nalty or not. Although the difference often consists of just a few short years, it is those years which make all the difference. Often its deterrent effect and costs are greatly affected by age and maturity. In fact, most theories and reasons for supporting the death penalty are flawed when applying them to juveniles. The debate over whether or not the death penalty is an effective deterrent is likely to continue as long as it is in place. However, its deterrent effect towards juveniles is more obvious. There are several reasons why the death penalty does not deter children. The death penalty has a very unique effect on juveniles. It has now become an ineffective means of deterring crime while in some cases actually acting as an incentive for crime.The first reason the death penalty is an ineffective tool for law enforcement is because it has to do with the hypocrisy surrounding the policy. Because the state is actively taking part in killing, the death penalty is seen as hypocritical by juveniles. It is of course, hard to believe that juveniles not murder when they regularly see it being done by the government with the apparent approval of society. This was supported when Victor Strieb a dean and Professor of Law at Ohio Northern University, stated that "Now they see government officials struggling with a problem of their own, a person whose behavior is unacceptable to them. How do government officials solve their problem? They kill or execute the person who is causing the problem. Is it wrong to kill someone to solve a problem?... It is akin to a lecture to children about the evils of smoking being delivered by a lecturer who is puffing on a cigarette." (Strieb, pg. 245)The next reason the death penalty is an ineffective tool for Law Enforcement deals with the lack of maturity that most juveniles show. Every juvenile is dealing with enormous amounts of stress everyday. It is these pressures that affect the deterrent effect of the juve...
