a shift in the overall juvenile crime rates. In other words, the evidence does not support the need for stricter and more punitive measures to be taken on the juvenile offender and “Renewed interest in juvenile justice policy generally and in highly punitive intervention measures specifically has occurred despite evidence indicating that prevalence rates for most types of juvenile offending have remained relatively stable over the past two decades. Most crimes committed by adolescents are property offenses such as theft and vandalism” (Jenson 324). How might we explain this response not only by those who work within the juvenile justice system but the American public in general. Jenson explains that this shift in juvenile justice policy and the “mounting public interest in juvenile justice policy is a reaction to changes in the nature of juvenile offending. The most conspicuous change in offending concerns violent crime. After more than a decade of stability, juvenile vio
...