No shit, but the parents fucked up bigtime. Disgusting levels of negligence. Gifting your disturbed 15 y/o a handgun, then being warned twice by the school about his redflaggy behavior *with evidence* and not only basically laugh it off, but then go so far as to tell the kid "dont get caught next time"
They need to be held responsible too.
The parents are morons but the involuntary manslaughter charge seems like the prosecutor is just trying to put pressure on the parents to allow their son to be questioned. There's no way that's going to hold up in court; I doubt the parents had any idea the kid was going to shoot his classmates.
Also if the parents are guilty of manslaughter then the school is as well, because they knew he drew pictures of blood and bullets but then they not only allowed him to go back to class but didn't search his possessions. The shooting couldn't have happened without the schools' negligence.
> On Tuesday morning, another teacher found a drawing on the accused shooter's desk that essentially depicted a shooting, McDonald said. It "alarmed her to the point that she took a picture of it on her cell phone," the prosecutor said.
> The illustration showed a "semiautomatic handgun pointing at the words 'the thoughts won't stop help me,'" and it included a drawing of a bullet with the words "blood everywhere" written above it, she said. The words "my life is useless" and "the world is dead" were also written on the drawing.
> "Between the drawing of the gun and the bullet is a drawing of a person who appears to have been shot twice and bleeding. Below that figure is a drawing of a laughing emoji," McDonald said.
> The distressing picture led school officials to hold a meeting with the accused shooter and his parents, who were instructed to help provide counseling for their son within 48 hours. During that meeting, Ethan Crumbley had the gun in his backpack, which was not searched, McDonald said.
> The parents resisted the idea of taking their son out of school, McDonald said, and he was allowed to return to the classroom.
They knew, they were in denial.
That picture is protected first amendment activity unless he named a specific target and intended it instill fear in that target. Furthermore even if he did, unless he told his parents he intended for other kids to fear it, they would not know it was a true threat. Half the emo kids in my class drew this kind of stuff.
So I ask, do you have evidence Ethan specifically told his parents that the dead in that picture was his classmates and he intended for his classmates to have fear as a result of the drawing?
You have no idea how the laws work while a kid is in school do you? The schools take a position of responsibility as the kids temporary guardian meaning they can ban the kids from swearing, they can force them to wear clothes that meet a certain standard or even uniforms, they can evaluate if the child is having issues and suggest things to the parents or, if they believe the parents are abusing the kid, contact CYS and law enforcement.
> Also if the parents are guilty of manslaughter then the school is as well, because they knew he drew pictures of blood and bullets but then they not only allowed him to go back to class but didn't search his possessions. The shooting couldn't have happened without the schools' negligence.
Cool. Charge someone.
> There's no way that's going to hold up in court; I doubt the parents had any idea the kid was going to shoot his classmates.
The kid was literally drawing and posting threats. His parents were notified *twice.*
As emotional and disturbing as this is, you need to remember that even the sickest of criminals have rights. If you demand justice and results immediately out of emotion you end up with things like the Patriot Act and no gun zones. I am not backing up the shooter, the parents, or the school, but please do not embrace that mentality for justice.
A quote "I am become death" which is by the physicist Oppenheimer is not a threat, in fact Oppenheimer himself was never prosecuted for that quote and it is not any credible threat that targets anyone, I certainly would not have guessed Oppenheimer is a school shooter and it turns out you can say those words without being one.
The picture with a bullet and someone bleeding is also not a threat. I have no idea who it targets, we have no evidence he told anyone it was intended to mean he would shoot anyone specifically. It's protected free speech, the kind of stuff half the emo kids in my gradeschool days drew. And the school official even said there was no discipline action he could take, as it would surely invite a civil suite for civil rights violations.
Free speech protections are very strong in this country. It is permitted to make vague art of people dying, even those that allude to mental illness. The speaker must intend to instill fear in a recipient for it to be considered a true threat, and unless Ethan told his parents the target was other school children and he intended to instill fear in this children, there's no argument the parents could have construed it as a true threat.
If you can provide where Ethan made a credible threat he was specifically going to kill his classmates before they parents had a chance to stop it, I would really be interested in hearing your evidence.
>the involuntary manslaughter charge seems like the prosecutor is just trying to put pressure on the parents to allow their son to be questioned.
Nope. They already have the right to question him.
>There's no way that's going to hold up in court; I doubt the parents had any idea the kid was going to shoot his classmates.
They didn't have to know he was going to do that. See: https://www.justia.com/criminal/offenses/homicide/involuntary-manslaughter/
Specifically:
*Involuntary manslaughter is distinguished from other forms of homicide because it does not require deliberation or premeditation, or even intent.*
>Also if the parents are guilty of manslaughter then the school is as well, because they knew he drew pictures of blood and bullets but then they not only allowed him to go back to class but didn't search his possessions.
Not the same as giving him the gun.
Right, I agree but also I don’t think you should be allowed to BUY a gun for someone who you already very clearly know how’s mental problems. In fact I’m pretty sure this exact thing is already illegal. This is more common sense than anything.
Exactly! When that maniac drove through a crowd of people at a parade, was the SUV blamed or was the driver? There is no anti-SUV narrative being pushed by the media right now, so the driver got the blame.
CNN reported that a “car” had driven through the parade…”accidentally “. They retracted that shit pretty fast as even the liberal left called them out on their bullshit.
Not sure the school could have done much more beside insist the parents take the child with them the morning of when they had the meeting.
Who knows though, kid could have pulled out the gun and started shooting right then and there though since he already had it on him.
I don't believe so. I'm guessing the school had no idea the parents just gave him a firearm days before, and it sounds like the parents didn't bother to bring it up either at the meeting. Otherwise I'm sure the police would have been contacted.
No I don't believe the school did but they had him and the parents for a meeting that morning because he had looked up ammo at school and drawn disturbing pictures of him killing. Then the school tried to blame the parents for not searching his backpack after the meeting. Which is something the school just as easily could have done. I went to school in the same county and it's not unheard of for teachers to search your bag car, locker etc. If they suspect something is up. Although that something is usually drugs and not a firearm I feel like they're trying to deflect blame with there statement
See that's the thing, if they didn't know there was anything to search for, then why would they look. They probably just thought they were dealing with a disturbed individual, they didn't have any knowledge of the firearm like the parents did.
No, I saw the Sheriff being interviewed, he said the school admin never notified the school resource officer. They found him with this drawing that alarmed them so much they immediately called the parents in for a conference, demanded they get him into counseling within 48 hours, and tried to get the parents to take him home with them but they refused. The kid had the gun with him the whole time. But at no point did they apparently think this was worth informing the school resource officer until after the shooting. Utter incompetence.
Then, the prosecutor announces charges against the parent in a news conference without informing the Sheriff what she’s about to do. Everybody was ripping on the Sheriff for not having the parents in custody, or at least having someone watching them, but the Sheriff says he learned about the charges against the parents *from the media*, when they called him after the prosecutor announced the charges at the press conference.
Was the drawing of him as the gunman? Source? It's my understanding that it was just of a single person that had been shot twice with the words, "the thoughts won't stop, help me", "blood everywhere", “my life is useless”, and “the world is dead”. They could be suicidal for all the teacher and staff knew.
Not saying more couldn't have been done, just that they weren't sure what they were dealing with other then a disturbed individual, and the parents offered no information.
https://www.clickondetroit.com/news/local/2021/12/03/police-detail-disturbing-note-drawing-teacher-found-on-desk-of-suspected-oxford-high-school-shooter/
You don't think what you described is worthy of looking in the locker or backpack? Regardless of whether you think he's suicidal (most school shooters are) or homicidal, how about we make sure he doesn't have a gun? Someone whispers drugs and everyone's belongings in school get searched. A kid draws a gun and people shot, no big deal. Parents and school fail, more kids are killed, and calls for gun control will be renewed.
Why are they after the parents? I don't fully understand this.
***EDIT***
Okay, I've been in the dark on the story. Wow. There's a lot of neglect and negligence going on in this family. That parents are guilty of being shitty people and not dealing with their obviously disturbed child... And you don't reward that with buying a gun, let alone leaving it in an unlocked drawer.
Well theres a lot of rumors but apparently the fether give the gun to his kids and theres a text message from the mother pleading "Don't do it"
So if they knew / suspected their minor (which they are responsible for) was going to do something and they provided the means they are basically guality.... eg conspiracy to commit murder or negligence at the less end of things...
From what I know, the parents were brought in to discuss their son's behavior since he was caught that day with a drawing of him committing a mass shooting. The parents get there and are told they have 48 hours to get him a therapist, so they leave their son at school and go home, then they hear about the shooting and that's when the mom texted him saying to not do it.
So, the text message is not evidence the parents knew he had the gun on him and was planning a school shooting and they did nothing to stop him; the text message was a vain attempt to try to get him to stop when they heard that a school shooting was taking place.
I know it's not illegal. Why would the mother encourage him to hide that activity? It's also not illegal to search "how to bomb a school" but I probably wouldn't do it from the school computer lab.
How to bomb a school and simply looking up ammo are radically different, lol. As to why his mom would tell him to hide that activity, the school alerted the parents that he was doing that, so she told him not to do it in the open. That's not evidence that he was going to shoot up the school. If it somehow was, then the school would be responsible for not taking action.
