make it unnecessary for them to change daily programming. This campaign would promote using the v-chip, and it would put the responsibility of the harmful effects of violent television into the parent s hands, not the media executive. While this campaign would result in a decrease in profits for some parts of the media industry, it will also help the media image overall.
Finally, the school system also must try to make schools safe for children. If this means placing metal detectors and guards at school doors, so be it . . . but the answer to this problem is probably a lot simpler. Students need to know that they can go to their teachers if they do not feel safe, or if they have been threatened. Students also need to know that their teachers will do something about the way they feel. Teachers have the responsibility of informing students that teachers care about them and want to positively influence their lives.
By promoting a caring environment, kids will feel as if they have support, and someone to talk to about their concerns at school. School administrators also have the responsibility to make schools safe. Individual school dynamics are all different, and therefore different actions will have to be taken, but the results should be some widespread. Students need to know that they can attend school without being hurt or killed, and without having to witness pain and murder.
In conclusion, youth violence is a problem in today s society, and it must not be allowed to continue. We have looked at youth violence in society today, and the statistics are astonishing. It is clear that the school, media, and home environment influences youth violence. All three aspects influence a child s growth and development and play an important role in a child s life.
Therefore, schools, media, and parents all need to take action in order to fight youth violence. A school can do this by making its environment safe and supportive. Parents can stop youth violence by listening to their children, and by taking an active role in their children s lives. The media must admit that it does influence children, and it must take action against this influence. It is necessary for all citizens in the United States to take action in hopes of curbing youth violence. Youth violence must be stopped, and it can if schools, media, and parents would simply start caring.
Essay 3 – Youth Violence And Television
Do The Young Ever Listen? It would be safe to say that American society is preoccupied with Television. If one asks the question, “How much violence is on television?” One finds that the level of violence has remained relatively constant over the last 2 decades. Most of the violence is directed mainly to young viewers. All most all television show depicts violence in one form or another. If an average child watches 2 to 4 hours of television a day, then by the time he/she is in high school he/she would have seen over 8,000 murders and more than 100,000 acts of violence (Eron et al., 220).
Recent research acknowledges that televised violence is related to the aggressive behavior of many children and adolescents. The major new factor responsible for this is the marketing of visual media violence to kids. There is a link between media violence and violence in our society.
Everyone knows about the cancer report, but no one knows about the media report. Why? For decades, if you asked tobacco executives about the link between their product and cancer, they lied. If you ask media executives about the link between their product and violent crime, they will do exactly the same thing–and they control the public airwaves.
Here is what they don’t want you to know: In Perspective On Violence (Grossman). , A review of almost 1,000 studies, presented to the American College of Forensic Psychiatry in 1998, found that all but 18 demonstrated that screen violence leads to real violence, and 12 of those 18 were funded by the television industry.
In 1992, the American Psychological Assn. concluded that 40 years of research on the link between TV violence and real-life violence has been ignored, stating that the “scientific debate is over” and calling for federal policy to protect society. “Surely, not every kid who partakes of violent TV shows, movies or video games will become a violent criminal. But can’t we do a better job with the next generation?” (Grossman ). Sure, not every kid who partakes of violent TV shows, movies or video games will become a violent criminal.
In-School Violence Expert Focuses on Prevention, it’s stated that as horrible as the nation’s spate of school shootings has been for students, parents and administrators, it has been a benefit for Mr. Stephens, [an expert on School violence] head of the National School Safety Center in this wealthy, rural Los Angeles suburb just east of Malibu.
He has become one of the nation’s most widely quoted authorities on school violence. Last May, a month after the shootings at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colo., Mr. Stephens appeared on television 25 times. His writings on school safety have been published in a number of newspapers and magazines, from USA Today to the Journal of the American Medical Association.
He crisscrosses the country, giving workshops on school violence, training administrators to watch for volatile youngsters, and inspecting their schools for security, and evaluating their evacuation plans. ”The tragedy at Columbine High School has underscored how much work remains to be done,” said Mr. Stephens, a trim, graying man of 52. Schools, Mr. Stephens hastens to say, remain relatively safe.
The effects of violent media broadcasts are that 22-34% of young male felons imprisoned for committing violent crimes [homocide, rape, assault?] report having consciously imitated crime techniques watched on TV. The effect of prolonged childhood exposure to television shows a positive relationship between earlier exposure to TV violence and later physical aggressiveness.
