If the children of today want to be treated more like adults then why not let them have adult sentences when (or should that be if?) they break the law.

Kids today think "its okay if i do this - i know it wrong but they'll only give me a slap on the wrists". It is true.

At 12 you know the difference between right and wrong (if you don't theres something seriously wrong with you) So why let 13yr olds roam about the streets at night getting pissed up...?? They know its wrong...they know their not old enough....!!

If i was in charge I would bring back the death penalty and charge the 13yr olds the same i would an 18yr+ .

Rachael, Preston, UK

Im a young male 21 years of age and im not suprised things may be getting worse as the media constantly steer us towards 'icons' such as moral -less footballers, actors and muscians. Modern thought tells us we are no more than matter or no different from animals and everything is irrationally 'over-rationalised'. This generations has nothing collective to look forward to other than materialism, so we say 'why bother'.

D.K, Keele, Newcastle-Under-Lyme,

People think that teenagers' behaviour is due to parents and schools not disciplining us enough, however i beg to differ. My parents have never even grounded me, despite the fact i learnt how to swear at about 8. I also regularly drink alcohol (with my parents and friends) and when my friends come to my house they're allowed to drink as well. Also, my parents know about my relationships and i know that i can talk to them about what's happening in my life.
This relaxed attitude i have is because my parents and school trust me and allow me a lot of freedom. Reading this, you may think that i'm one of these "hoodies". However, I'm pretty sure if you met me you wouldn't think that at all. I'm 16 years old and I'm predicted 12 A*s at GCSE and plan to go on to Cambridge University before becoming an Officer in the Army. I'm currently a member of the Army Cadet Force.
I think that the solution is to treat us teenagers as adults. Give us responsibilities. It makes us mature and it works.

Gemma, Barrow Uopn Humber, England

Jennie USA : "A note; I read a study recently showed the brains of children are changing until they are about 25 yrs old. That means children are children until they are 25. We need to revise the definition of "adult". "

That would be to define an adult in terms of physical development, and exclusively so: far too simplistic. Many 12 years olds are capable of having their own children, and in older societies still do (Mahatma Ghandi was a father by 13, and St Elizabeth of Hungary by 15). And nature has equipped us emotionally and physically for it. Anthropologically lifespan was so short that you wouldn't be there to raise your kids if you didn't start very early. It is much more reasonable to say that childhood is left when the person is capable of having their own.

In my case I distinctly remember my awareness, and awareness-of-self, radically changed at 13, and I have been the same ever since. I was happy not to have responsibilities, but I matured ever so slowly. Not good.

Greg Lorriman, Leatherhead, UK

Children ARE dangerous, it's not wrong to think that a mind that's not smart is safe to be around. Children who are not controlled are apt to form gangs & follow the leader. I remember childhood.

But it's also wrong to make children be under constant rigid control, they need times to be able to develop their own self-control. I think children will always do stupid things, they have to learn that consequences come from those. Making sure the children learn consequences is the job of adults. It's also their job to make sure children live long enough & healthily enough to become adults.

A note; I read a study recently showed the brains of children are changing until they are about 25 yrs old. That means children are children until they are 25. We need to revise the definition of "adult".

Jennie, SC, USA

we all live in fear, that only encourages bullies. think back to school. those bullies are the hoodies. however mandatory community or prison sentences for knife-carrying would help.

mount, dorset, gb

It seems odd that we reprimand kids for being kids. They need some outlet for their exuberance; and with government setting rules on games like tag and ball games, saying that they are a violation of health and saftey, what else are kids to do? We even chide them for playing videogames now, one of the last few places of solace that they have. The young are always going to be seen as rebellious to the old because change is the way of the world and it will drive society forward. Besides, what good is the government if they have nothing to control?

Ben, Phoenix, Arizona

The fundamental problem with teenagers is that they are not kids at all: they are young adults. They need to be given real responsibilities as soon as they reach 12, as was traditional in the past.

Instead they are treated as if they were still children, a nonsense since they are more than capable of having their own. Their resentment and frustration, mislabeled as adolescence, is inevitable. They should also be facing adult penalties for criminal behaviour.

And they should not be cooped up in classrooms subject to boring teachers (most teachers are boring) to learn subjects they will generally never use and soon forget. It is a total waste of time and resources. They should instead be working and apprenticed. If they learn anything it should be of immediate practical value: a real motive to learn, not compulsion.

And, with parental consent until majority (21?), they should have the right to marry, instead of dishonoring their hearts and bodies by promiscuity and masturbation.

Greg Lorriman, Leatherhead, UK

Well I have to admit when I was 16, that is in 1960, because I was tall, I used to to go to our local pub and get a gallon of draft beer put into a plastic container. I would then share it among my friends.

