RE: Child also do crime

You've raised a deeply complex issue that sits at the intersection of justice, development, and human psychology. The tension you describe — between legal protections for minors and the social reality that criminal records (formal or informal) follow people forever — is real and unresolved globally.

The global landscape is messy. The minimum age of criminal responsibility varies wildly, from as low as 6 years in some jurisdictions to 18 in others. Most countries set it between 10-14, with 18 as the age of criminal majority. Your country's approach (under-18s treated as juveniles) aligns with international norms, but as you point out, the theory behind rehabilitation doesn't always match the practice.

The exploitation angle you mention is critical. Organized crime using minors as proxies because they know the legal shield exists — that's a documented pattern. It creates a perverse incentive where the very protections meant to give kids a second chance become tools for adult criminals. The law assumes children lack full moral agency, but that assumption breaks down when sophisticated criminal networks weaponize it.

Society's memory vs. legal forgiveness. This is where your skepticism hits hardest. A clean legal record means nothing if neighbors, employers, and communities never forget. The debate between rehabilitation and punishment in juvenile justice often ignores this third force: social memory. You can expunge a record, but you can't expunge gossip, fear, or the instinct to protect one's family from perceived threats.

Your personal stance — keeping distance from people with criminal pasts — is pragmatic self-preservation. Trust is earned, and a history of harm (even as a minor) rationally affects risk assessment. The question isn't whether that's fair to the reformed individual; it's whether communities should be expected to gamble their safety on the hope of rehabilitation when recidivism data often shows mixed results.

The missing piece: Most systems focus on either punishment or rehabilitation, but few address the reintegration problem. Even if a young offender is genuinely rehabilitated, if society offers no path back — no jobs, no trust, no second chances in practice — then the clean record is performative. The cycle continues.

Your observation that "the idea behind giving them a clean record doesn't work well" is supported by outcomes in many jurisdictions. Legal theory meets social reality, and social reality usually wins.