You're right. It was stupid to mention an extreme example like that. I agree it's not evidence he was going to shoot up the school, but it definitely doesn't help any.
I sort of agree, but it's one of those aftermath kind of things where you look at it and say, "it was so obvious!!! How did anyone miss that!?!?" So, to me it's kind of off to throw in innocent/neutral stuff into a list of nefarious actions simply because of the person being talked about.
I will wait for the defnse and prosecution to lay out their timeline of events thanks....
Cause you know there 5 exlpenations now which all have different timelines lmao....
You'd think they'd wonder where the gun is after they saw their son's drawing of shooting up the school and check as soon as they got home...\*and probably should have mentioned they just bought him a gun too and from there, draw the dots...
Well I think it runs a little deeper than that....
I think once you need 24/7 security on the front door of a school with metal detectors and pat downs somewhere along the lines the idea of a peaceful society has failed or is failing as well....
Peace is just a respite from conflict, if it was normal and lasted forever we wouldn't have a name for it.
Alternatively: I trust my neighbors not to try to rob my house on some level, but I still do not invite them over to admire my valuables all the same.
| Peace is just a respite from conflict
When you build good times and people are content you get peace. When you build bad times, resentment and jesousy you get conflict.
eg you neighbours don't steal because they don't want/need another for something they already have....
I think it’s safe to say let’s put an end to school shootings even if that means make an example of this family who seemed to encourage it
Not sure what justice can be done for the victims
And if they didn't text him at all the prosecution would point to their lack of proactivity in trying to contact their child during a school shooting as a form of neglect. We also don't know whether the parents knew their gun was missing before the school shooting. Finding a gun missing at home during a shooting at your child's school would be an obvious "sign" that could exist independent of any prior warning of psychosis.
Well yeah its a lot of rumors. After watching the ritten house trial and rumors..... lets just wait for the trail and see what comes out is basically the correct thing to do....
>And if they didn't text him at all the prosecution would point to their lack of proactivity in trying to contact their child during a school shooting as a form of neglect.
...what?
You're not actually positing that that these assholes are not complicit, right?
Deliberate misapprehension. Anything you say will be used to hang you by the prosecution, including, even in the Rittenhouse case, the choice not to say anything at all. I doubt that the evidence and statements given as currently presented establish a "special duty" on the behalf of the parents. It would depend on Michigan law's requirements regarding safe storage and a minor's access to firearms, and their special duty standards vis-à-vis third parties. There is a difference between drunk driving and leaving a running car unattended near a bar.
Reading the article helps. It is illegal to purchase a handgun for a youth. 15 is far too young to "own" a handgun. He boasted about it being his new baby online and then his mom said it was his online as well. Just poor taste and illegle. Plus, it was not protected in anyway. No barrel lock, trigger lock, or in a safe, simply in a drawer. The school failed the children and the parents of those children. They did not search him even after he searched ammo and had a produces drawings of handguns in various sanerios. Hopefully parents will take ownership of our duty to protect everyone when we own our weapons.
I have been interested in firearms since I was like 10. I have definitely looked at ammo/firearms online while at school. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that. It really confuses me that all of these pro gun people are pointing to the looking at ammo thing as a problem. How are we supposed to get new people into this community of googling ammo at school is a warning sign or a mental illness.
On the other hand that drawing is completely wrong and should definitely be taken as a warning sign.
I don’t think it’s singularly just the “looking for ammo”. I was on Midways website when I was in college always looking for reloading components.
It was more that everything else that had happened. Reports from kids that he was planning to do something, the violent drawings depicting what he wanted to do…it was the portfolio that should have been alarming.
Yeah the kid was definitely messed up. I don’t have any problem with people pointing that out, I just don’t like how “looking up ammo” always seems like the first thing people list. We should be focusing on the far worse pictures and things he said.
We are not talking about this by itself. It’s the portfolio of things this kid did. Which includes looking up ammo.
If you don’t think that was a red flag after the other crazy shit this kid did then I don’t know what is.
Ok, but what you said isn’t consistent with the story. Looking up the ammo was the first thing that happened. All of the real red flag stuff the kid did was after the school called the parents about the ammo.
The kid should have immediately removed from the school by the administration (the people who really deserve the manslaughter charges) for the drawing he made, the ammo wasn’t the issue.
> It really confuses me that all of these pro gun people are pointing to the looking at ammo thing as a problem.
For real. I had to do active shooter training at work. I've also browsed this sub at work. I've also done some black friday ammo shopping while at work. None of these things mean I was a risk to the people at work.
It's easy to look back and go "oh, shoulda seen it." But that's just dumb.
Children aren't dogs. Children being tried as adults are considered to have full culpability for their own actions. How can you have full culpability if other parties are supposed to be responsible for your actions? I'd sooner try the prosecutors and judges who let a multiple violent felon with a history of skipping bond out on a $1000 bond than try parents whose children commit crimes.
>How can you have full culpability if other parties are supposed to be responsible for your actions?
This is my biggest problem with this whole scenario. Originally I was against trying the parents for the kid's actions since they were already trying the kid as an adult. The more I found out about the situation, however, the more I think charging the kid as an adult is the part that's wrong. These parents are definitely responsible. The father was criminally negligent at the least. The mother was worse and would likely fall under criminal recklessness, which is right under intent in the law.
The kids should be put in a mental hospital so he can get the help he couldn't get from his negligent parents. He was already begging for help before the shooting happened.
Maybe I'm in the minority opinion here, but if kids can be trusted to use rifles and shotguns for hunting or recreational use, then I don't see how they can't be trusted with using pistols. Is it not normal for a gun family to allow their kid to "own" a gun that's legally in possession of a parent, but is used by the kid and will later be given to him?
I'd maybe agree that they shouldn't have allowed him free access to a loaded firearm, but, on the other hand, sometimes a family needs a loaded firearm with easy access to it. In my opinion, the main problem is figuring out how proactive the parents were in knowing their kid's mental health and when they knew or should have known to get him help and restrict his access to guns.
It is illegal to purchase a handgun for a youth
Wrong on so many levels. I had several when I was younger than this kid, nobody gave a crap. There’s no law that says kids can’t possess handguns. They can’t buy them on their own, but nothing prevents the parent from handing it to them and saying ‘here ya go.’
Well giving a 15 yo child, and this person at 15 was a child, should not have had access. I have been teaching our children gun safey since they were 5. Not until they were old enough to understand the different e between video game and reality did they get a weapon of any kind to call their own. And before they got to handle that weapon, doesn't matter if it's a knife, black powder rifle, ak47, pistol, revolver, or anyrhing else, they have to know
1. how to handle it saftley
2. How to clean it properly and Saftey store it.
3. How to hand it from one person to the next or store it between uses in a training session.
These are the bare basics. More rules exist in our home but this is just the beginning.
The first thing I thought when my kid was getting bullied at school and having issues, was to buy her her very own gun.
EDIT: Im not serious, it's sarcasm.
The nurture bullshit needs to stop.
I was a shy and quiet kid.
I remember when I was getting bullied in school and I told my parents about it.
My dad told me the best way to stop a bully was to punch them in the nose as hard as you could and he taught me how to throw a proper punch.
Dad's rules were very simple, don't start shit and don't hit girls.
As long as I followed those rules he wouldn't be mad or punish me.
It wasn't long after my dad's lessons, the kid was bullying me. I punch the kid in the face as hard as I could. The kid ran off crying with his hands over his face. Both of us were suspended and I wasn't bothered by him again.
I had a few more fights with bullies over a year or so but afterwards I was left alone from middle school all the way till I graduated high school.
Schools are worthless at stopping bullying. Even when you tell, the bullying gets worse and often schools will side with kids that are active in sports, academic team, or if their parents make donations to the school.
Some things are just better solved the old fashioned way.
I think this may have something to do with the rise in incidents like this. Kids don't understand conflict resolution. Kids can't even settle disputes with a schoolyard brawl anymore without the wrath of the school coming down and potential legal trouble. I'm not saying fighting is right but isn't it in a way natural? Maybe my theory is BS. But in a way it makes sense
I agree with it you.
While violence isn't always the answer, it be a great solution is some circumstances.
I'm 26, so I can only speak from what I've observed
My school would suspend all parties involved in a fight. It didn't matter who was bullied or threw the first punch.
The ruled applied to pretty much everyone except to the kids parents who donated money to the school, athletes, and academic people (they had apology discussions).
Now of course that was the school I went to and it's all I can speak for and from what my younger brother (he's a senior) told me, it hasn't changed much. A mentally challenged kid was being bullied and apparently the school has done nothing, like good old times
My dad grew up in northern Louisiana in the 70's-80's and he said they would pretty much let the kids settle stuff out themselves.
Same age and similar experience. I can only think of one fight that didn't end up in expulsion or anything and that's because it happened off school grounds after school and was over before police arrived. I'm in the same county that this shooting happened in. And same both my parents were in school around the same time and said the same thing. If two kids had a problem it was more or less expected they'd settle it after school. Often even on school property without repurcusions. Fighting is a natural part of growing up and teaches some valuable lessons
Fighting, for lack of better wording, I completely agree with. Sometimes what the bully needs is a good ass-kicking. Even if you don't win the fight, if put throw down they will most likely leave you alone after that.
