Reviewers note, the social and cultural outlook changed significantly since the early 1900s when juvenile justice system were founded. The availability of narcotics, gangs, and guns has taken juveniles to commit numerous of illegal acts from serious crimes to murder. The critics are adamant juvenile systems are no longer sufficient to addressing issues caused by violent, unethical adolescents (Net Industries, 2012). A few debate the seeming clemency of the juvenile system composites its breakdown to rehabilitate by communicating to the youth that he or she can deter serious outcomes for his or her illegal acts. The juvenile justice system creates a revolving-door method sending the message that juvenile delinquents are not held accountable for his or actions. Until the repeat offenders land into the adult justice system, he or she faces reality for punishment the first time. Therefore, this may be a better an alternative to penalize a delinquent possibly deter future criminal acts (Net Industries, 2012). It has been also criticized, how wrong for juveniles who commit violent acts to be released from the jurisdiction of the juvenile court system at the age of 18 or 21. Only serving a few years in a juvenile delinquent facility for a crime if committed by an adult would have a 10-year sentence is unfair. The penalty for a crime, critics debated, should be the same despite of age of the offender (Net Industries, 2012). The critics challenge the system, saying it should be “dismantled” because of the deficiencies. Young offenders should be given complete Due Process rights, involving the right to trial by jury, the same as adult offenders. At liberty from the juvenile system’s rehabilitative concepts and limitations on criminal due process rights. To add, young offenders should be held accountable for his or her illegal acts. Once a delinquent is