The most critical time for the youth to be exposed is in their pre-adolescent childhood. Studies conclude that viewing certain program of violence increase aggression in the youth, making them more fearful and less trusting and desensitizing them to violent behavior by other people (Collins) Statistics in The Mass Media and Youth Aggression, states, “Today about 5 out of every 20 robbery arrests and 3 of every 20 murder, rape, and aggravated assault arrests are of juveniles.
In raw numbers, this translates into 3,000 murder, 6,000 forcible rape, 41,000 robbery, and 65,000 aggravated assault arrests of youths annually. Violence is sometimes socially sanctioned, particularly within the U.S: Youth culture is the target audience of the most prominently violent media. Although the media cannot criminalize someone not having criminal predispositions, media-generated, copy-cat crime is a significant criminal phenomenon with ample anecdotal and case evidence providing a form for criminality to take.
The recurring mimicking of dangerous film stunts belies the argument of the media having only positive behavioral effects. It is apparent that while the media alone cannot make someone a criminal, it can change the criminal behavior of a predisposed offender. (245) As the made-for-TV movie industry reflects, violent behavior sometimes results in the creation of more violent media.
Finally, by providing live models of violence and creating community and home environments that are more inured to and tolerant of violence, violent behavior helps to create more violently predisposed youth in society. Therefore, while the direct effect of media on violence may not be initially large, its influence cycles through the model and accumulates. In Mass Media and Aggression, it’s stated that there are three sources of youth violence that government policy can influence.
In order of importance, they are extreme differences in economic conditions and the concentration of wealth in America; the American gun culture; and, exacerbating the problems created by the first two, the media’s violence-enhancing messages. Family, neighborhood, and personality factors may be more important for generating violence in absolute magnitude, but they are not easily influenced by public actions. Currently, the debate concerning both the media and youth violence has evolved into “circles of blame” in which one group ascribes blame for the problem to someone else in the circle.
Thus, in the media circle, the public blames the networks and studios, which blame the producers and writers, who blame the advertisers, who blame the public. In the violence circle, the government blames the youth, who blame the community, which blames the schools, which blame the parents, who blame the government. A more sensible, productive process would be a shift to a “ring of responsibility,” with the groups addressing their individual contributions to the problem and arriving at cooperative policies. We can’t selectively reduce one aspect of violence in a violent society and expect real results.
Youth violence will not be seriously reduced without violence in other aspects of our culture being addressed. In the same vein, modifying media violence alone will not have much effect but to ignore it will make efforts on other fronts less successful. Ironically, despite the fact that the media have limited independent effects on youth violence, we need to expand the focus on them.
This should incorporate other social institutions, such as the media industry itself, and the social norms and values reflected in The media. We could then derive more general models of media effects and social violence (Eron et al., 220). In media violence youth and society, “Violence is a cultural product. The media are reflections of the culture and engines in the production process. Although they are not the only or even the most powerful causes, they are tied into the other violence-generating engines, and youth pay particular attention to them.
The aggregate result of all of these forces in the United States is a national character that is individualistic, materialistic, and violence-prone. If we wish to change our national character regarding violence, we cannot take on only some aspects of its genesis. We must address everything we can, such as economic inequities, the gun culture, and the glamorization of violence. And, by a slow, painful, generational process of moral leadership and example, we must work to modify the individual, family, and neighborhood factors that violently predispose youth. In conclusion, our youth will be violent as long as our culture is violent.
The local social conditions in which they are raised and the larger cultural and economic environments that they will enter generate great numbers of violently predisposed individuals. As we have experienced, violently predisposed youth, particularly among our poor, will fully develop their potential and come to prey upon us. Faced with frightful predators, we subsequently and justly punish them, but the use of punishment alone will not solve the problem.
The role that the media play in the above scenario versus their potential role in clarifying violence and showing our youth that armed aggression is not an American cultural right, will determine the media’s ultimate relationship to youthful violence in society (Surette). In Pulling the Plug on Television, Johnson states that “Although media violence is not the cause of the violence in our state, it’s the single most easily remediable contributing factor (Johnson).
Might not the immense publicity was given to troubled youths who kill or wound classmates and perpetrators of other kinds of mass violence actually spawn more attacks. Studies conclude viewing certain programs of violence can increase aggression in children making them more fearful and less trusting while desensitizing them to violent behavior by other people.
Youth violence affects a lot of people. Hearing about it on the news is one way that youth violence has affected my life. In Washington, D.C. there is a lot of youth violence.