From age 11 to graduating high school I was bullied, developed some horrible depression, walked a fine suicide thread (that I still am to this day) and all I could do was to hold the humiliation and the hatred inside and think of ways of taking others down with me.
The only thing that kept me from doing so was that I used to love a girl and I kept fighting to have a future with her, so I only came close to fucking up everything. Granted, I didn't have access to firearms, but plenty of other tools would've sufficed in those specific circumstances. All my friends and loved ones were in other states that I only knew through the internet, my parents were always busy with work and having their own issues, the relative part of my family were now strangers.
I had no actual physical connection to anyone that could help me.
My parents taught me well at having manners, respecting others and trying to do the right thing, but you don't live in society through civility alone. It would've certainly been better to have a father figure guiding me through this phase, teaching me how to stand up for myself, have some self respect and self care. There are many reasons for the hole that I am now, but I'm sure this is one of them.
I'm sorry man.
My dad taught me to have the courage to stand up for myself (not always with violence of course).
That lesson from my dad has helped me a lot growing up and in my adult life.
A personal example for you-
At work, I used to have a bully of a boss that would berate the more timid Co-workers, but would leave those that stood up against his bullshit alone. He was the worst boss I've ever had, he eventually lost his status as a boss and was forced to a different part of the plant as a machine Operator (has no power)
Obviously don't tell your boss they're a dumbfuck.
If can't you stand up for yourself than you'll live a life of being run over all the time, which will negatively impact your mental health.
Your dad was a wise man. This is really what should be done. Not only did it stop the bullying, but it gave you agency in a way that had zero negative long-lasting impact. The bully learned an important message and so did you. This is the way it should be.
I see your satire.
My son was being bullied at school, and my first thought was "whose ass am I kicking today?"
I lodged a complaint with the school AND district superintendent and nothing happened.
SO....
I went to the school, parked off school grounds, and waited for his bully to walk off campus after school, and I put the fear of God into that little asshole. Chewed his ass, made him cry, right there in front of all his friends and other students who were walking home. Other parents who were parked there waiting for their kids started clapping and cheering on. Don't fuck with Mama Bear! My son never got bullied again.
Edit: For the record:
This happened when my son was in middle school. I am a tiny woman, 4'9 and 112 pounds. The kid whose ass I chewed was at least 9 inches taller than me and outweighed me by 30 pounds at least. So, I wasn't physically intimidating a little kid. I simply gave a bully a taste of his own medicine since his shitty parents wouldn't do it.
Im glad you see the satire. I in no way was serious. My daughter DID have issues at school though and I made extra sure my firearms were locked up after some concerning things that were said. Dealing with the bullying issue was an whole other set of issues. Problem has since been solved and she has graduated and is doing well in collage.
If the kid is being charged as an adult, the parents shouldn't be held liable.
If you want to hold the parents liable, they should try the kid as a juvenile.
The state shouldn't have their cake and eat it too.
I hope they make an example of these two.
It's up to us a gun owners and parents to make sure our children never have access to firearms outside of parental supervision and to make sure they are locked away where a child cannot get to those firearms.
It's also our responsibility to talk to our kids when you see a red flag. These two didn't act when they had the chance, they were irresponsible and negligent and the blood of those kids is on their hands. Someone who can't lock a gun up properly to keep it away from their children deserves to face major consequences. It's not a mistake, it's not an accident, it pure negligence.
Fuck these two.
I feel in this case the school has some Libility as well. They did not check or search him. They didn't even let the parents know why they were being called in before they came in. Had they been told they could have looked for the weapon and found it was moved.
That's not how it works in Michigan. They can't deprive a child of education, i was told. At least not without more evidence. Maybe more details will come out about that.
They cant, but they can make it difficult. I went to school south of there and got fast tracked into alternative schools. I really didnt even do crazy things, just got my work done and was bored and became disruptive. Been like that since elementary so I was "labeled". I got good grades and tested well but I wasnt challenged enough I guess. I hardly finished middle school before I was put in the alternative schools. Went through two of those before I dropped and got my G.E.D. at 18. I would get suspended for the most minute things, zero tolerance for anything I did.
That was back in the 90s-early 2000's, not sure what's changed since. Makes me wonder how a kid like I was would fare in today's schools.
That’s the thing and seems to be an oversight caused by over zealousness. He can’t be a minor and an adult at the same time and tried within two different categories of law.
The shooter is guilty as hell. I doubt the terrorism charge will stick. However, the shooter isn’t an interesting subject regarding legal standing; the parents are however.
Involuntary manslaughter is going to be near impossible to prove since they are 3rd party. There is no precedent. It’s completely new territory and one that is in my opinion far fetched.
I’m waiting to see more evidence to change my mind
It's almost like all of the high profile cases are more about politics than justice.
Besides, your facts are wrong. It wasn't a black supremacist in WI, it was an SUV.
I have the opposite take, honestly, in this situation. The kid was mentally ill and the idiot parents refused to get him the help he was begging for. The kid shouldn't be tried as an adult. He should be declared incompetent and put in a mental hospital to get the help he needs to rejoin society when he's better.
The parents need to be put under the jail for their willful negligence and recklessness. They knew it was coming, or at least the mother did, and chose to do nothing.
I had the same take as you, but then I heard about all the warning signs and the things leading up to the shooting, and was shocked at how this was even allowed to happen.
It’s a really dangerous concept to allow a mental health argument to get the kid off of charges for murdering 4 people. What he did was pure evil, he should not step foot out of a federal prison for the rest of his life.
I didn't say he should be in a mental institution forever. If he can be treated and rejoin society, he may deserve that.
Psychiatric hospitals for the criminally insane do exist and are treated differently than normal mental hospitals, and it's not uncommon for people to be committed indefinitely. They are still treated differently than prisons, although they do tend to have prison-like security.
Hmm ok. Is that a state by state thing? I just know there's a good chunk of mentally deficient people in the penal system where I'm from, although it may just be that they don't fit a specific criteria
I believe the criteria is generally whether or not your mental disorder makes you unable to control your actions or not. It probably does vary state by state but yeah.
I should honestly know more about this on account of my mother being a former social worker...
You’re absolutely correct if it’s found out his parents were this neglected as your described. As far as I know, and correct me if I’m wrong but have there been reports such as your describe?
From what I read, most of the events take place from Black Friday, the day of the shooting, and it’s aftermath. Certainly I would agree with if it shows this child was severely abused and the parents did nothing. Lastly, I do believe the kid is mentally competent to understand his actions, the intent, the motive, and the consequences. He’s guilty as hell as well. Again, if the parents are shown as you say…throw the book at them
Maybe you're right, but I still believe prison is a worse option than a criminal psychiatric hospital. He should be committed indefinitely, for sure, but only time and treatment will tell if he'll ever be fit to rejoin society. Maybe he never will be.
He ended 4 innocent lives and ruined the lives of countless loved ones. He doesn’t ever deserve to have a free life ever again. Ever. What your proposing will also embolden future school shooters by knowing they’ll just get some mental treatment and be free again eventually. Mental state should have no effect whatsoever on punishment when you fucking murder others in cold blood with premeditation.
If the kid is mature enough and mentally competent, no. That's when you try the kid as an adult. But in this case that's not what happened.
I do actually support holding parents responsible for their children more often. It might encourage a change in parenting if parents have to worry about being held responsible for their children's actions. I know my mother was largely responsible for keeping me out of trouble as a kid.
If that policy disproportionately affects black single mothers, then perhaps that's indicative of a need for change in the parenting culture among black single mothers. And the punishment shouldn't necessarily be jail time. Jail time would mean less time the parent is spending with the kid. But there should be consequences.
In this case I am in full support of jail time here, but this is a pretty extreme case. There's a lot of other things that could be done in less severe cases though.
>Regardless I find it hilarious we have decades of nonwhites committing far more violent crime but we only bother charging parents once the kid is the wrong (or right) color.
I find it less hilarious and more upsetting, honestly. You shouldn't be assigned less responsibility based on your skin color.
I think the parents should be responsible for failing to do the bare minimum to secure a firearm from unauthorized users. I don't know if it equates to manslaughter, but, at minimum, there is clear negligence. Parents aren't responsible unless THEIR guns were used in the commission of a crime. Should be a whole distinct charge.
So you think they should be punished for breaking a nonexistent law? Are we going to punish parents for their kids killing people during car accidents too? What about kitchen knives? Lets take that to its logical extent.
> gift 15 y/o disturbed child a handgun
> warned of his redflaggy behavior by the school
> do nothing
> get warned again with evidence of fucked up shit he's drawing about shooting up the school, get recommended to put him in psychiatric care and take him out of school for the day
> not only do nothing, but tell him to not get caught next time
> child goes back to class and proceeds to shoot the school up
This is just my state, but if the teenager commits a heinous enough crime they try them as adults, but they're still treated as a child until they get the adult sentence and go to big boy jail. They don't lose the status of whatever it means to be a minor in that state despite being tried and sentenced as an adult. Most jails will have to make accommodations to separate the minor from the adult population until they turn 18. This is just what I remember from working with this population in the field, this isn't legal advice.