I think the big difference between then and now is that it was accepted that all adults could discipline young people and that if a young kid answered back, than that adult had the support of all the adults in the area.

There was also I think a stronger code of what was wrong and right. People were also more community minded, I think this was because people were still relieved to have survived the war.

One important point is that virtually every male had served in the forces and new 19 different ways to kill a person. I think this gave them confidence and also a form of bond, which it would be impossible to develop now.

As to sex we were more innocent. Good girls just didn't until the diamond engagement ring was put on her finger.

Odtaa, Richmond, UK

I don't think the government actually has a problem with teenage drinking and sex. What they do have a problem with is the rise in gun crime, stabbings, vandalism and kicking innocent civillians to death for trying to preserve their neighbourhood and family safety. That doesn't mean all teens should have a bad rep. It just means that those who decide to take unlawful, rampaging route must be stamped out. This is just another do-gooder article that completely misses the big picture.

Kv, London,

What government rhetoric obscures is that usually teenagers are making rational choices. A baby at 16 or 17 is, as you say, a passport to the adult world. The alternative is endless half-baked training courses mixed with menial employment, and no prospect of earning enough money to establish a home.

Similarly drink is a form of social bonding. Amongst adults, unemployment is lower amongst those who drink more. Amongst teenagers you will probably find that the more popular boys tend to be the ones who have access to alcohol.

Policy which assumes that teenagers are irrationally harming themselves is wrong, and won't generally be effective.

Malcolm McLean, Bradford, UK

Those such as Sam below who disagree with Janice might like to re-read "Cider with Rosie"

Perhaps the difference is that in those days everybody in the village knew Lol and Rosie, and kept an eye out for them. Today, we don't know who the children are, other than that they want to conceal their identities. It's impossible to judge who's harmless and who's not.

Ian Kemmish, Biggleswade, UK

I almost totally agree, Although I know from personal experience that some teenagers can attack people just for the way they look! I dislike the way that people say this and that were caused by teenagers - being a teenager is just an age group a like being in your 40s! If every time an offence was committed by a forty year old, like Steve Wright who is facing trial for the murder of 5 prostitutes people said "look what has happened to forty year olds; they are all prostitute using murderers!" I'm sure a lot of people would be very angry over this stereotype; so why do the same to Teenagers? Think about all those Teenagers who aren't out there on the streets causing trouble (there is a lot more teenagers in Watford than the 30 or 40 standing around the shops and fastfood outlets), do they deserve a reputation like this while they sit at home studying for their GCSE's and A Levels. What about the teenagers in cadet organisations marshalling for local events; are these violent hoodies?

Thom, Flitwick, Bedfordshire

You're right, Janice, its the same now as when I was young, ca 1950. Though instant world-wide news has intensified everything. Also of course, in those days , drugs were unknown.

B.C. Seals, Scarborough, UK

"Kids like booze and sex. So what?"

So a lot actually. Indulging in both in the way that is put as being acceptable here indicates a high level of lack of self-control and discipline. No wonder we have so many knife-wielding thugs running around our streets at such a young age if having no self-control is taught as such a good thing.

Dominic Stockford, Teddington, London,

Should be required reading for the bereaved family of that chap from Warrington

Pat, Rochdale,

It's like working in a school, reprimanding kids all day for exactly the same things that you did. Let's just give them the facts and let them be. Couldn't agree more but let's draw the line at drugs.

judy, Liverpool, England

"Kids like booze and sex" - haven't they always and haven't governments always demonised them?

Chris, Birmingham,

Sex and booze have *not* always been the twin pillars of teenage life. This has only become the norm since the massive liberalisation of the 1960s. Since then Britain has been squandering the social capital built up by previous generations. Now we are seeing the results. The 'prevailing narrative of national despair', whilst often overblown, does have a core of truth to it. For example, recorded crimes have rocketed from 500,000 per year in the 1950s to around 5 million per year today. (Home Office's own statistics). But don't blame the teenagers - blame the Baby-boomer parents! In today's culture, what else would you expect?

Sam, Oxford, UK

I agree with you, Janice. But I also believe we need better school discipline and we need to be much, much more effective at dealing with teenagers who commit crimes of violence and theft. The police, the courts and the prison service fall so far short of what is required that we'll only see more and more murders in the news. That is the real reason why trust in teenagers has reached such a low point.

Sam, Albany,

A threat is always "more in..head than reality". It's a threat.

Phil, Nottingham, UK

Most every threat is 'more in our heads' than reality. When it becomes reality it ceases to be a threat.
'Salisbury'?

Phil, Nottingham, UK