Criminals under the age of 25 shouldn't be jailed.....

[Skyedriver]

as they have not yet matured

But they can drive a car
Join the Forces and be trained to kill
Marry
Vote

[Dont Panic]

Can I go and change my age I wonder?
Id like to be under 25 again itd have many advantages and I could commit so much crime.

[XCP]

Most criminals are under 25. Who is saying that they shouldn't be jailed?

[bristolbaron]

Dont Panic said:

Can I go and change my age I wonder?
Id like to be under 25 again itd have many advantages and I could commit so much crime.

You don’t have to change your age, as long as you identify as a 24yo you’re fine!

[98elise]

Skyedriver said:

as they have not yet matured

But they can drive a car
Join the Forces and be trained to kill
Marry
Vote

Who is saying they have not matured?

At 25 I had already joined the forces, completed a 4 year apprenticeship, run a section on a warship, left the forces having done 8 years service, met my now wife, and bought a house.

If I had commited a crime I could hardly plead I was just an immature kid!

[hairy vx220]

By 25 I had an engineering degree, bought a flat, car, steady girlfriend (with a physics degree).

That is b0ll0cks.

[slightlyoldgit]

I had founded a company, f**ked up and started again by 25!

So this is utter tripe...

[The Mad Monk]

98elise said:

Who is saying they have not matured?

At 25 I had already joined the forces, completed a 4 year apprenticeship, run a section on a warship, left the forces having done 8 years service, met my now wife, and bought a house.

If I had commited a crime I could hardly plead I was just an immature kid!

You left school when you were 13?

[Pesty]

The Mad Monk said:

You left school when you were 13?

Perhaps the apprenticeship was in the forces.


They can decide to block puberty and chop their cocks off but should not be jailed.
Hmmm

[98elise]

The Mad Monk said:

98elise said:

Who is saying they have not matured?

At 25 I had already joined the forces, completed a 4 year apprenticeship, run a section on a warship, left the forces having done 8 years service, met my now wife, and bought a house.

If I had commited a crime I could hardly plead I was just an immature kid!

You left school when you were 13?

The apprenticeship was within the forces. The events are in chronological order.

At 25 I was just starting my second career.

[anonymous-user]

I would not be surprised to see a significant overlap in those that believe this and also want to extend voting to 16.

[Reciprocating mass]

Just sounds like another excuse to not lock up criminals to me. we do enough of that already

[Olas]

Age is not material here, the extent of the crme is material.


over 25 driving at 41mph in a 40 limit? no prison.
under 25 and a prolific serial killer? prison.

[pequod]

Olas said:

Age is not material here, the extent of the crme is material.


over 25 driving at 41mph in a 40 limit? no prison.
under 25 and a prolific serial killer? prison.

An under 25 year old 'prolific serial killer' definitely shouldn't be in prison ... stood against a wall and shot would be my preferred sentence for such people. Same goes for whatever age of murderer, serial or not, but particularly if they are prolific.

Am I wrong or should we simply accept locking them up for life is enough 'punishment' for such crimes?

[vikingaero]

Skyedriver said:

as they have not yet matured

But they can drive a car
Join the Forces and be trained to kill
Marry
Vote

Murder
Rape

Maybe those who have this point of view should have the Murderers and multiple rapists living with them? Thought not.

[Gerradi]

Skyedriver said:

as they have not yet matured

But they can drive a car
Join the Forces and be trained to kill
Marry
Vote

The one you left out , whichto my mind is the most frightening of all.
They can become parents?!!

[anonymous-user]

Having at least one child by 25 would have been fairly normal 50 years ago. My mum had her first (me) at 29 and that was considered quite old. Now it would be considered young.

If I could have my time over again I would certainly leave school at 16 and have started a family by 30.

[Derek Smith]

There's a lot of argument that convicted offenders under the age of 25 should not be automatically sent to adult prisons. This has been ongoing for years.

The theory is that up to 25 (and beyond a bit come to that) there's an opportunity to deflect and cut recidivism.

Sending them to adult prisons increases the chances of recidivism considerably.

This might be what the strangely absent OP meant. If so, then I agree.

[vikingaero]

They don't go to adult prisons. Young offenders start off in Secure Childrens Homes up to 13, then Secure Training Centres 13-17, from 15 onwards more serious offenders go to 1 of 4 YOI's, up to 18 years. From 18 they go on to adult or HMPYOI's

[anonymous-user]

Derek Smith said:

There's a lot of argument that convicted offenders under the age of 25 should not be automatically sent to adult prisons. This has been ongoing for years.

The theory is that up to 25 (and beyond a bit come to that) there's an opportunity to deflect and cut recidivism.

Sending them to adult prisons increases the chances of recidivism considerably.

This might be what the strangely absent OP meant. If so, then I agree.

Its a rubbish arguement. I can't see any reason why going to an adult jail would increase any risk of reoffending, probably the opposite. Young offenders are all about proving a point, they aren't old enough to truly consider a future. Ultimately the prison system as a whole is failing anyway, its not about rehabilitation its about punishment, and its punishing the type of people that don't care or view it as a deterrent. Instead of fannying around trying to change things like what age constitutes an adult the government should be investing more time and money into understanding why people are going down the paths they have chosen and working with them to try and change things, otherwise the same people will stay in the circuit of crime - prison - release - crime etc