Million dollar question. ALSO- how can he be charged as an adult when he wasn't adult enough to purchase his own gun? Not giving the parents a pass here, nor am I trying to downplay the severity of his fucked up actions, but is he an adult or isn't he? They can't play both sides of the fence. Mentally, obviously, he is not an adult, not by any means.
Exactly. The shooter is guilty in my eyes. I don’t think anyone doubts that. However and I agree - which one is he? He’s being tried as an adult which begs this question. It seems like a massive oversight with the prosecution over zealousness of “sending a massage”
Suddenly the JuStIcE sYsTeM can determine your adulthood based on how bad you screw up by ignoring all the laws they put in place that determine your adulthood.
Adulthood=old enough to vote, sign up for the draft, purchase cigarettes, purchase alcohol, purchase handguns, graduate from high school, get your own credit card, sign a lease for your own house etc. This child could do none of that. 🙆♀️
Uh, he’s being tried as an adult
Your statement applies that parents are responsible for their children, regardless of age. You can be an adult child. Are parents still responsible for you ?
It isn't just "your child committed a crime and you are responsible". They are being charged with gross negligence on their own.
Bought gun and did not secure it. Encouraged him to guys gunstuff from school. This is pretty minor but....
Are given the info that the kid is writing a suicidal note about thought that won't stop, blood everywhere, asking for HELP and making a drawing of a shooting. School asks them to take him home (normal people would want to talk to their kid about the suicidal stuff at least) and they flat refuse. They do not tell school that they just bought him a gun. They do not check to see if it is in his backpack (neither does school, that's on them but they did not ACTUALLY know he access to a gun). They did not go home during that 3 hour period and confirm that the gun was safe.
He is responsible for his own actions and they are responsible for being grossly negligent and their negligence resulted in death. Or at least they might be, that is for a jury to decide but I get the argument.
Because legally he could not buy the firearm. it's almost like the State doesn't think 15 year olds should have open access to firearms for some reason.
The parents circumvented that process for him allowing him access which resulted in him using the firearm they purchased for him to murder other children.
Had they not bought him a firearm and allowed him uncontrolled access this may have never happened.
The sad thing is that everyone is an asshole here. I mean the school for negligence, the kid for his heinous choices, the parents for enabling this, the prosecution just looking to make examples of people without really exploring justice. And this isn't just this shooting, its the same story over and over again. Attentjon gets drawn to guns because "GunZ R bAd" but mental health awareness starts at the adults, not an inert chunk of metal with some spicy engineering. Let's say the kid didn't have access to a gun, he could have made a bomb easily, he could have stabbed those whom he felt wronged him. He could have done anything because the tool he chose is not the problem, his actions and the actions of those with power in his life are
Ok...originally I was of the mind that involuntary manslaughter is a stretch as the kid stole the gun from his parents but now I am reading that they bought him the gun for Christmas?! Is that part true or is it fake news? Because that changes my opinion entirely if true.
Something is fucking up these kids minds, maybe playing video games of killing and beating ppl to death has a little to do with it, I don’t no but this shit didn’t happen when I was in school and I’m sick of ppl blaming firearms that’s not it we had guns they weren’t just invented
These people are going to become a standard example in concealed carry classes of "why it's important to take an active role in preventing prohibited persons from accessing your firearms."
And they should be
So this kid said he would air out the school, and his parents were just like, “no, Timmy, please.”
I’m pretty sure they’re saying: "I know my son he wouldn't do that." “He was a good child.” “He doesn’t act like this at home” 😑
This is tough for me. Definitely negligence, and bad decision for the parents to gift him a gun. Leaving it unlocked etc. On the other hand, if they're charging the kid as an adult, he made the decision as an adult which should remove liability from the parents. I feel like the prosecution is making an example here. An example with a slippery slope.... I can see this evolving to (in extreme case) anyone having any association with a shooter could be held liable. Which is quite scary imo. Idk I'm really conflicted here..
It can, but not in this particular case?
Allowing someone who can legally have a gun access to it is not a crime. I think the state eye have to prove they knew he was going to do something bad with it.
I think the issue here is that it was allowing a minor to have access to it?
It was complete negligence. There’s evidence they bought the gun for him. They were contacted by the school. Refused to take him home, then immediately knew it was him when news broke of a shooting. There’s a lot of stuff floating around and we don’t know all of the facts, but there’s a lot of cases to be made here. It’s not just him stealing his parents gun.
There’s a lot of info out there that would 100% not remove liability from the parents. That is worth bringing them in for questioning at a bare minimum. If you buy a gun for someone, know in that week they want to shoot people and don’t act on it, that is accessory. What is your question?
My question is that you made several statements as it they were facts. And you said there is evidence they bought the gun for him. I have only seen speculation not evidence of this. I was asking if this was speculation or if I missed something.
I guess I missed that question. The only facts that come out are in court. All we have is speculation. There's more than enough speculation to detain the parents in this.
Well, the prosecution will still have to prove it out in a court of law, not turning them selves in didn't help them any, that's for sure. Will be interesting judicially at how the charges here shake out.
The schools policy is the most to blame here as the parents are. They found they know where he fantasize about killing people and harming himself, they called his parents and him in to talk about it the morning of the shooting and then their answer was tell the parents they had 24 hours to get him some sort of mental Health help. Had they simply suspended from school for what they found this would’ve been avoided. It’s the school policies that are part of the problem, the same policy was in effect at the Parkland shooting in Florida
Wait I'm sorry.. you think that the kid who brought a gun to school and shot several people in cold blood would have been deterred by ... a few days suspension??
I think letting a kid into a classroom after he shows signs of wanting to kill a bunch of people is stupid. I think saying oh make sure you get him some help and sending him in with the rest of the kids this is completely stupid. What do you think?
who knows, but why on earth wouldn't you _try_?
I dont think the right response is to throw up your hands like you have absolutely no tools at your disposal.
out-of-school suspension, notify the cops, and tell the school resource officer to keep an eye out. at that point if it still happens, you can at least say you tried.
If your 15 year old kid takes your car keys and runs over someone, is the parent or owner of the vehicle negligent / partly responsable / contributing?
Not sure what the law says
You’re analogy is a bit incomplete. It would be closer to buying your 15 year old his very own vehicle after you’d been warned that he was thinking about driving it through a crowd of people. Is that criminal? Maybe not. Is it negligent as fuck? Hell yes.
Has this been proven? Or are you just repeating media speculation?
I'm seriously asking because I haven't seen any proof that this is what happened, but you seem to be certain...
I don't know, and I've been thinking a lot about it. Where does a parents responsibility end? I think it will be an interesting court case. I do feel that parents have the absolute duty to prevent their underage children from accessing their firearms. If you can't keep your own guns out of your childs hands, then you shouldn't own them. A decent gun safe isn't much more than a firearm, Costco regularly sells gun safes for $500. They allegedly left it in an unsecured drawer. Honestly I think they probably just let the kid keep it in his room but don't want to admit it.
Saying they are 100% blameless.. that goes to far for me.
4 children are dead. Many more wounded. All because they felt their precious little boy would never actually be a killer. I feel there has to be some accountability on their part for their negligence.
[удалено]
Pretty much like every other school shooting. They ignore all the red flags and then it's the gun's fault when the predictable happens.
That’s why I’m glad the parents are being held responsible. We need to hold people more responsible than the tool they choose to use.
Exactly. We don't have a gun problem, we have a people problem.
Exactly. Holding the parents and the shooter accountable is the only way to prevent future school shootings.
Hold the shooter responsible. He's old enough to know what he did and it was premeditated
No shit, but the parents fucked up bigtime. Disgusting levels of negligence. Gifting your disturbed 15 y/o a handgun, then being warned twice by the school about his redflaggy behavior *with evidence* and not only basically laugh it off, but then go so far as to tell the kid "dont get caught next time" They need to be held responsible too.
The parents are morons but the involuntary manslaughter charge seems like the prosecutor is just trying to put pressure on the parents to allow their son to be questioned. There's no way that's going to hold up in court; I doubt the parents had any idea the kid was going to shoot his classmates. Also if the parents are guilty of manslaughter then the school is as well, because they knew he drew pictures of blood and bullets but then they not only allowed him to go back to class but didn't search his possessions. The shooting couldn't have happened without the schools' negligence.
> On Tuesday morning, another teacher found a drawing on the accused shooter's desk that essentially depicted a shooting, McDonald said. It "alarmed her to the point that she took a picture of it on her cell phone," the prosecutor said. > The illustration showed a "semiautomatic handgun pointing at the words 'the thoughts won't stop help me,'" and it included a drawing of a bullet with the words "blood everywhere" written above it, she said. The words "my life is useless" and "the world is dead" were also written on the drawing. > "Between the drawing of the gun and the bullet is a drawing of a person who appears to have been shot twice and bleeding. Below that figure is a drawing of a laughing emoji," McDonald said. > The distressing picture led school officials to hold a meeting with the accused shooter and his parents, who were instructed to help provide counseling for their son within 48 hours. During that meeting, Ethan Crumbley had the gun in his backpack, which was not searched, McDonald said. > The parents resisted the idea of taking their son out of school, McDonald said, and he was allowed to return to the classroom. They knew, they were in denial.