While I do not know any victims of youth violence has affected my life. I cannot go outside during lunch at school. I have to walk through a metal detector when I enter my school and when I want to go to a concert at the MCI Center.
There are many causes of youth violence. The availability of drugs and weapons in the community is one of the causes of youth violence. If people can get weapons easily, they have no problems committing crimes. The media is another major cause of youth violence because people see and hear about crimes and copy them.
Conflict in the family can influence someone to perform violent acts. After witnessing domestic violence at home they go out in the streets and do what they see their parents do. Some violent youths will also try to get their friends to commit crimes with them.
There is a lot to be done about youth violence in the community. Metal detectors in school are a great way to prevent youth violence because if kids are unable to bring weapons to school there will be a lot less youth violence. Talking to a school counselor can help students who might become violent because a counselor can help them solve their problems.
Student mentoring can help too because students who do not feel comfortable talking to an adult will feel more comfortable talking to someone their own age. Conflict resolution classes help because they give students the skills that they need to solve their problems without using violence. Adult role models who speak against violence can help reduce youth violence.
Violence is a learned behavior. Children often experience violence for the first time in their lives in their homes or in the community. This first taste of violence may include their parents, family members, or their friends. Studies have shown that children who witness violent acts, either as a victim or as a victimizer, are more likely to grow up to become involved in violence.
During our second weekend class, we talked specifically about violence and youth. For many young people who have already developed a pattern of violent behavior, the probability that this way of life will endure into their adult lives is very likely. I believe that aggression is often learned very early in a child’s life. For the growing trend in youth violence to subside, I assert that parents and many others must make every attempt to educate themselves and to implement methods that will reduce and ultimately prevent much of this violent behavior.
Parents most often play the greatest positive role in a child’s life by raising them in homes where they feel safe, secure, and loved. These strong relationships that are developed early in life, give the children an ability to form warm, trusting, and lasting alliances. Parents or other adult peers who present themselves as positive role models may lay the foundation that is needed to enable the child to begin to build the cornerstones of his conscience and strong moral development. This will hopefully be the basis for a child’s ability to learn and use nonaggressive and more appropriate ways to solve problems.
Children have minds of their own. As they begin to mature, their newfound independence will sometimes lead them to misbehave in various ways. A parent’s patience(or lack of) as they interact daily with their children is crucial. Hitting, slapping, or spanking a child as punishment often sends the message that it is okay to hit others to solve problems.
A more productive approach may be to help the child figure out what they did wrong and show them how to learn from their mistakes. Kids need to understand the reasoning behind our rules and they need to feel that they can correct these mistakes if they do make them. No matter what the child has done, he needs to know that your love for him/her is unconditional.
It is vitally important for your children to witness the display of appropriate behaviors in the way you act, as well as other adults that are prominent in their lives. Children most often learn by example. They need structure in their lives including clear expectations for behaviors-theirs as well as others. It is important for parents to make rules and to stick to them. This will help children learn to act and behave in ways that are good for them and for others around them.
Parents should constantly strive for a safe, nonviolent home environment. This is especially true for aggressive arguments between parents and/or siblings. The number of violence children sees in the media should also be monitored and controlled. We should talk to children about the violence they see on television, in the movies, and in video games. If it is age-appropriate, help them understand the implications in real life and the serious repercussions for violent behaviors.
These are also good opportunities to let them think of nonaggressive ways to solve problems without violence. We must also teach our children to care for themselves when threatened by another person. Children need to believe that it is better to resist violence than to become a part of it. We must teach our children to accept and respect others regardless of race and ethnicity.
This has been a very brief and condensed summary of some of the priorities that all parents and adults need to consider. The extent of youth violence in our country did not develop in a short time frame and will not end in like manner. My hope is that many others will realize the efforts that need to be set forth by all adults in order to begin to change the future for our youth and the youth for generations to come.
Are we solving youth violence by sending minors to jail in adult prisons? In the article ?Tough Justice for Juveniles? author Edward Humes discusses the underlining problems with the Juvenile Justice System. In this article, Humes claims in paragraph 2 that: ?Our national fixation with meting out adult punishments to young criminals has blinded us to the underlying crisis “the juvenile system’s shocking inability to impose meaningful penalties, or even supervision, on offenders before they become the “predators” we so fear.”
