Devil’s Advocate
Should there be harsher punishments for young offenders to discourage offending?
FOR Grace Drinan arsher punishments such as increased jail sentences and fines will discourage criminal behaviour in young offenders. As young people value their liberty, the threat of jail time may significantly decrease criminal activity in the demographic. Additionally, as young people often have less means to pay fines, as they are less likely to have full time work, with only 47% of respondents to a 2017 survey having a full-time job. Because an inability to pay a fine can lead to a short period of imprisonment, large fines may discourage reoffending. These measures can act as a deterrence for potential criminal activity in the first instance, or even recidivist behaviour. For example, serious driving offences, such as dangerous driving occasioning death or grievous bodily harm are punished by prison time, and less serious, strict liability driving offences such as speeding are punished by an on the spot fine. These fines issued by police officers would also be harsher on young people, who may not have the means to pay such a fine. This may stop them from offending in the future. Furthermore, this is also relevant in the current COVID-19 climate. In order to deter citizens from breaking restrictions, on the spot fines can be handed out by police. These were largely handed out to young people, who accounted for more than half the fines from March 17 to June 28. These fines are more likely to deter young people from going outside and breaking restrictions, than more lenient penalties, especially considering young people were more likely to lose their job in the pandemic. Harsher punishments for young offenders will prevent recidivism, especially for summary offences. Statistics show that young people are more likely to
H
10 | The Brief
reoffend when convicted of less severe offences such as unlawful entry. Summary offences are the least serious and as such result in less severe penalties. However, according to a BOCSAR report from 2005-2015, 90% of young offenders reoffended for those convicted of unlawful entry. This signifies that more lenient punishments for less serious offences are unsuccessful at discouraging young people from reoffending. This suggests that there should be harsher penalties for these types of crimes to deter young offenders. This is especially the case consider these young people are much more likely to commit summary offences than serious indictable offences. Harsher punishments for young offenders will reflect community expectations. This is evident in the UK case of the death of James Bulger where community outcry at the violent nature of the crime prompted harsh punishments for the two young offenders, aged 10. Whilst community response is not the most effective deterrent for criminal behaviour, it is something to consider as community values are so integral to the criminal justice system. Although non-legal mechanisms are also recommended to deter young people from committing crimes, such as education, harsher punishments are the best way to deter young people from criminal behaviour. Harsher punishments can directly impact their liberty, a commodity that young people value highly. While young offenders should not face the same punishments, as adults as it has been recognised, they have decreased cognitive function and ongoing brain development, harsher punishments are necessary. Harsher punishments will prevent young offenders from perpetuating a life of crime and are effective deterrent measures.
Ed.1 2021