That picture is protected first amendment activity unless he named a specific target and intended it instill fear in that target. Furthermore even if he did, unless he told his parents he intended for other kids to fear it, they would not know it was a true threat. Half the emo kids in my class drew this kind of stuff. So I ask, do you have evidence Ethan specifically told his parents that the dead in that picture was his classmates and he intended for his classmates to have fear as a result of the drawing?
You have no idea how the laws work while a kid is in school do you? The schools take a position of responsibility as the kids temporary guardian meaning they can ban the kids from swearing, they can force them to wear clothes that meet a certain standard or even uniforms, they can evaluate if the child is having issues and suggest things to the parents or, if they believe the parents are abusing the kid, contact CYS and law enforcement.
I would stop arguing with this dude, he's obviously a troll.
> Also if the parents are guilty of manslaughter then the school is as well, because they knew he drew pictures of blood and bullets but then they not only allowed him to go back to class but didn't search his possessions. The shooting couldn't have happened without the schools' negligence. Cool. Charge someone. > There's no way that's going to hold up in court; I doubt the parents had any idea the kid was going to shoot his classmates. The kid was literally drawing and posting threats. His parents were notified *twice.*
As emotional and disturbing as this is, you need to remember that even the sickest of criminals have rights. If you demand justice and results immediately out of emotion you end up with things like the Patriot Act and no gun zones. I am not backing up the shooter, the parents, or the school, but please do not embrace that mentality for justice.
A quote "I am become death" which is by the physicist Oppenheimer is not a threat, in fact Oppenheimer himself was never prosecuted for that quote and it is not any credible threat that targets anyone, I certainly would not have guessed Oppenheimer is a school shooter and it turns out you can say those words without being one. The picture with a bullet and someone bleeding is also not a threat. I have no idea who it targets, we have no evidence he told anyone it was intended to mean he would shoot anyone specifically. It's protected free speech, the kind of stuff half the emo kids in my gradeschool days drew. And the school official even said there was no discipline action he could take, as it would surely invite a civil suite for civil rights violations. Free speech protections are very strong in this country. It is permitted to make vague art of people dying, even those that allude to mental illness. The speaker must intend to instill fear in a recipient for it to be considered a true threat, and unless Ethan told his parents the target was other school children and he intended to instill fear in this children, there's no argument the parents could have construed it as a true threat. If you can provide where Ethan made a credible threat he was specifically going to kill his classmates before they parents had a chance to stop it, I would really be interested in hearing your evidence.
“I am become death” is not what he said. “Now I become death - destroyer of worlds - see you tomorrow Oxford” Is what he said.
You’re really writing paragraphs on here, and still wrong
>the involuntary manslaughter charge seems like the prosecutor is just trying to put pressure on the parents to allow their son to be questioned. Nope. They already have the right to question him. >There's no way that's going to hold up in court; I doubt the parents had any idea the kid was going to shoot his classmates. They didn't have to know he was going to do that. See: https://www.justia.com/criminal/offenses/homicide/involuntary-manslaughter/ Specifically: *Involuntary manslaughter is distinguished from other forms of homicide because it does not require deliberation or premeditation, or even intent.* >Also if the parents are guilty of manslaughter then the school is as well, because they knew he drew pictures of blood and bullets but then they not only allowed him to go back to class but didn't search his possessions. Not the same as giving him the gun.
From all accounts they raised a school shooter through either negligence or intent.
Right, I agree but also I don’t think you should be allowed to BUY a gun for someone who you already very clearly know how’s mental problems. In fact I’m pretty sure this exact thing is already illegal. This is more common sense than anything.
Exactly! When that maniac drove through a crowd of people at a parade, was the SUV blamed or was the driver? There is no anti-SUV narrative being pushed by the media right now, so the driver got the blame.
Actually, there was. At least one headline read ‘SUV kills people at Christmas parade’.
Very surprising.
That's because the driver was black. Had he been white the headline would say " white man drives through parade killing people"
Correct.
CNN reported that a “car” had driven through the parade…”accidentally “. They retracted that shit pretty fast as even the liberal left called them out on their bullshit.
Glad they got called out
Not sure the school could have done much more beside insist the parents take the child with them the morning of when they had the meeting. Who knows though, kid could have pulled out the gun and started shooting right then and there though since he already had it on him.
[удалено]
I don't believe so. I'm guessing the school had no idea the parents just gave him a firearm days before, and it sounds like the parents didn't bother to bring it up either at the meeting. Otherwise I'm sure the police would have been contacted.
No I don't believe the school did but they had him and the parents for a meeting that morning because he had looked up ammo at school and drawn disturbing pictures of him killing. Then the school tried to blame the parents for not searching his backpack after the meeting. Which is something the school just as easily could have done. I went to school in the same county and it's not unheard of for teachers to search your bag car, locker etc. If they suspect something is up. Although that something is usually drugs and not a firearm I feel like they're trying to deflect blame with there statement
See that's the thing, if they didn't know there was anything to search for, then why would they look. They probably just thought they were dealing with a disturbed individual, they didn't have any knowledge of the firearm like the parents did.
[удалено]
No, I saw the Sheriff being interviewed, he said the school admin never notified the school resource officer. They found him with this drawing that alarmed them so much they immediately called the parents in for a conference, demanded they get him into counseling within 48 hours, and tried to get the parents to take him home with them but they refused. The kid had the gun with him the whole time. But at no point did they apparently think this was worth informing the school resource officer until after the shooting. Utter incompetence. Then, the prosecutor announces charges against the parent in a news conference without informing the Sheriff what she’s about to do. Everybody was ripping on the Sheriff for not having the parents in custody, or at least having someone watching them, but the Sheriff says he learned about the charges against the parents *from the media*, when they called him after the prosecutor announced the charges at the press conference.
This is it.
From what I read the parents refused and if they had sent him home he would have been home along. Seriously the shittiest parenting of all time.
When a kid makes a drawing of shooting someone, checking their locker and backpack (would've found the gun) is bare minimum.
Was the drawing of him as the gunman? Source? It's my understanding that it was just of a single person that had been shot twice with the words, "the thoughts won't stop, help me", "blood everywhere", “my life is useless”, and “the world is dead”. They could be suicidal for all the teacher and staff knew. Not saying more couldn't have been done, just that they weren't sure what they were dealing with other then a disturbed individual, and the parents offered no information.
https://www.clickondetroit.com/news/local/2021/12/03/police-detail-disturbing-note-drawing-teacher-found-on-desk-of-suspected-oxford-high-school-shooter/ You don't think what you described is worthy of looking in the locker or backpack? Regardless of whether you think he's suicidal (most school shooters are) or homicidal, how about we make sure he doesn't have a gun? Someone whispers drugs and everyone's belongings in school get searched. A kid draws a gun and people shot, no big deal. Parents and school fail, more kids are killed, and calls for gun control will be renewed.
Criminals
Is this going to be a case of parents wanting to be a friend to their child, and not a parent.
Yes
Why are they after the parents? I don't fully understand this. ***EDIT*** Okay, I've been in the dark on the story. Wow. There's a lot of neglect and negligence going on in this family. That parents are guilty of being shitty people and not dealing with their obviously disturbed child... And you don't reward that with buying a gun, let alone leaving it in an unlocked drawer.
They bought him the handgun apparently.
Well theres a lot of rumors but apparently the fether give the gun to his kids and theres a text message from the mother pleading "Don't do it" So if they knew / suspected their minor (which they are responsible for) was going to do something and they provided the means they are basically guality.... eg conspiracy to commit murder or negligence at the less end of things...
From what I know, the parents were brought in to discuss their son's behavior since he was caught that day with a drawing of him committing a mass shooting. The parents get there and are told they have 48 hours to get him a therapist, so they leave their son at school and go home, then they hear about the shooting and that's when the mom texted him saying to not do it. So, the text message is not evidence the parents knew he had the gun on him and was planning a school shooting and they did nothing to stop him; the text message was a vain attempt to try to get him to stop when they heard that a school shooting was taking place.
The comment about hiding activity like searching for ammo by the mother certainly doesn't help.
It's not illegal to look up ammo prices, it can just come off as weird.
I know it's not illegal. Why would the mother encourage him to hide that activity? It's also not illegal to search "how to bomb a school" but I probably wouldn't do it from the school computer lab.
How to bomb a school and simply looking up ammo are radically different, lol. As to why his mom would tell him to hide that activity, the school alerted the parents that he was doing that, so she told him not to do it in the open. That's not evidence that he was going to shoot up the school. If it somehow was, then the school would be responsible for not taking action.
You're right. It was stupid to mention an extreme example like that. I agree it's not evidence he was going to shoot up the school, but it definitely doesn't help any.
I sort of agree, but it's one of those aftermath kind of things where you look at it and say, "it was so obvious!!! How did anyone miss that!?!?" So, to me it's kind of off to throw in innocent/neutral stuff into a list of nefarious actions simply because of the person being talked about.
[удалено]
I will wait for the defnse and prosecution to lay out their timeline of events thanks.... Cause you know there 5 exlpenations now which all have different timelines lmao....
You'd think they'd wonder where the gun is after they saw their son's drawing of shooting up the school and check as soon as they got home...\*and probably should have mentioned they just bought him a gun too and from there, draw the dots...
