Should the age for general criminal responsibility be raised from 17?

Question

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

Favoring raising of the age:
• The Supreme Court has ruled that the death penalty cannot be imposed on persons under 18; age consistency across all offenses is desirable.
• The federal justice system, the District of Columbia, and 38 states set 18 as the age of responsibility. Texas is out of step with the bulk of American jurisdictions.
• Voting, purchase of alcoholic beverages, entering into contracts, and many other thresholds into adulthood that require mature decision-making mandate an age greater than 17, often 21.
• Persons who are 17 may not have graduated from high school yet. Their brains and their ability to control their impulses are still under development.

Opposing raising of the age:
• As a practical matter, few persons age 17 or 18 are convicted of felonies and go to prison. Most youthful offenders either commit petty offenses or are granted probation. Only about 300 of the 148,500 inmates in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice are 18 years old or younger. If the age of responsibility were raised to 18, one would not expect a substantial number of offenders actually receiving prison sentences.
• Current law already establishes a process for trying in the adult system particularly violent offenders who commit crimes when under 17 years of age.
• There is no evidence to suggest that raising the age of responsibility would enhance the traditional purposes of the criminal law.