Parents of Michigan high school shooter Ethan Crumbley will go to trial, judges rule

Yes, if they are minors, ALL parents should be held accountable for their child’s actions. I thought they were; aren’t they? If not that’s a flaw in our system that needs addressing.

I’m not as cynical, it IS about parental and firearm ownership accountability. IF, we need new or clarified laws then that would be a valuable lesson that should not be missed from this tragedy.

 

Wasn't this two separate events? The ammo search and the carving? Sure the carving is a huge red flag but that was only a few hours before the shooting and the parents did say that they would get him some councelling. How fast should they have done that? Immediately? Without the bennefit of hind sight, it's hard to say how immediate the help should have been sought. Why didn't the school send the kid home after the carving incident if it seemed so much of an emergency? From the post, mental illness didn't seem to be the main topic but rather the fact that the parents didn't seem to think that a kid looking at ammo was a big deal. I probably wouldn't have either at the time.

 

When my kids were teens and were getting into trouble, I begged the police to help me and they told me that after age 14, there was nothing that they could do. That the kid was old enough to make their own decisions. Of course they also told me that I was still responsible until they were 18. I would take my daughter to school and watch her until she was in the building. As soon as I left, she would leave and go get into trouble. The school never called. Should I have had to to sit with her all day?

 

Or appropriate civil committment...

Glad you bothered answering that silly question. I had no intention of responding....

 

I would have thought before a certain age they wouldn't intervene (if at all), certainly not after. I believe "I" would have gotten a badge number an talked to the Chief or Sargent ... whomever.

I would have gotten her some counseling, obviously you needed some help. I'm guessing but I think/hope if you would have talked to the principal or her counselor they would have helped you. I know they would have in our school district.

 

The signs in school only indicate that there had to have been more obvious signs at home. The fact that the parents excused the threat. That they didn't take the kid home. That the school didn't send them home.... All this seems to suggest that the "mental issue" approach is not going to help much in solving the problem.

When we talk (as the OP does) about "warning signs" clearly we are talking about warning signs of a mental illness. And this should be the first thing that comes to mind for anybody who believes mass shootings should be addressed predominantly by addressing mental illness. I have seen multiple posters here who once held the "mental illness" hypothesis, but are now defending the parents. This tells me most of them didn't actually believe that this was actually the main problem to be addressed.

To be clear, I believe the mental illness issues should be addressed. But this is only one small part of solving (or ameliorating) the problem. More effective actions include strong restrictions on who has access to guns, what guns and ammunition they have access to, and what requirements should be met.

 

What statute did they violate?

 

Oops, guess you didn't get the memo, the word gay is not banned! Anywhere in the State of Florida. Or if I am somehow wrong about that, I just broke the law, and if you really are from Florida, so did you. I might also suggest you would feel more comfortable in a socialist country like California, but unfortuntately for you, once SCOTUS reviews these cases going through the system about States trying to be clever in their blatant attempts to ignore the Bruen decision, CAs gun laws will be virtually identical to ours.

Of course, if you really do live here, knowing (as you should) that every time you go out in public you are pretty much surrounded by armed persons, and yet, no harm has come to you, I would think you would realize your fear is misplaced.

 

Have you ever heard of the parents of a teenage gang bangers being held responsible for that kid's crimes?

 

Truthfully, I have zero experience with inner city problems. I'm from a rural area, was anyway, (I live in the suburbs of a big city now and where I'm from is no longer rural either.) where everyone knew everyone, and kids, generally, couldn't get away from anything without their parents finding out.

But to your point, there probably needs to be more intervention in inner cities, education, community centers, sports and crafting programs; anything to keep kids engaged and off the streets. Those parents are poor, and have nothing extra to offer. We/U.S. need to get involved and help; IMHO.

 

Ok, now I understand where you are coming from. I forgot that your one and only solution is to ban guns. My bad.

 

Here ya go.

