Youth Criminal Justice Act

[ºReFº]

Alright,

Well, the Youth Criminal Justice Act is a document of the Canadian Government and next week in Law I'm doing a debate representing the youth themselves, my opponents will be those representing different types of people (social workers, child services, youth groups, etc.) The argument itself is whether or not the Act is too harsh on the youth or too lenient, representing the youth themselves my view is neutral and my job is to rebut any arguments others bring fourth.

Anyone have any thoughts on that really, anything that may help me out?

[BFM_Hydra]

Ref,

From what I have seen, it would be hard to argue your side - that the sanctions are too harsh. The rights and freedoms of the youths are protected extensively under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Unless they've all been overridden by a parliamentary law lately - I don't pay THAT much attention to Canadian politics ). Although this goes for adults as well. Children also appear to have extra privacy laws which apply to them which ARE an Act of Parliament which protects them even further from harm in the community.

The sanctions themselves appear to be quite lenient, with many of them revolving around their rights as minors.

However, you could argue the following;

• That minors (under the age of 18 and over the age of 12) should not be subject to having their names and pictures released to and published to the media, as this can have a denigrative affect on their future employment, schooling, and life objectives. However, your opposition may say that those who commit heinous crimes such as murder should be "named and shamed". In Australia under 18s cannot have their names or photos released and published to the media.
• That those people aged under 18 should never have to be tried in the adult judicial system, no matter how violent the crime committed. You could argue that it is not fair that those who have had little experience in understanding the law are brought before it's full force. Once again though, this could be easily struck down by your opposition, who can pose that age and background is taken into account when sentencing, and that the judges are trained to treat each case individually.
  

Sorry I couldn't be that much help...Good luck

[carl]

i am not from Canada but i have read a bit about this. this act seems to be perfectly in order.  nothing seems to harsh and nothing seems to lenient. the criminal act is the main point here.  if you say that the criminal act is in order then so is the youth act. and the criminal act does give sufficient punishment to whoever commits a crime.  Young persons, ages 12 to 17, may be charged with offences under the Criminal Code, are prosecuted in much the same way as adults under the Criminal Code, and are subject to the same laws of evidence. However, sentencing, procedure and evidence law are modified to some extent by the Youth Criminal Justice Act. these modifications simply make the punishment more child like and are less server.  the reduction of severity in the criminal act (thanks to the youth justice act) is not too much and not too little.  so in conclusion and in my opinion i believe that this act is just fine.  sorry this wasn't much help but this is my opinion and you might be able to pull something from it. 

[BFM_Hydra]

DOH!

You're playing the WHIP role! I didn't see the part about having a "neutral view" and "Rebut any arguments the opposition bring forth"

This makes it a little easier.

Things that could come up in the debate as main arguments/points...

• The youth of Canada know just as much about the law as the adults and should be treated the same, regardless of how old they are. [Too lenient]
• Parents/guardians should bare the responsibility of protecting their children, and, in doing so, also bare the responsibility of punishment for when they break the law.[Too lenient]
• Leniency for the youth in trial is encouraged with judges trained to acknowledge age, life experience and background in sentencing, as well as past offences. [Defence of leniency]
• Youths should not have their names and photos released the media if they break serious laws, such as murder or aggravated assault, as this is a breach of privacy and has an enormous affect on their future. (Eg. Employment) [Too harsh]
• What could also come up is that it is too lenient and ALL youth offenders should be named and shamed in the community. [Too lenient]
• Rather than criminal penalties we should consider and encourage other sanctions such as community service. [Too harsh]

Once again...good luck.

[ºReFº]

Alright, well the debate is tommorow and continues on wednesday. I, at this point believe those representing groups and agencies that believe the act is too harsh will be taken down easily, those who believe the act is too lenient will be a bit tougher.

Now if the opposition argues the act is too lenient:
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Critics of the YCJA felt it was too lenient and when the Conservative Harper government came into power in January 2006, it lobbied for harsher sentences, arguing that they would be a deterrent to would-be youth criminals and cut down on repeat offenders.
In June 2006, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled "since no basis can be found in the Youth Criminal Justice Act for imposing a harsher sanction than would otherwise be called for to deter others from committing crimes, general deterrence is not a principle of youth sentence under the new regime."

