Even though the YCJA is current technique and it is over a decade old, people are starting to wonder: is it really the most efficacious way of dealing with young offenders?
13 years ago, on April 1st, 2003 the YCJA came into effect. It deals with teenaged criminals from 12 to under 18 years of age. Yes, our current way works, but not extremely well; for the ages are not broad enough, the punishments offered are not resulting in the right message; the youth are not learning from their mistakes, and that results in them not being prepared for the future responsibility that awaits them in adulthood.

At 12 years old, you could commit a crime at face at least some sort of punishment. But what if you are 10, 11, or younger? We need to have a way …show more content…
As of now, the statistics show that around 32, 000 youth have completed court cases every year in Canada alone. It is the older half of the adolescents, male and female, that are more likely to appear in court. They are closer to adulthood than anyone else protected. The most common crimes include theft, break and enter, common assault, and mischief. In the meantime, the average sentences given out have probation at number one, followed by community service then custody. (Stats Canada) In 2014, a chart posted by the government shows that youth aged 12-17 were the most accused, while young adults aged 18-24 came in second. In some cases, the number of teens accused almost doubled the young adult category. Females have the number of repeat offenders very close and sometimes above the one-time committers. (Stats Canada) For males, it’s more. They are double and sometimes triple the number of female offenders in Canada for every type of crime. If we offer more types of sentences available to the youth of Canada, then they might actually learn something rather than doing hours of community service. If they spend some time in a place similar to prison or jail, then they might have a change of heart due to the conditions. When you are doing something community service you don't necessarily take anything to heart, especially if you …show more content…
In the end, it would be them who takes the blame and there would be too much pressure on the child. What if in the time ahead they’re arrested for something, just like they once were in their childhood. They now are eligible to have their information released, they waltz into court thinking that the same sort of mindset as they had as a child. Being a youth is far, far different from an adult, and parents are constantly telling their children lessons. If we are taught about everything from jobs, taxes, school, etc. then why shouldn't we throw crime and the consequences it comes with into the mix as well? In September 2016, a 12-year-old Alberta boy was arrested and plead guilty for chasing a peer with a knife and demanding money from him. (Global News) His sentence? The judge sentenced him to play basketball, 5 hours a week at the least. He told the jurist that his life goal was to play basketball, even though he wasn't on a team or owned a ball. This sort of forfeit doesn't “heal” or help the kid. What is he supposed to learn from that? It isn't stopping him from committing another crime in the future with that sentence. If anything, it would encourage him. “Oh, I can get away with this easily. What can I do next?” He announced that he didn't have a basketball, and Judge Derek Redman said that would be taken care of, making the court sheriff get him one. (The Star) This is