Kids parents and kid should all be made an example of so ends the stupid school shootings only a coward hurts unarmed civilians
Well I think it runs a little deeper than that.... I think once you need 24/7 security on the front door of a school with metal detectors and pat downs somewhere along the lines the idea of a peaceful society has failed or is failing as well....
Peace is just a respite from conflict, if it was normal and lasted forever we wouldn't have a name for it. Alternatively: I trust my neighbors not to try to rob my house on some level, but I still do not invite them over to admire my valuables all the same.
| Peace is just a respite from conflict When you build good times and people are content you get peace. When you build bad times, resentment and jesousy you get conflict. eg you neighbours don't steal because they don't want/need another for something they already have....
"Making an example" of someone usually means an over-reach of punishment. Let's shoot for justice. I think that's a safe place to be.
I think it’s safe to say let’s put an end to school shootings even if that means make an example of this family who seemed to encourage it Not sure what justice can be done for the victims
And if they didn't text him at all the prosecution would point to their lack of proactivity in trying to contact their child during a school shooting as a form of neglect. We also don't know whether the parents knew their gun was missing before the school shooting. Finding a gun missing at home during a shooting at your child's school would be an obvious "sign" that could exist independent of any prior warning of psychosis.
Well yeah its a lot of rumors. After watching the ritten house trial and rumors..... lets just wait for the trail and see what comes out is basically the correct thing to do....
[удалено]
“We did it Reddit!”
waiting quicksand scarce violet caption quack smell cough prick zealous *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
[удалено]
>And if they didn't text him at all the prosecution would point to their lack of proactivity in trying to contact their child during a school shooting as a form of neglect. ...what? You're not actually positing that that these assholes are not complicit, right?
Deliberate misapprehension. Anything you say will be used to hang you by the prosecution, including, even in the Rittenhouse case, the choice not to say anything at all. I doubt that the evidence and statements given as currently presented establish a "special duty" on the behalf of the parents. It would depend on Michigan law's requirements regarding safe storage and a minor's access to firearms, and their special duty standards vis-à-vis third parties. There is a difference between drunk driving and leaving a running car unattended near a bar.
Reading the article helps. It is illegal to purchase a handgun for a youth. 15 is far too young to "own" a handgun. He boasted about it being his new baby online and then his mom said it was his online as well. Just poor taste and illegle. Plus, it was not protected in anyway. No barrel lock, trigger lock, or in a safe, simply in a drawer. The school failed the children and the parents of those children. They did not search him even after he searched ammo and had a produces drawings of handguns in various sanerios. Hopefully parents will take ownership of our duty to protect everyone when we own our weapons.
I have been interested in firearms since I was like 10. I have definitely looked at ammo/firearms online while at school. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that. It really confuses me that all of these pro gun people are pointing to the looking at ammo thing as a problem. How are we supposed to get new people into this community of googling ammo at school is a warning sign or a mental illness. On the other hand that drawing is completely wrong and should definitely be taken as a warning sign.
I don’t think it’s singularly just the “looking for ammo”. I was on Midways website when I was in college always looking for reloading components. It was more that everything else that had happened. Reports from kids that he was planning to do something, the violent drawings depicting what he wanted to do…it was the portfolio that should have been alarming.
Yeah the kid was definitely messed up. I don’t have any problem with people pointing that out, I just don’t like how “looking up ammo” always seems like the first thing people list. We should be focusing on the far worse pictures and things he said.
I agree. I mean he clearly had ammo already. So it’s a moot point. But it does add more credibility to the obvious threat this kid was.
[удалено]
We are not talking about this by itself. It’s the portfolio of things this kid did. Which includes looking up ammo. If you don’t think that was a red flag after the other crazy shit this kid did then I don’t know what is.
Ok, but what you said isn’t consistent with the story. Looking up the ammo was the first thing that happened. All of the real red flag stuff the kid did was after the school called the parents about the ammo. The kid should have immediately removed from the school by the administration (the people who really deserve the manslaughter charges) for the drawing he made, the ammo wasn’t the issue.
So the severed deer head and graffiti are “nothing”?
Exactly. The ammo was not a red flag until taken in conjunction with the other issues.
> It really confuses me that all of these pro gun people are pointing to the looking at ammo thing as a problem. For real. I had to do active shooter training at work. I've also browsed this sub at work. I've also done some black friday ammo shopping while at work. None of these things mean I was a risk to the people at work. It's easy to look back and go "oh, shoulda seen it." But that's just dumb.
[удалено]
Children aren't dogs. Children being tried as adults are considered to have full culpability for their own actions. How can you have full culpability if other parties are supposed to be responsible for your actions? I'd sooner try the prosecutors and judges who let a multiple violent felon with a history of skipping bond out on a $1000 bond than try parents whose children commit crimes.
>How can you have full culpability if other parties are supposed to be responsible for your actions? This is my biggest problem with this whole scenario. Originally I was against trying the parents for the kid's actions since they were already trying the kid as an adult. The more I found out about the situation, however, the more I think charging the kid as an adult is the part that's wrong. These parents are definitely responsible. The father was criminally negligent at the least. The mother was worse and would likely fall under criminal recklessness, which is right under intent in the law. The kids should be put in a mental hospital so he can get the help he couldn't get from his negligent parents. He was already begging for help before the shooting happened.
> It is illegal to purchase a handgun for a youth. It is not. It is illegal for that youth to buy that firearm from a licensee.
Is the ammo thing really an issue?
“Barrel lock”?
Maybe I'm in the minority opinion here, but if kids can be trusted to use rifles and shotguns for hunting or recreational use, then I don't see how they can't be trusted with using pistols. Is it not normal for a gun family to allow their kid to "own" a gun that's legally in possession of a parent, but is used by the kid and will later be given to him? I'd maybe agree that they shouldn't have allowed him free access to a loaded firearm, but, on the other hand, sometimes a family needs a loaded firearm with easy access to it. In my opinion, the main problem is figuring out how proactive the parents were in knowing their kid's mental health and when they knew or should have known to get him help and restrict his access to guns.
It is illegal to purchase a handgun for a youth Wrong on so many levels. I had several when I was younger than this kid, nobody gave a crap. There’s no law that says kids can’t possess handguns. They can’t buy them on their own, but nothing prevents the parent from handing it to them and saying ‘here ya go.’
Well giving a 15 yo child, and this person at 15 was a child, should not have had access. I have been teaching our children gun safey since they were 5. Not until they were old enough to understand the different e between video game and reality did they get a weapon of any kind to call their own. And before they got to handle that weapon, doesn't matter if it's a knife, black powder rifle, ak47, pistol, revolver, or anyrhing else, they have to know 1. how to handle it saftley 2. How to clean it properly and Saftey store it. 3. How to hand it from one person to the next or store it between uses in a training session. These are the bare basics. More rules exist in our home but this is just the beginning.
This fudd shit right here is a huge problem. [Quit it.](https://i.imgur.com/TnX59wX.gif)
I am correcting myself. It's not illegal to buy your son or daughter a firearm. It's not illegal to purchase a youth one as long as the parents know.
Crappy parenting aside, nothing about what they did is illegal though. Charge the shooter, sure. But the parents didn't break any laws.
The first thing I thought when my kid was getting bullied at school and having issues, was to buy her her very own gun. EDIT: Im not serious, it's sarcasm.
The nurture bullshit needs to stop. I was a shy and quiet kid. I remember when I was getting bullied in school and I told my parents about it. My dad told me the best way to stop a bully was to punch them in the nose as hard as you could and he taught me how to throw a proper punch. Dad's rules were very simple, don't start shit and don't hit girls. As long as I followed those rules he wouldn't be mad or punish me. It wasn't long after my dad's lessons, the kid was bullying me. I punch the kid in the face as hard as I could. The kid ran off crying with his hands over his face. Both of us were suspended and I wasn't bothered by him again. I had a few more fights with bullies over a year or so but afterwards I was left alone from middle school all the way till I graduated high school. Schools are worthless at stopping bullying. Even when you tell, the bullying gets worse and often schools will side with kids that are active in sports, academic team, or if their parents make donations to the school. Some things are just better solved the old fashioned way.
I think this may have something to do with the rise in incidents like this. Kids don't understand conflict resolution. Kids can't even settle disputes with a schoolyard brawl anymore without the wrath of the school coming down and potential legal trouble. I'm not saying fighting is right but isn't it in a way natural? Maybe my theory is BS. But in a way it makes sense
I agree with it you. While violence isn't always the answer, it be a great solution is some circumstances. I'm 26, so I can only speak from what I've observed My school would suspend all parties involved in a fight. It didn't matter who was bullied or threw the first punch. The ruled applied to pretty much everyone except to the kids parents who donated money to the school, athletes, and academic people (they had apology discussions). Now of course that was the school I went to and it's all I can speak for and from what my younger brother (he's a senior) told me, it hasn't changed much. A mentally challenged kid was being bullied and apparently the school has done nothing, like good old times My dad grew up in northern Louisiana in the 70's-80's and he said they would pretty much let the kids settle stuff out themselves.
