In England and Wales the legal age definitions for youth criminals are aged 10 to 17. The uncertainty remains when childhood is left behind and adulthood is achieved. As said before they are biological and psychological factors but there may and will in most young persons life be experienced at different ages.



Why are images of youth crime so influential?

Firstly, because of visibility of youth crime. Young lifestyles make their offending more visible, more often met in streets or public places, therefore more likely to get caught by public, police etc.

Secondly, public concerns over wider social factors: the break up of the family; dissolution of community; dwindling influence of key figures of socialisation – parents, teachers and police. Thirdly and the most significantly, mass media which can create moral panic and exaggerate ideas. Personal violent crimes account for less than 10% of all recorded crime and the British papers devote 60% of material to crime. Stereotypical images released to society, groups become labelled.

Typical crime events are contrasted with visions of the normal world. Media does not simply reflect reality but defines it in a particular way – to prolong events. It creates a moral panic by sensationalising youth crime. Emotive language is used. In much media and political debate the terms ‘teenage’, ‘adolescence’, ‘youth’ and ‘generation’ have been trapped in a negative discourse to describe a condition, or period of transition, which is considered both troubled and troublesome.

The last, the luminosity of youth. Youth is a period of transition from fray innocent childhood to the social maturity of adulthood. Luminal describes something that is at the borders, neither one thing nor another. Youth is positioned in grey border between childhood and adulthood, such border areas are seen as parts of potential threat. Youth find themselves in an area outside of both groups and this can be very threatening.

Does youth crime differ from crime committed by other age groups?

The main difference is obviously the age, some argue that the youth are impressive and immature therefore, they don’t really understand the true meaning of what she/he is doing. Others argue that the youth no matter what age should know the difference between right and wrong, and should know exactly what she/he is doing. When committing a crime you know whatever age you are, that it you are breaking the law. Some say that younger criminals are easier to reform; whereas older criminals are set in their ways and are often harder to reform. Suppose you could say that youths can be saved, as they are not fully formed by adults, therefore they may be rehabilitated. Also their justifications for committing the crime are usually far from the same. For example, an adult offender could be committing the crime such as burglary to get money for drugs etc whereas a youth could be doing it for fun or out of boredom.

The youth crime wave is a myth. Only 3.9% of young people are involved in the juvenile justice system. Seventy percent of those never re-offend but the 30% that do re-offend do it within 2 years.

Contrary to the popular opinion being manufactured by the media, young people do not constitute the largest category of serious offenders.

The myth of crime wave is part of a broader ideological offensive that aims to promote the family as solely responsible for the social security of young people, the unemployed, the elderly and the sick.

Solutions to youth crimes are far from being found. Many have been suggested; real solutions to crime will only come with real solutions to the problems that cause it. A starting point would be creating real jobs, significantly increasing publicly funded youth and community services and providing a guaranteed living income for all.