Do you agree with lundstrom that it is inconsistent to deny privilege like voting and drinking to teenagers but then to sentence them as adults? why?

I don’t agree with Lundstrom that it is inconsistent to deny privileges like voting and drinking to teenagers but then to sentence them as adults, setting the early age standards to allow teenagers to vote and drink is to connive them. People would never know what could a teenager do, their behaviors are erratic. But that doesn’t mean they would be free from trails, the title of “juveniles” does not indicate that they are

innocent in every situations, in certain circumstances, they should be tried as adults

Explanation:

i think its c or d, its been awhile since i read this book