Personally, I agree with Humes, the Juvenile Justice System is so readily willing to punish young criminals to the furthest extent of the law. In most cases without even considering, they’re a prior criminal history or the crimes, that they are currently being processed. Humes illustrated examples in paragraphs 4, 5, 6, and 7 by discussing two youth offenders and the punishment that they were sentenced to after being processed through the current laws used by the Juvenile Court System.
In this article, the author clearly illustrates an appeal to authority by displaying a rational tone that isn’t offensive and the author appears to be personally knowledgeable about the subject matter making his views creditable. The author also clearly expresses a genuine concern for the subject matter being discussed and offers suggestions on how to correct the problem illustrated in the claim.
In paragraph 11 Humes stated: “We can keep tinkering with the laws so we can ship more and younger children to adult court, but this does nothing to return juvenile courts to their original mission: to deal with young people before they become hardened criminals.? I believe that Humes is trying to express a concern that most people have surrounding youth crime which is the fact that we don’t want to send children to adult jail so that they can learn to become better criminals. I also agree with Humes with the respect that there is a need to correct how we punish children that commit adult crimes.
The age that a teenager can be tried, as an adult in most states is 16 in some states they are trying to lower the age to 14. I can see how this is important due to a growing number of murders committed by juveniles but this law doesn’t protect juveniles that commit petty crimes such as theft and burglary. I don’t believe that we need to soften the punishment for juvenile offenders but I do believe that in some cases the juveniles can be rehabilitated with the proper direction set up by the courts.
In this article, the author’s appeal to emotion is that of concern and sadness for the juveniles that are processed through the court system without a second thought as to what will become of these young offenders. I personally believe that something needs to be done about how the court handles these youngsters and how they are processed.
This only added to my emotional response that the author leads the reader to feel and made me feel as though I should be personally involved in correcting what is wrong with the Juvenile Justice System. We need to consider whether we are out to teach them a lesson against committing crimes or turning them into better criminals by locking them up in adult prisons. The author gave alarming statistics that appealed to my emotion as a reader in paragraphs 10 and 11.
In both paragraphs, the author cited examples and used statistics to shock the reader’s emotional response to the article. The authors? appeal to logic is an argument from causation. Which he illustrates by comparing the cause which would be the harsh punishment of juveniles to the effect which would be how they become the predators that we fear they will become from spending time in adult prisons. I agree with the authors? views from this form of logic because the effect or outcome is a hardened criminal.
From personal experience dealing with a stepsister that has been in and out of the Juvenile Courts since the age of 12, I have found Hume’s views to be correct. My sister is currently doing time in upstate Virginia for three felonies. I do not believe that placing her in such places as TDH has taught her the true meaning of life.
I believe that with the help she could have bettered herself and finished school. However, because of her repeated offenses, she was taken away from her parents, who did nothing to better her outlook on life and put her in a place where all she can learn is how to become a better criminal.
I had no other choice but to disassociate myself from her violent criminal behavior and allow the court to punish her the way they saw fit. However, I disagreed with the way she was sentenced because of her age and the crimes she was convicted for. I believe that with supervision and strict regulations she could have made something of her life but now I only fear that when she is released she will only come out a hardened criminal that knows nothing about life other than a life of crime because it is the only way she has been taught to survive in society.
In conclusion Humes belief that societies need to punish young criminals to the furthest extent of the law only teaches them to become better adult criminals is correct. The solution to solving this problem can only be addressed by lawmakers that pass laws regarding juvenile offenders.
In paragraph 13 Humes proposes the following questions regarding youth crime by stating: “How do we save first-time offenders from lives of crime? How do we turn the best of our legal profession toward saving children?? From those questions, Humes states: “Only when we deal with these issues will we start to “crackdown” on juvenile crime.?
I believe that until our government develops a more concentrated system for punishing young criminals we will have more children that are lost in the Juvenile Justice System. I personally feel that without a proper system of government that looks into rehabilitation and supervision for first-time lightweight juvenile criminals we will end up with an entire generation of hardened criminals running loose in America.
Essay 7 – Do Drugs Cause Youth Violence?
I believe that youth violence in America is somewhat due to the use of drugs, but not entirely. Although drugs are known to reduce violent behavior, I do not believe they are the routes of violence among American teens. I think that kids can be violent in the absence of drugs.
While under the influence of alcohol, one cannot understand the difference between what is wrong and what is right. They believe they are at a much more powerful level than they actually are. Emotions are much more prominent after someone has been drinking, and this may lead to random outbursts upon anyone near. I’ve witnessed anonymous members of my family perform similar acts.