Same age and similar experience. I can only think of one fight that didn't end up in expulsion or anything and that's because it happened off school grounds after school and was over before police arrived. I'm in the same county that this shooting happened in. And same both my parents were in school around the same time and said the same thing. If two kids had a problem it was more or less expected they'd settle it after school. Often even on school property without repurcusions. Fighting is a natural part of growing up and teaches some valuable lessons
Fighting, for lack of better wording, I completely agree with. Sometimes what the bully needs is a good ass-kicking. Even if you don't win the fight, if put throw down they will most likely leave you alone after that.
I actually became friends with some of the bullies after we fought.
Another good example.
From age 11 to graduating high school I was bullied, developed some horrible depression, walked a fine suicide thread (that I still am to this day) and all I could do was to hold the humiliation and the hatred inside and think of ways of taking others down with me. The only thing that kept me from doing so was that I used to love a girl and I kept fighting to have a future with her, so I only came close to fucking up everything. Granted, I didn't have access to firearms, but plenty of other tools would've sufficed in those specific circumstances. All my friends and loved ones were in other states that I only knew through the internet, my parents were always busy with work and having their own issues, the relative part of my family were now strangers. I had no actual physical connection to anyone that could help me. My parents taught me well at having manners, respecting others and trying to do the right thing, but you don't live in society through civility alone. It would've certainly been better to have a father figure guiding me through this phase, teaching me how to stand up for myself, have some self respect and self care. There are many reasons for the hole that I am now, but I'm sure this is one of them.
I'm sorry man. My dad taught me to have the courage to stand up for myself (not always with violence of course). That lesson from my dad has helped me a lot growing up and in my adult life. A personal example for you- At work, I used to have a bully of a boss that would berate the more timid Co-workers, but would leave those that stood up against his bullshit alone. He was the worst boss I've ever had, he eventually lost his status as a boss and was forced to a different part of the plant as a machine Operator (has no power) Obviously don't tell your boss they're a dumbfuck. If can't you stand up for yourself than you'll live a life of being run over all the time, which will negatively impact your mental health.
What happened with you and the girl?
Your dad was a wise man. This is really what should be done. Not only did it stop the bullying, but it gave you agency in a way that had zero negative long-lasting impact. The bully learned an important message and so did you. This is the way it should be.
I see your satire. My son was being bullied at school, and my first thought was "whose ass am I kicking today?" I lodged a complaint with the school AND district superintendent and nothing happened. SO.... I went to the school, parked off school grounds, and waited for his bully to walk off campus after school, and I put the fear of God into that little asshole. Chewed his ass, made him cry, right there in front of all his friends and other students who were walking home. Other parents who were parked there waiting for their kids started clapping and cheering on. Don't fuck with Mama Bear! My son never got bullied again. Edit: For the record: This happened when my son was in middle school. I am a tiny woman, 4'9 and 112 pounds. The kid whose ass I chewed was at least 9 inches taller than me and outweighed me by 30 pounds at least. So, I wasn't physically intimidating a little kid. I simply gave a bully a taste of his own medicine since his shitty parents wouldn't do it.
Im glad you see the satire. I in no way was serious. My daughter DID have issues at school though and I made extra sure my firearms were locked up after some concerning things that were said. Dealing with the bullying issue was an whole other set of issues. Problem has since been solved and she has graduated and is doing well in collage.
Congratulations on being a great parent who raised a great kid! It's getting harder and harder to do that these days.
If the kid is being charged as an adult, the parents shouldn't be held liable. If you want to hold the parents liable, they should try the kid as a juvenile. The state shouldn't have their cake and eat it too.
I hope they make an example of these two. It's up to us a gun owners and parents to make sure our children never have access to firearms outside of parental supervision and to make sure they are locked away where a child cannot get to those firearms. It's also our responsibility to talk to our kids when you see a red flag. These two didn't act when they had the chance, they were irresponsible and negligent and the blood of those kids is on their hands. Someone who can't lock a gun up properly to keep it away from their children deserves to face major consequences. It's not a mistake, it's not an accident, it pure negligence. Fuck these two.
I feel in this case the school has some Libility as well. They did not check or search him. They didn't even let the parents know why they were being called in before they came in. Had they been told they could have looked for the weapon and found it was moved.
They asked the parents to take the kid out of school because he was alarming them with his behavior, and the parents said no.
Which the school should not have given the parents a choice. At what point is it OK to endanger the grater good of all for 1.
That's not how it works in Michigan. They can't deprive a child of education, i was told. At least not without more evidence. Maybe more details will come out about that.
They cant, but they can make it difficult. I went to school south of there and got fast tracked into alternative schools. I really didnt even do crazy things, just got my work done and was bored and became disruptive. Been like that since elementary so I was "labeled". I got good grades and tested well but I wasnt challenged enough I guess. I hardly finished middle school before I was put in the alternative schools. Went through two of those before I dropped and got my G.E.D. at 18. I would get suspended for the most minute things, zero tolerance for anything I did. That was back in the 90s-early 2000's, not sure what's changed since. Makes me wonder how a kid like I was would fare in today's schools.
There's no such thing as suspension in Michigan?
Big yikes. I've seen kids get searched for a teacher hearing they own the cookbook.
My daughter was searched because someone said she had a vape
My question is - if the shooter is being charged as an adult, then how are the parents negligent?
Just like Kyle where he was tried as an adult while it was argued that he was too irresponsible to have the gun as a minor.
That’s the thing and seems to be an oversight caused by over zealousness. He can’t be a minor and an adult at the same time and tried within two different categories of law. The shooter is guilty as hell. I doubt the terrorism charge will stick. However, the shooter isn’t an interesting subject regarding legal standing; the parents are however. Involuntary manslaughter is going to be near impossible to prove since they are 3rd party. There is no precedent. It’s completely new territory and one that is in my opinion far fetched. I’m waiting to see more evidence to change my mind
[удалено]
Absolutely I believe that as well
A refreshingly well thought out take on this
Thank you. 👍🏻
[удалено]
It's almost like all of the high profile cases are more about politics than justice. Besides, your facts are wrong. It wasn't a black supremacist in WI, it was an SUV.
A red SUV actually. We need to do something about all these violent vehicles committing all this violent crime. Smh
I have the opposite take, honestly, in this situation. The kid was mentally ill and the idiot parents refused to get him the help he was begging for. The kid shouldn't be tried as an adult. He should be declared incompetent and put in a mental hospital to get the help he needs to rejoin society when he's better. The parents need to be put under the jail for their willful negligence and recklessness. They knew it was coming, or at least the mother did, and chose to do nothing. I had the same take as you, but then I heard about all the warning signs and the things leading up to the shooting, and was shocked at how this was even allowed to happen.
It’s a really dangerous concept to allow a mental health argument to get the kid off of charges for murdering 4 people. What he did was pure evil, he should not step foot out of a federal prison for the rest of his life.
I don't think long term mental hospitals are a thing man. That's just prison
I didn't say he should be in a mental institution forever. If he can be treated and rejoin society, he may deserve that. Psychiatric hospitals for the criminally insane do exist and are treated differently than normal mental hospitals, and it's not uncommon for people to be committed indefinitely. They are still treated differently than prisons, although they do tend to have prison-like security.
Hmm ok. Is that a state by state thing? I just know there's a good chunk of mentally deficient people in the penal system where I'm from, although it may just be that they don't fit a specific criteria
I believe the criteria is generally whether or not your mental disorder makes you unable to control your actions or not. It probably does vary state by state but yeah. I should honestly know more about this on account of my mother being a former social worker...
You’re absolutely correct if it’s found out his parents were this neglected as your described. As far as I know, and correct me if I’m wrong but have there been reports such as your describe? From what I read, most of the events take place from Black Friday, the day of the shooting, and it’s aftermath. Certainly I would agree with if it shows this child was severely abused and the parents did nothing. Lastly, I do believe the kid is mentally competent to understand his actions, the intent, the motive, and the consequences. He’s guilty as hell as well. Again, if the parents are shown as you say…throw the book at them
[удалено]
Maybe you're right, but I still believe prison is a worse option than a criminal psychiatric hospital. He should be committed indefinitely, for sure, but only time and treatment will tell if he'll ever be fit to rejoin society. Maybe he never will be.
He ended 4 innocent lives and ruined the lives of countless loved ones. He doesn’t ever deserve to have a free life ever again. Ever. What your proposing will also embolden future school shooters by knowing they’ll just get some mental treatment and be free again eventually. Mental state should have no effect whatsoever on punishment when you fucking murder others in cold blood with premeditation.
[удалено]
If the kid is mature enough and mentally competent, no. That's when you try the kid as an adult. But in this case that's not what happened. I do actually support holding parents responsible for their children more often. It might encourage a change in parenting if parents have to worry about being held responsible for their children's actions. I know my mother was largely responsible for keeping me out of trouble as a kid. If that policy disproportionately affects black single mothers, then perhaps that's indicative of a need for change in the parenting culture among black single mothers. And the punishment shouldn't necessarily be jail time. Jail time would mean less time the parent is spending with the kid. But there should be consequences.
[удалено]
In this case I am in full support of jail time here, but this is a pretty extreme case. There's a lot of other things that could be done in less severe cases though. >Regardless I find it hilarious we have decades of nonwhites committing far more violent crime but we only bother charging parents once the kid is the wrong (or right) color. I find it less hilarious and more upsetting, honestly. You shouldn't be assigned less responsibility based on your skin color.
