There are calls to raise the age of criminal responsibility to 14.
In all states in Australia, a child offender becomes legally responsible for their crimes when they turn 10, and can be prosecuted for those crimes.
While the argument is a 10-year-old is far too young to be blamed for their behaviours - what do we do about it?
Whether we believe young children are responsible for their crimes or not, the fact of the matter is they are committing those crimes. Anecdotally in Tasmania, youths are found to be responsible for a serious chunk of the state's offences - with "gangs of children" aged 10 to 15 reported in parts of the state.
Some of their crimes are considered less serious - vandalism, minor shoplifting.
But these "gangs" have also been responsible for burglaries, assaults, break-ins and dangerous police chases.
Nationally, it is a similar picture, with reports of youth crime sprees in most of the major cities.
It is easy to apply the same "do the crime, do the time" to every offender, but when it comes to offenders who are not even old enough to open their own Facebook page, something more needs to be done.
This issue needs a proactive approach. We need to look at why these children are offending.
It is the view of those who are calling for the change, including Tasmania's Commissioner for Children and Young People Leanne McLean who said we need a "more holistic intervention when children commit a crime". She is right.
Yes there are some bad apples, who will commit crimes simply because they think it is "cool", and yes there needs to be punishment for serious crimes.
But the majority of youths who end up in the justice system have been failed somewhere along the way.
Whether that failure was on the part of their parent or guardian, or the system itself.
Would it not be better for both the children and the system to prevent these crimes from happening in the first place by addressing the social, emotional and economic issues?