If He Did Not See His Age, Why Should We?

In our society, there are two different punishments for the same crime. Here, I am talking about a minor who has committed the same crime as an adult. In the Nirbhaya gang-rape case, the boy who was involved in the most brutal acts was underage, meaning he was below 18. So, does being young make his crime any less serious? Absolutely not.

Then I want to ask: why was that monster not hanged along with the others? Please give me one logical argument. Tell me, if a person does not consider his age while committing a crime, why should we, as a society that calls itself civilized and just, consider his age while punishing him?

I want to make my position absolutely clear: whether a person is under 18 or above 18, they should receive the strict punishment that their crime deserves. For me, a woman’s honour and dignity are more important than the useless sympathy of a cowardly society.

We should ask the government and lawmakers only one question: If a person does not consider their age while committing a crime, why should we consider their age while punishing them?