WOAH WE HAVE A LOT GOING ON HERE
I don’t know if the charge will stick, or if it is appropriate. The parents are always culpable in such tragic circumstances. Columbine, Newtown, Parkland, same theme.
You left out Sandy Hook…
Yea, that’s in Newtown. Mom keeping an AR15 for seriously ill son.
In a locked safe.
Negligence in not securing the firearm
We’re now into generations where a lot of “idiots raising idiots” is going on. This is hardly a surprise.
Perhaps they should look on the set of Rust…
The parents in the schools you mention were never charged.
The prosecutors–typical leftists-- do what they do best… they are over charging the parents in an effort to maximize the damage and publicity. They are using the system to punish the parents. They should stick to the law and give themselves credibility. It is a different society than when I was growing up in the '60’s and my dad could leave his Korean War M1 Garand in the coat closet and expect it to be left alone.
I’m all for the boy to get the book thrown at him and I’m all for schools ending their foolish “no gun zone” crap. As for the parents? The gun should have been secured just because in smart all the way around. We don’t know the relationship and if they understood the danger their son would cause…
Not sure if that is truly the right thing to do. If they bought the gun and ammo for him and knew he was going to create some mayhem, they should be charged. What if the shooter though was over 18, but still living at home? What if they had made strides towards limiting access to the firearm, and he still gained access? Parent’s unfortunately are sometimes the last to know, and not through lack of trying. It may be a dangerous precedent that has been set. The amount of attorneys who would want to defend the child more than likely are limited, and that may go for the parents as well.
Mother of the Newtown monster received instant punishment.
I do NOT believe that guns at home should be locked away from ALL kids. Multiple examples where 11, 12, 15 y.o. engaged home invaders with gunfire, and saved their own lives and some of their family, support this position.
I DO believe that some kids need to be locked up, some in a mental hospital, some in prison, and that their family and regular social institutions are unable to keep people safe from these kids. Truly, we don’t understand what was going on in this unfortunate family, but “if they understood” - it is their damn parental responsibility! What prosecutors will do, how much of it will be for show, or justified - I’ll leave it to the media.
I will stand partially corrected.
I am sure there is still a lot to learn about this case… but how did the parents keep the school from removing the kid? I remember a lot of news stories where a kid makes a comment, has a t-shirt with a picture of a gun, or bites a pop-tart making it look like a gun and the police are called and the kid is hauled off. Seems strange that the parents were able to override the schools decision to remove the student from the building?
No, not in this case. At least, no report about parents making any kind of legal pressure against the school.
Who here doesn’t have firearms, some folks lock them up, some don’t. We all ( should) teach our children how to use them, safety rules & dangers. We trust our children to be wise enough, sometimes we have a child that is off center ( for lack of a better word). As adults we know this . I’ve had 3 that I will always truly love, the last one didn’t have the lights come on until later in life. Sometimes you have to really keep an eye on that one. Teach them the best you can… So hopefully this never happens…
This is a very complex issue. I have 2 children, now 20 and 17. Both are living with us in our house. We have firearms in the house (with some staged for home defense), and I have taught both on how to safely use them. However, they do not have access to them unless I get them out of secured storage. I trust them, but I think the risk of granting access to firearms (which are purchased under my name) in an emergency outweighs the benefit of them having access to the firearm when I am not around. In the State where I live, you need to be 21 to own a handgun (18 for long guns). Granted, I live in suburbia, so I am not as worried about clandestine home invaders or Grizzly bears. Maybe others have other situations where having firearms more accessible makes sense, but that is not for me.
Perhaps think about this… Bad folks are everywhere, they have transportation, to & from your neighborhood no matter where you are. One day all safe & warm next day shtf, no telling when or where…
David-65, I hear you. Don’t think that I am lulled into a sense of complacency because I live in a nice neighborhood. I have a home defense plan, and prepare for the worst. My point is that I do not agree with leaving firearms unsecured in the house.
Couple of thoughts:
Aren’t the parents responsible for children under 18 years of age?
If two thugs break into a house and the homeowner shoots one dead, doesn’t the other get charged in the death in many states? Why couldn’t the prosecutor try the same approach with the parents in this case?
I haven’t followed this case closely but did read that the father had bought the gun on Black Friday. Haven’t seen that he bought some way of securing the weapon. If he is a new gun owner, it wouldn’t surprise me if he didn’t.
I saw that the boy wasn’t removed from school and also saw that the school didn’t contact the sheriff’s office as was their protocol? Didn’t know the parents had a say in if the boy was to be removed or not, seems real odd to me. I would think that’s entirely up to the school.
Guess I should read more on this to be clear on how this all went down.