Let's talk about race!

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

The United States Supreme Court recently ruled that it is unconstitutional for juvenile offenders to be sentenced to life sentences without parole in cases not involving murder. The question of juvenile offenders is a very complicated subject. Whether or not to try them as adults is often dependent upon the judgment of the particular psychologist that works for the Court, but sometimes it comes down to statutory requirements with automatic adult sentencing for certain crimes. In this way the deliberation of the jury is colored by the very question of their age, when in other cases a legal adult may receive a certain measure of grace. Any leniency for a child who has been scientifically condemned to a possibly harsher punishment is preempted by the fact that the jury cannot consider him or her a child. At the very least, the ruling of the Court on this matter produces a chilling effect on any such consideration. We are, in effect, levying harsher punishment upon our children than we are our adults- adults who are otherwise considered more culpable. This is a terribly irony.

On the other hand, the general thinking in society today is that adolescents are almost, if not completely, equal to adults in moral consideration. Teenagers are expected to exhibit the same level of moral thinking as any adult, and we are averse to accepting age as a shield against “proper” punishment. Complicating the issue further is that minority youth are tried as adults at incredibly high rates. African-American youth aged 10 to 17 form 15% of their age group, while accounting for 52% of youths subjected to adult sentencing guidelines. This is a 1 in 2 chance that as a minority youth, you will be judged as an adult. It no longer seems like a question of science, but a decision of fate.

Developmental psychology already has an obvious role to play in this issue. Enforcement rates for urban populations far outstrip police activity in suburban and wealthier areas. This inadvertently criminalizes entire populations disproportionately, and leads to inbred cultural biases against minority youth. The least educated, least wealthy and least fed of our nation are subjected to harsher standards. Furthermore, a minority youth who grows up in a gang culture will learn the morals of that culture.

Developmental psychology can study the effects of violent gangs on minority youth, and offer guidance to our justice system on how best to handle the problem of adult sentencing. It can also study the effects of hyper-criminalization upon youth psychology. Charges of “reverse discrimination” are illogical concerning this issue. Non-minority youth would not be tried as adults at a greater rate as a result of this proposal. The “special treatment” such a program would entail is simply the neutralization of the de facto special treatment they are already receiving as minority youth; minority youth who are seen as more culpable than others because they are black.

Comments

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

Personally, I bring race into it because I don't want to see black kids seen as ruthless thugs while white kids are seen as "misguided" or "confused" or "ill".

[dukexmachismo.livejournal.com]

Or the criminal justice system is. ;)

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

Where I live it's the brown kids that are ruthless thugs. Where my in-laws live it's the white kids, it's all a matter of perspective I guess.

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

Because he wants to get to 300 comments.

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

I think you're arguing at the wrong point of failure of the system. The reason more minority kids get sentenced for horrible crimes is because people in poverty are more likely to join gangs and do horrible things. Once they're in the gang slinging crack and shooting people, we've already failed though.

It's not a sentencing problem, it's a poverty problem.

[torpidai.livejournal.com]

It's not a sentencing problem, it's a poverty problem.

Agreed, though having said that, so many in other nations are in dire poverty too, yet their kids don't get into this sort of mire, and hell, the crime rates are real low, though in all fairness the whole commune is illegal, that 1Sq mile of India that is slumland, it sure don't look like prime real estate land, but soon will be, and to my mind, when the bulldozers come, there will be much more unemployment for a while.

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

I agree that a fundamental problem is a social issue.

[tridus.livejournal.com]

Well, that raises a question about the numbers. If you look at similar crimes, what are the rates then?

If the numbers are skewed because one group is being charged with murder more and the other is being charged with vandalism, that's one thing. It's another thing entirely if an urban/minority youth faces adult sentences more often then a suburban/white youth for the same crime.

That rate seems way too high in general though. Adult sentences should only be used for repeat offenders or extreme cases. In this case it seems more like someone wants to be "tough on crime"® by treating people like adults who really aren't adults. (And we know teenagers aren't fully matured yet, that's why we don't let them drive, drink, or go to war until various age milestones. Teenagers will do stupid things, most of the time that doesn't mean they're hardened criminals incapable of living within the law.)

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

You still can't look at the crimes without the context. If someone burgles a store at gunpoint, its a pretty serious crime, but if they're just some poor shmuck thinking they found a way to get an easy up(lets say he was black), as opposed to a gang member(lets say he's white) who may or may not also be the suspect in a few other things, is quite unrepentant and otherwise a disaster to their community, the leniancy of the court is going to be different.

Also often in cases, they'll drop other charges if the person pleads guilty to a lesser charge which they take the max time for, so in cases where the person also did a lot of vandalizing, terrorizing, etc, they may have bargained to only take the threatening with a deadly weapon and theft charges and got the max sentence where someone who only walked in and pointed a gun may end up with that charge but be able to bargain it down to a lesser sentence.

What we area dealing with is a cultural issue of certain areas of poverty that the larger population has turned their shoulder to.

[mrbogey.livejournal.com]

You're probably gonna hate this, but this is me agreeing with you on this subject.

The system is not logical. It picks up and drops charges on a whim based upon the desires of the prosecutor. There may be bias and there may not be. But it's hard to do a charge only comparison because the whole trial system gives weight to specific details.

I've seen cases where prosecutors nail perps who've only been jailed once or twice harder than other repeat criminals because the perp is suspected in more crimes so he was vigorously pursued while the other was just passed through the system and given a minimum sentence.

[mrbogey.livejournal.com]

Offensive!

[korean-guy-01.livejournal.com]

African American and minorities aren't equivalent.

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

The sky is blue, except when it isn't.

[korean-guy-01.livejournal.com]

The sky is blue, the sky is everything but white.

Developmental bias

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

One of our students works with urban youth who tend to act violently when pushed or prodded. One of them asked him if he hit anyone. He admitted to having hit and fought others before he grew out of it. As an adult, he couldn't see using violence as a way to address a problem. It simply didn't make sense. Developmental psychologists fail to see the immaturity of violent conduct because they have yet to outgrow their own violent tendencies.

Re: Developmental bias

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

wat?

"I knew a guy."

Cool story bro.