Should juvenile age be reduced to 16 from 18?

You must hate the sin, not the sinner.

Many people have recommended lowering of age for all crimes/keeping different juvenile age for different crimes.
We cannot simply suggest to lower the age if 

·         India has less no. of juvenile homes and less staff for it.

·         Juveniles form gangs inside the reform homes. Boys are severely beaten inside and several have claimed to have been sodomized by other inmates

      (If we are so concerned about juveniles, why send them in the company of hardened criminals? Do they not have same or even graver danger in their company?)

·         On many occasions, the minors bribe the security guards to obtain drugs

      (Are adults or security guards in adult prisons averse to taking bribes? )

The police are supposed to destroy the records of the juvenile after the completion of his/her sentence, and so juveniles can easily get away without a criminal record (This is the idea behind juvenile homes. To give a chance to the juvenile to reform and be able to start afresh as he has a long life ahead of him.)

The whole practice of juvenile homes started to give offenders of a lower age to have a chance to reform as most of them are naive and supposedly not mature enough to distinguish good from bad. Also, many are from unprivileged backgrounds. Juvenile homes are supposed to act as a rehab center for these juveniles and help them understand their duty towards the society. Just because ideal scenario does not exist, we should not be doing away this "golden chance" for the minor offenders.

Also, India is a signatory to the UN conventions and we have before us the juvenile age followed by different countries world over. Lets give some weight to the convention. Afterall, it was arrived at after enough deliberations by the experts having a much broader vision than us. Anyday, I will trust their wisdom more than the media-whipped frenzy.

Why live like a Pauper

Encouraged by reading so many posts on Quora pointing out how important it is to read books, I have been trying to keep that habit of mine going! J

These days am reading Benjamin Franklin’s autobiography by Walter Issacson.

And I stumbled across this wonderful passage which I feel can be used as a litmus test when forced to be corrupt/adopt some kind of malpractices.

Here I reproduce the passage -

“To determine whether I should publish it or not, I went home in the evening, purchased a two penny loaf at the baker’s, and with the water from the pump made my supper; I then wrapped myself up in my great-coat, and laid down on the floor and slept till morning, when, on another loaf and a mug of water, I made my breakfast. From this regimen I feel no inconvenience whatsoever. Finding I can live in this manner, I have formed a determination never to prostitute my press to the purposes of corruption and abuse of this kind for the sake of gaining a more comfortable subsistence.”

The context is that Franklin was working as a printer and a customer asked him to publish a piece in his paper which was both scandalous and defamatory. Also, the customer was offering huge sums of money. To decide whether to take the money or not – Franklin took the above mentioned test on him.

Oh boy, what a way to decide whether to indulge in unfair means. Wouldn't it be great if each one of us can administer ourselves to such a test to determine if it was really necessary for us to be corrupt? Surely it would go a long way in reducing it!

Peace out!
(Until I find something else worth posting about)