Youth crime is a growing epidemic that affects most adolescents at some point in their lives. There is no doubt in society that young people commit crimes. It has been shown that between 1986 and 1998, violent crimes committed by youth increased by approximately 120% (CITE). The most controversial debate in Canadian history is expected to be over the Young Offenders Act (YOA). In 1982, Parliament passed the Young Offenders Act (YOA). In force since 1984, the Young Offenders Act replaced the most recent version of the Young Offenders Act (JDA). The objective of the Young Offenders Act was to move from a social protection approach to one that makes young people responsible for their actions. He also addressed concerns that the paternalistic treatment of children under the JDA was not consistent with Canadian human rights legislation (Mapleleaf). The debate remained heated until new legislation was passed, the Youth Criminal Justice Act. Some thought a complete overhaul was necessary, others felt minor changes would suffice, and still others felt the Young Offenders Act was best left as it is.Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why violent video games should not be banned"? Get the original essay In February 2002, the House of Commons passed the Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA). The Act came into force in April 2003 and replaces the Young Offenders Act. The new law attempts to balance the legalistic framework of the Young Offenders Act and the social needs-based approach that underpins the Young Offenders Act. When we read the YCJA, we see that it applies to children aged twelve to seventeen (Justice Canada, 2003). Some will say that this age is either too high or too low to make children criminally responsible for their actions. Even since the 1800s, children were treated like adults. This often happened around the age of twelve. Whenever children disobeyed their parents or the law, they were often punished on an adult level. This applies to the present day, where the YCJA applies to children between the ages of twelve and seventeen. To complement this argument, modern research has proven that children under the age of 18 have not yet fully established brain maturity and should not be held responsible for their crimes. Much of the YCJA is because it provides a “second chance” for children because they do not fully understand the consequences and procedures they must follow after committing a crime. This research also demonstrated that people do not fully develop their brains until the age of nineteen or twenty, which is also the age when the YCJA no longer applies to children. The age at which the YCJA applies is appropriate and gives young people a second chance to understand what they did wrong..