[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.H I P H O P M AT T E R SPrevention Act of 1998 or what was more commonly referred to asProposition 21.The measures approved by Californians were by farthe nation’s toughest on juvenile oƒenders.Among other thingsProposition 21 allowed prosecutors rather than judges to decidewhether a young person would be tried as an adult, reduced confi-dentiality protections for juvenile oƒenders, increased penalties for gang-related crimes, allowed police to wire-tap suspected gang mem-bers, and deemed $400 worth of property damage a felony—essen-tially making some youthful pranks and indiscretions a more serious oƒense.The changes mandated by Prop 21 were not simply sweeping, theywere radical.At its core Prop 21 represented a stunning philosophical break from longstanding ideas and approaches to dealing with way-ward youth, many of whom suƒered as much from poverty, brokenfamilies, inadequate education, and mental health problems as they did any personal or moral defect.For more than a century and a half the nation’s juvenile justicesystem was based on the idea that if properly cared for, instructed, and treated, young oƒenders could be rescued from a life of crimeand self-destructive behavior.What clearly distinguished juvenile justice was the idea that young people should be treated diƒerently from adult oƒenders.Most juvenile justice operations emphasizededucation, job training, and counseling as ways to rehabilitate and prepare youth for an eventual return to their community.Butthroughout the 1980s and 1990s that philosophy came under increas-ing attack as media portrayals of juvenile crime became more graphic and sensational, and politicians realized that by standing up against crime, they could gain support from an electorate that tended to be older, whiter, and more a~uent than the youth often targeted bytougher crime laws.Proponents of a harsher juvenile justice system asserted that previous models were outdated and needed serious up-grading to deal with the modern youth oƒender.Amazingly, even as politicians and the state District Attorney’sassociation rallied support for Prop 21, California’s statistics from166 [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
zanotowane.pl doc.pisz.pl pdf.pisz.pl przylepto3.keep.pl
.H I P H O P M AT T E R SPrevention Act of 1998 or what was more commonly referred to asProposition 21.The measures approved by Californians were by farthe nation’s toughest on juvenile oƒenders.Among other thingsProposition 21 allowed prosecutors rather than judges to decidewhether a young person would be tried as an adult, reduced confi-dentiality protections for juvenile oƒenders, increased penalties for gang-related crimes, allowed police to wire-tap suspected gang mem-bers, and deemed $400 worth of property damage a felony—essen-tially making some youthful pranks and indiscretions a more serious oƒense.The changes mandated by Prop 21 were not simply sweeping, theywere radical.At its core Prop 21 represented a stunning philosophical break from longstanding ideas and approaches to dealing with way-ward youth, many of whom suƒered as much from poverty, brokenfamilies, inadequate education, and mental health problems as they did any personal or moral defect.For more than a century and a half the nation’s juvenile justicesystem was based on the idea that if properly cared for, instructed, and treated, young oƒenders could be rescued from a life of crimeand self-destructive behavior.What clearly distinguished juvenile justice was the idea that young people should be treated diƒerently from adult oƒenders.Most juvenile justice operations emphasizededucation, job training, and counseling as ways to rehabilitate and prepare youth for an eventual return to their community.Butthroughout the 1980s and 1990s that philosophy came under increas-ing attack as media portrayals of juvenile crime became more graphic and sensational, and politicians realized that by standing up against crime, they could gain support from an electorate that tended to be older, whiter, and more a~uent than the youth often targeted bytougher crime laws.Proponents of a harsher juvenile justice system asserted that previous models were outdated and needed serious up-grading to deal with the modern youth oƒender.Amazingly, even as politicians and the state District Attorney’sassociation rallied support for Prop 21, California’s statistics from166 [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]