The more dangerous drugs, such as methamphetamine, heroin, L.S.D, P.C.P, crack-cocaine, etc. are more likely to cause acts of violence over the obtainment of such substances rather than that of the users under the influence themselves. Such acts are done more among an older range of users not exactly in the youth category.
Less dangerous drugs such as marijuana, cigarettes, caffeine, tobacco, etc. cause more damage to the user than anyone else and most likely will not lead to violent acts. Some may help in administering violent ideas, but not in acting out violent acts.
Based on the information I’ve gathered, I think that around 30% of youth violence in America is connected with drug use in some way. All and All I believe violence among kids is more of mental health or household-related issue rather than drug use. I’m not promoting drugs or anything, I just don’t think they are connected.
In my opinion, I don’t think it really matters whether or not drugs are legalized. No matter what happens, people will always be taking drugs. It’s more of a personal decision than anything else, I mean there is no law stating you cannot cut yourself.
But once someone is at the stage when he or she is endangering others and not themselves is when it becomes a real issue. The best way I believe drugs should be dealt with is the same as alcohol. If people want to hurt themselves, that’s their problem.
Young teenagers must get the message that violence will not be tolerated in our academic institutes, that these violent acts will be met with the severest reprimands. Some people believe that enforcing harsher penalties on young offenders is not a good idea as current laws are more effective. Many parents resent the fact that they should be held responsible in many situations.
Stricter rules should be placed on young offenders who break the law. Young offenders who commit violent crimes should be tried as adults. Many young offenders feel that they can get away with a slap on the wrist for violent crimes.
One in 12 high schoolers is threatened or injured with a weapon each year. If you’re between the ages of 12 and 24, you face the highest risk of being the victim of violence. Statistics show that by the early 1990s the incidence of violence caused by young people reached unparalleled levels. There is no single explanation for the overall rise in youth violence.
Self-esteem and Morale values should be taught at home and reinforced at school, by rewarding children who show positive attitudes. Rational persuasion is thus the foundation of peaceful coexistence. Early education about violence should be also taught in our educational institutes. Schools need to encourage individual, independent judgment and to provide factual knowledge and reasoning skills.
Effective strategies include school-based curricula that emphasize the development of problem-solving skills, anger management, and other strategies that help kids develop social skills. In addition, parenting programs that promote strong bonding between parents and children and that teach parents skills in managing conflict in the family, as well as mentoring programs for young people.
The parents should be held responsible for the children who repeatedly break the rules and parental involvement should be made mandatory when a child is showing signs of violent behavior. The parents should be forced to take more interest in the well-being of the child.
Teachers and school faculty should be better trained to notice potential problems developing in students. A support system should be put in place for students so when an individual child feels threatened; they have someone they can approach in confidence. It’s too late to save some teenage violence victims, but it’s not too late to save future victims of teenage rage and violence.
To curb our youth violence we must take a more detailed view of the crimes committed. Combined with early intervention methods and education. Teens need to understand that the consequences of their actions will lead to serious penalties. This would hopefully make them think twice before being involved in violent acts.
Juvenile violence is increasing fear in our country. Aggression, as defined in webster’s online dictionary, is the “ extreme, troubled or angry and often harmful act or effort of (personal ) power so as to injure or abuse. ” There is the growing knowledge that there is a constant increase in aggression amongst today’s young, and with the increased care, gets some sources of blame for their actions, However, all but one are simply excuses.
There is the need for hard evidence to help the process of hostility and violence in young Today Tragic events like these shots in Columbine High School capture national attention and fear, but are not typical of youth violence. Most teenage homicides are committed inside cities and outside of education.
They most often require a social conflict and a single person. Typically, six or seven youths are slain in the country every day. Most of these represent inner-city number youths.
This study examines The wide range of aggression including child abuse and neglect by caregivers, youth violence, aggression by intimate partners, sexual violence, adult abuse, suicide, and collective violence. One section is dedicated to each of these seven issues. This study also includes the statistical annex with people and location information derived from those WHO rates and Morbidity information and the list of resources for violence prevention.
Juvenile violence is an unfavorable childhood experience and is related to different kinds of aggression, including child abuse and neglect, adolescent dating violence, individual sexual partner violence, sexual violence, and suicide. Other kinds of aggression take a common risk and protective factors, and victims of one kind of violence are more likely to have Different forms of aggression.