This post is ridiculous. Legally, children are, by and large, held to a much lower standard when it comes to being held accountable for their actions. Precisely because they don't have the same capabilities and perspective as older people, even people who are just over the line of 20. Even then, the specific thing pedolust defended against wasn't even just that kids should be held responsible for their actions. It was that adults SHOULDN'T be held responsible for their actions against kids because those adults fell under the influence of wily kids. When have you ever heard of an adult being let off because they were manipulated by a child criminal mastermind? It happens with child criminals.
Notice the words "uncoerced"? No one is talking about legality or your argument would already be lost as there are different ages in many areas for legal consent (that doesn't make it moral in any fashion).
Again, for the third time, do you believe that a teenager should not be held to account for actions that they participate in? Do you believe that if they walk up to a 30 year old and say, "I want to shoot my grandma in the face so I can take her money." The 30 year old says,"Ok, let's do it.". They go and do it. The "adult" is the only one bearing responsibility and that teenager did not know what they were doing?
According to your post you (at least) legally believe that the teen should bear some responsibility (or are you disagreeing with that)? If that is the case, why does it stop when it comes to this particular matter? Why are they suddenly braindead?
Or are you wanting to raise the age up to 20 now before they know right and wrong?
You pretty much skimmed my post in eagerness to make a point that answered nothing.