Parental Liability Basics
Parental liability is the term used to refer to a parent's obligation to pay for damage caused by negligent, intentional, or criminal acts committed by the parent's child. ...

Civil Parental Liability
In most states, parents are responsible for all malicious or willful property damage done by their children. This is called civil parental liability because it's non-criminal. ...

Criminal Parental Liability
Laws making parents criminally responsible for the delinquent acts of their children followed the civil liability statutes. In 1903, Colorado was the first state to enact a law against "contributing to the delinquency of a minor." At least 42 other states and DC now have laws against contributing to the delinquency of a minor.

Parents' Liability for Their Children's Actions
Parental liability only applies to your minor or underage children. The age of majority is the age at which a minor, in the eyes of state law, becomes an adult. ...
https://www.findlaw.com/family/parental-rights-and-liability/parental-liability-basics.html

I think those parents failed their legal and moral responsibility to their child when they didn't take his preliminary actions seriously and counseled him, "don't get caught", instead of talking with him and getting him help. That's what the trial is about.

 

Yea, I did those things, ran it up the chain, etc. No one cared. I did get her councelling, familiy and 1:1. Didn't matter. Point is, there is only so much that parents can do when the system doesn't give you any options. I told the principal to call me directly on my cell any time she skipped. I set up meetings with the teachers. They all said that their hands were tied or some kind of BS. They just flat out didn't care. It's easy to blame the parents until you are actually "the parent".

 

Clearly, the Second Amendment acknowledges the RIGHT to own (current, popular, firearms); un-infringed. But its doesn't give anyone the right to be a knucklehead about it.

 

I get it. Some kids just won't be helped; that's a truth too. Still the law is the law and if she and you were in these parents place, you would be in their place. What you would have going for you is that you did everything in your power to help and contain her. These parents did worse than nothing when their only counseling was "don't get caught".

It's easy for me to say but if I would have been in your situation I would have moved and tried to get her in a better place; where you and she could have gotten the help you needed. It's a shame that your community was so callused.

 

I've been saying that for 20+ years, and I didn't even work for DOJ! Perhaps we should require a license to breed, and all unauthorized pregnancies will be terminated, plus a fine? Maybe a misdemeanor the first time, and felony for subsequent offenses?

 

Couldn't care less.

 

You should, without the law we are nothing. It's the law that sews U.S. together and makes U.S. civilized.

 

Constitutional and civil rights apply to all Citizens, not just a select few. Sorry, not sorry. You need to get over being butt-hurt over Heller, it's time to get butt-hurt (and soon enough, over it) about Bruen instead. 'Course you being from the Freedom State, neither of those rulings affect you at all, as Florida has not violated your 2nd Amendment rights since 1986!

We are lucky to live here! #welivehere

 

You want to send someone to jail but can't say what law they broke. Sounds like banana republic stuff to me. Then again, the present administration is trying to put the previous one in jail on the flimsiest possible cause, so your party is already well versed in that.

 

Civil rights be damned.

That's a sad graphic, nothing to be proud of and, only contributes the gulf between gun factions. IMHO, it's counter productive to preserving our Second Amendment rights.

 

Ain't I the lucky one. Not so lucky the folk I see every single day in my local paper.

But YOUR logic would probably dictate that I should wait until I get killed in one of the daily shootings around here before I start complaining about the gun epidemic, right?

 

Logic dictates that we work within the law to solve OUR societal problems and the violence that comes from them. Not ignore laws, or try to "cleverly" worm our way around them.

In this case we have good law and these parents are going to be held accountable for their irresponsibility. I hope their child is getting the help, now, that they should have provided. He's just as much a victim as those he murdered.

 

Definitely your bad. I have explained my solution multiple times
http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/how-to-ban-guns-without-firing-a-single-shot.600040/

However, i do understand that you need to use binary thinking to avoid discussing what I REALLY propose. You left yourself with no arguments. Especially now that you distanced yourself from the "it's just a mental health issue" argument.

 

And "your" solution would not stop violence or, save one life.