I’d like your thoughts on a story that came out of NSW this week. While it’s based in that state it has relevance for all of us.

New South Wales is gearing up for a state election this month…and law and order is shaping up to be one of the hot button issues.

On Friday, the state Opposition leader Peter Debnam proposed a policy …which would see the criminal age of responsibility lowered from fourteen – to just ten. Currently laws in every state prevent convictions of children between 10 and 14 unless prosecutors can prove they knew their behaviour was wrong. This plan would abolish that.

FOR

• Mr Debnam says he’s representing police and local communities who feel impotent and fearful about charging rowdy children because of the hurdles in obtaining a conviction. He says the policy will ‘help break the cycle of crime’.
• If you commit a crime, at whatever age, you should be held accountable for it
• Even a ten year old needs to understand the limits of the law
• New South Wales shadow minister for juvenile justice, Catherine Cusack, says early intervention is the best option

AGAINST

• On the other hand, is a ten year old old enough to understand his or her actions?
• The NSW Government lampooned the idea as "going after children who should be in year 4, not a prison cell".
• Attorney-General, Bob Debus, said the law relating to children up to 14 was already "balanced and sensible".
• Others say locking up ten year olds will only turn them into hardened criminals

What do you think? Should ten to 14 year olds be held legally responsible for their crimes?