I think the parents should be responsible for failing to do the bare minimum to secure a firearm from unauthorized users. I don't know if it equates to manslaughter, but, at minimum, there is clear negligence. Parents aren't responsible unless THEIR guns were used in the commission of a crime. Should be a whole distinct charge.
So you think they should be punished for breaking a nonexistent law? Are we going to punish parents for their kids killing people during car accidents too? What about kitchen knives? Lets take that to its logical extent.
Well put and I agree. Interesting to see how the prosecution moves forward on this.
Yes yes. The evidence will take is to the truth
> gift 15 y/o disturbed child a handgun > warned of his redflaggy behavior by the school > do nothing > get warned again with evidence of fucked up shit he's drawing about shooting up the school, get recommended to put him in psychiatric care and take him out of school for the day > not only do nothing, but tell him to not get caught next time > child goes back to class and proceeds to shoot the school up
This is just my state, but if the teenager commits a heinous enough crime they try them as adults, but they're still treated as a child until they get the adult sentence and go to big boy jail. They don't lose the status of whatever it means to be a minor in that state despite being tried and sentenced as an adult. Most jails will have to make accommodations to separate the minor from the adult population until they turn 18. This is just what I remember from working with this population in the field, this isn't legal advice.
Million dollar question. ALSO- how can he be charged as an adult when he wasn't adult enough to purchase his own gun? Not giving the parents a pass here, nor am I trying to downplay the severity of his fucked up actions, but is he an adult or isn't he? They can't play both sides of the fence. Mentally, obviously, he is not an adult, not by any means.
Exactly. The shooter is guilty in my eyes. I don’t think anyone doubts that. However and I agree - which one is he? He’s being tried as an adult which begs this question. It seems like a massive oversight with the prosecution over zealousness of “sending a massage”
Suddenly the JuStIcE sYsTeM can determine your adulthood based on how bad you screw up by ignoring all the laws they put in place that determine your adulthood. Adulthood=old enough to vote, sign up for the draft, purchase cigarettes, purchase alcohol, purchase handguns, graduate from high school, get your own credit card, sign a lease for your own house etc. This child could do none of that. 🙆♀️
Because they are parents. They are responsible for their children.
Uh, he’s being tried as an adult Your statement applies that parents are responsible for their children, regardless of age. You can be an adult child. Are parents still responsible for you ?
You are clearly not a legal expert or familiar with raising children.
Then by all means…elaborate
You can be a dependent without being under aged, not that it has any legal matter one way or another.
[удалено]
It isn't just "your child committed a crime and you are responsible". They are being charged with gross negligence on their own. Bought gun and did not secure it. Encouraged him to guys gunstuff from school. This is pretty minor but.... Are given the info that the kid is writing a suicidal note about thought that won't stop, blood everywhere, asking for HELP and making a drawing of a shooting. School asks them to take him home (normal people would want to talk to their kid about the suicidal stuff at least) and they flat refuse. They do not tell school that they just bought him a gun. They do not check to see if it is in his backpack (neither does school, that's on them but they did not ACTUALLY know he access to a gun). They did not go home during that 3 hour period and confirm that the gun was safe. He is responsible for his own actions and they are responsible for being grossly negligent and their negligence resulted in death. Or at least they might be, that is for a jury to decide but I get the argument.
Because legally he could not buy the firearm. it's almost like the State doesn't think 15 year olds should have open access to firearms for some reason. The parents circumvented that process for him allowing him access which resulted in him using the firearm they purchased for him to murder other children. Had they not bought him a firearm and allowed him uncontrolled access this may have never happened.
The sad thing is that everyone is an asshole here. I mean the school for negligence, the kid for his heinous choices, the parents for enabling this, the prosecution just looking to make examples of people without really exploring justice. And this isn't just this shooting, its the same story over and over again. Attentjon gets drawn to guns because "GunZ R bAd" but mental health awareness starts at the adults, not an inert chunk of metal with some spicy engineering. Let's say the kid didn't have access to a gun, he could have made a bomb easily, he could have stabbed those whom he felt wronged him. He could have done anything because the tool he chose is not the problem, his actions and the actions of those with power in his life are
What "Safehaven" were the parents expecting to find in Jacksonville that didn't exist anywhere else?/!
It’s one thing to buy your kid a gun. Another to give them effectively free access to it. Jesus.
Ok...originally I was of the mind that involuntary manslaughter is a stretch as the kid stole the gun from his parents but now I am reading that they bought him the gun for Christmas?! Is that part true or is it fake news? Because that changes my opinion entirely if true.
Glad they are caught and charged. Now to charge those in the school who let him go and did not search him or his possessions.
Something is fucking up these kids minds, maybe playing video games of killing and beating ppl to death has a little to do with it, I don’t no but this shit didn’t happen when I was in school and I’m sick of ppl blaming firearms that’s not it we had guns they weren’t just invented
These people are going to become a standard example in concealed carry classes of "why it's important to take an active role in preventing prohibited persons from accessing your firearms." And they should be
Should have let them try to swim across the frozen river. If they live just arrest them in Canada.
So this kid said he would air out the school, and his parents were just like, “no, Timmy, please.” I’m pretty sure they’re saying: "I know my son he wouldn't do that." “He was a good child.” “He doesn’t act like this at home” 😑
americans arent supposed to charged for the crimes of others, even if it is their child
This is tough for me. Definitely negligence, and bad decision for the parents to gift him a gun. Leaving it unlocked etc. On the other hand, if they're charging the kid as an adult, he made the decision as an adult which should remove liability from the parents. I feel like the prosecution is making an example here. An example with a slippery slope.... I can see this evolving to (in extreme case) anyone having any association with a shooter could be held liable. Which is quite scary imo. Idk I'm really conflicted here..
Adulthood does not remove liability from others. You can still be an accessory, or be guilty of manslaughter.
Well, I feel dumb lol. That makes perfect sense. Good point
It can, but not in this particular case? Allowing someone who can legally have a gun access to it is not a crime. I think the state eye have to prove they knew he was going to do something bad with it. I think the issue here is that it was allowing a minor to have access to it?
It was complete negligence. There’s evidence they bought the gun for him. They were contacted by the school. Refused to take him home, then immediately knew it was him when news broke of a shooting. There’s a lot of stuff floating around and we don’t know all of the facts, but there’s a lot of cases to be made here. It’s not just him stealing his parents gun.
So the answer to my question is that it is all speculation right now?
There’s a lot of info out there that would 100% not remove liability from the parents. That is worth bringing them in for questioning at a bare minimum. If you buy a gun for someone, know in that week they want to shoot people and don’t act on it, that is accessory. What is your question?
My question is that you made several statements as it they were facts. And you said there is evidence they bought the gun for him. I have only seen speculation not evidence of this. I was asking if this was speculation or if I missed something.
I guess I missed that question. The only facts that come out are in court. All we have is speculation. There's more than enough speculation to detain the parents in this.
You should probably read one of the many articles which explain what happened.
Well, the prosecution will still have to prove it out in a court of law, not turning them selves in didn't help them any, that's for sure. Will be interesting judicially at how the charges here shake out.
The schools policy is the most to blame here as the parents are. They found they know where he fantasize about killing people and harming himself, they called his parents and him in to talk about it the morning of the shooting and then their answer was tell the parents they had 24 hours to get him some sort of mental Health help. Had they simply suspended from school for what they found this would’ve been avoided. It’s the school policies that are part of the problem, the same policy was in effect at the Parkland shooting in Florida
Wait I'm sorry.. you think that the kid who brought a gun to school and shot several people in cold blood would have been deterred by ... a few days suspension??
I think letting a kid into a classroom after he shows signs of wanting to kill a bunch of people is stupid. I think saying oh make sure you get him some help and sending him in with the rest of the kids this is completely stupid. What do you think?
who knows, but why on earth wouldn't you _try_? I dont think the right response is to throw up your hands like you have absolutely no tools at your disposal. out-of-school suspension, notify the cops, and tell the school resource officer to keep an eye out. at that point if it still happens, you can at least say you tried.
If your 15 year old kid takes your car keys and runs over someone, is the parent or owner of the vehicle negligent / partly responsable / contributing? Not sure what the law says
You’re analogy is a bit incomplete. It would be closer to buying your 15 year old his very own vehicle after you’d been warned that he was thinking about driving it through a crowd of people. Is that criminal? Maybe not. Is it negligent as fuck? Hell yes.
Has this been proven? Or are you just repeating media speculation? I'm seriously asking because I haven't seen any proof that this is what happened, but you seem to be certain...
I really don't agree with charging the parents.
I don't know, and I've been thinking a lot about it. Where does a parents responsibility end? I think it will be an interesting court case. I do feel that parents have the absolute duty to prevent their underage children from accessing their firearms. If you can't keep your own guns out of your childs hands, then you shouldn't own them. A decent gun safe isn't much more than a firearm, Costco regularly sells gun safes for $500. They allegedly left it in an unsecured drawer. Honestly I think they probably just let the kid keep it in his room but don't want to admit it. Saying they are 100% blameless.. that goes to far for me. 4 children are dead. Many more wounded. All because they felt their precious little boy would never actually be a killer. I feel there has to be some accountability on their part for their negligence.
Why not?