court system not treating juveniles as adults has been debated since the creation of the judiciary system. One hundred years ago, when progressive era reformers first invented the idea of a separate justice system for juveniles, it was for boys who made mistakes in their youth that reflected the judgment of an immature adolescent. In today's world however, courts not only have to deal with the "Mickey mouse" crimes executed by rambunctious youths, but cold-blooded, violent crimes that may even be deserving of capital punishment in the adult court system. American society likes to use the common phrase "what is in the best interest of the child" when justifying the punishment they deploy on juvenile delinquents. The fact is lots of people don't really think that way, they think what is the safest and easiest way to deal with these children, without absolutely destroying their lives. Children incarcerated as adults are thrown in jail for their mistakes, live out their childhood with hardcore criminals, and are thrown into society with no education and no social skills, being expected to begin a new reformed life. Children who have the opportunity to enter crime prevention and or rehabilitation programs can straighten themselves out, learn why they do the things they do, and then are returned to their social situations at least have a chance and the know how to begin a semi-normal, legitimate adult life. Of coarse there are pros and cons to both ways juvenile crime can be dealt with, and it is very hard to distinguish which is better. .
If juveniles are tried and punished along the same standards as adults, there is a good chance that their future occupation will be a hardened criminal. If more money is spent on government programs like rehabilitation centers, community centers, and mentor programs designed for these juvenile offenders many could be produced into respectable, law-abiding adults.