If this is an argument then we are underlying our entire justice system, particular to the supreme court of Canada, the highest court in Canada. Our court has made a ruling and this is not a debate on whether our justice system is corrupt.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
In our justice system, police have the choice depending on the circumstances of a crime and past police records to charge the individual or use extrajudicial measures. The act and our team representing the youth believe in second chances. If that second chance of trust is broken, police and crown attorney's take that into consideration when using discretion on whether to take extrajudicial measures. Repeat offenders and those who have not learned from there mistakes will be prosecuted.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Now if the opposition argues the act is too harsh:

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
The Youth Criminal Justice Act starts from the idea that young people should be held responsible for their actions, but that they are still children who make mistakes and should be given the opportunity to mature, learn from their mistakes, accept the consequences of their actions, and make amends. Thus, they should be treated differently from adults who are expected to understand and be fully accountable for their actions.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
There are ways of dealing with less serious offences that do not involve proceedings in Youth Justice Court. The police will assess your situation and they have some discretion about the way they handle your case. If you have not committed a serious offence the Youth Criminal Justice Act encourages the police to use what are called extrajudicial measures. These measures divert youth from the court process and keep them from having a youth record. Crown Attorneys also have the discretion to take into consideration extrajudicial measures.
YCJA encourages this:
• decide to take no further action against you, if the offence is minor and you have no previous dealings with the police.
• give you a verbal warning or caution. This will probably mean that the officer will talk to you about the impact of your actions on others, the consequences of your actions for you, and what will likely happen if you get into trouble again. The warning or caution may be placed in police records, so that if the police have to deal with you again, they will know that you have been warned before.
• refer you to different programs in the community if you agree.

There are many different programs and agencies that help youth, depending on the community where you live. Some examples include
•   recreation programs,
•   counselling for young people,
•   mental health agencies,
•   child welfare offices, or
•   youth justice committees.
Youth must agree that you would like to be referred to one of these agencies, and they may talk to a lawyer about it before they agree, thus showing that the YCJA is not too harsh and gives youth other opportunities.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
On April 1, 2003, the Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA) officially replaced the Young Offenders Act. It aims to emphasize the rehabilitation and re-entry of a young offender into society. The new act addresses the criticism that Canada's youth justice system lacked a clear philosophy, laying out a Declaration of Principles:

"The youth criminal justice system is to prevent crime by addressing the circumstances underlying a young person's offending behaviour, rehabilitate young persons who commit offences and reintegrate them back into society, and ensure that a young person is subject to meaningful consequences for his or her offences, in order to promote the long-term protection of the public."
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

I've got some facts ready for rebuttle, but they will be used when needed.

Now, does anyone have anything to say about my arguments or any further argument ideas?

P.S. Thanks Hydra and carl for replying

[carl]

your welcome.  i am very interested/knowledgeable of political and governmental issues.  your argument is well though out and i have nothing else to say and i wish you luck. 

[BFM_Hydra]

I think the rebuttal you have come up with there is outstanding. You use your evidence well to back up your arguments, which is very convincing.

When elaborating on your rebuttal though, make sure to encompass in their whole argument - like you have there - rather than focussing on each specific. If you can take down their arguments as a whole it is much more convincing.

ie.

If you want to take a down a tree, you chop it at the trunk. Don't take out the branches and leaves. The point is the trunk, with examples/statistics etc. being the branches and leaves.

I particularly like the way you have listed different sanctions available. Remember to mention that each case is handled individually. ie. Each person arrested/appearing before a court, etc. is subject to get a different sentence, depending on circumstances, past offences, potential of rehabilitation, etc. The reason I say mention this is because it is up to the trial judge to take in all information and decide what sanction/penalty best suits the crime committed. A penalty seen as "too harsh" or "too lenient" is only an opinion. The only person that knows ALL the facts is the judge and he/she can make the best decision based on those facts as he/she is trained to do.

Good job, Ref. Good luck You seem like you have enough information.

[BFM_Warlord]

I have found this entire topic to be very interesting and award you all for each of your distinctive efforts and advice.Very nice use of this board gentlemen and good luck.I do believe as they do you will ace it.You had all the answers yourself basically.It just never hurts to see anther persons point of view.A job well done I believe. Debates are always interesting and without them, were would most of us be now. 

[CazeZer]

A job able-bodied done I believe. Debates are consistently absorbing and after them, were would a lot of of us be now.


________________
California Criminal Defense Attorney

[Jenmark]

        I hope you post it what will happen in the debate.



________________
California Criminal Defense Attorney

[MrMxyzptlk]

Um... according to the opening sentence of his post, the debate ALREADY TOOK PLACE the first week of June....

 

[BFM_Edison]

Of last year, too, Mxy

[MrMxyzptlk]

Oh wow, yur right!!

Major necro-post then!!!