[Rainger99]

Originally Posted by phylt

--------------------

Sorry - I am a Conservative and see the validity of the Second Amendment.

But - enough is enough - we MUST act in this country, despite the 'slippery slope'. We MUST hold parents responsible - especially in the case of the last two shootings (MI & GA). In MI the parents were convicted, and the recent GA case is pretty cut and dry. Parents MUST accept responsibility. Even for minor offenses such as robbery, driving, etc. The buck must stop somewhere. Kids AND parents must be RESPONSIBLE for their actions.

At what age are parents no longer responsible for their kid's actions?

In Michigan, the parents were convicted of involuntary manslaughter. In Georgia, the father is being charged with four counts of involuntary manslaughter, two counts of second-degree murder (I don't understand which two were second degree murder).

As far as I can tell, they only go after the parents in a school shooting. Have they gone after parents when the kid kills someone while robbing a gas station or shoots another person on the street? Or just mugs someone?

Juvenile offenders were involved in about 1,122 murders in the U.S. in 2020, representing about 8% of all known murder offenders.

I guess if the murder is a mass school shooting, the parents are also responsible. If it isn't, the kids are responsible.

[Caymus]

Times have changed. My High School had a rifle team which practiced on site with live ammo.

[tophcfa]

Guns have been around forever, but the problem at hand has grown very bad much more recently. Connect the dots, these shootings have increased exponentially along with the growth of social media.

[Chellybean]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

That slippery slope ought to be very frightening.

1. If parents can be held responsible for the actions of their children when committing firearm violations then what else can they be held responsible for? If a child gets into a fight can the parents be charged with assault? If the 16 year old has an accident and someone is killed, can the parents be charged too? There should be consistency in holding parents accountable - watch out for unintended consequences.

2. If a parent comes into a gun store with their child to purchased a firearm and the child then uses it to commit a crime, can the store owner now be charged? He should have known the there was a chance the child would get their hands on the weapon that he provided.

3. If the theory is the parent should have reasonably expected the child might commit a crime if provided a weapon and is therefore responsible for providing the weapon then is the manufacturer any less responsible for producing and providing the #1 weapon used in these crimes?

Once the mob picks up the pitchforks they are hard to put down again.

Very well said my exact point!

[Rainger99]

I just heard on television that the judge told the shooter that he faced the death penalty or life in prison. Apparently the judge didn't know the law. He had to bring the shooter back into the courtroom and tell him that he was not facing the death penalty.

Judge Mingledorff initially told the suspected shooter that he could face the death penalty as a result of his actions. He later called Gray back into the court room to clarify that, as a minor, he is not eligible for the death penalty.

I would think a judge that is on national tv would know that in 2005 the Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision that people who are under 18 at the time of the crime can't be executed for their crimes.

https://cfsy.org/wp-content/uploads/...ns-Opinion.pdf

Not sure if the court needed 87 pages to write the decision.

[mraines]

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

We need to approach this terrible problem from every angle and get local communities very much involved in preventing them. My Villages' former neighbors lost their 14 year old granddaughter in the Parkland shooting. They moved from the Villages but it is now like almost everyone knows someone who has loved ones involved in these tragedies.

We need to encourage our younger generation members to befriend the loners and misfits so that these kids do not resort to violence.

We need more gun control. Allowing all these guns is ridiculous and being able to buy one at a yard sale even more so. This is an American problem. We need to fix it. If this comment is allowed, I will probably tick off some people but it is what I believe.

[Chellybean]

Originally Posted by Rainger99

I just heard on television that the judge told the shooter that he faced the death penalty or life in prison. Apparently the judge didn't know the law. He had to bring the shooter back into the courtroom and tell him that he was not facing the death penalty.

Judge Mingledorff initially told the suspected shooter that he could face the death penalty as a result of his actions. He later called Gray back into the court room to clarify that, as a minor, he is not eligible for the death penalty.

I would think a judge that is on national tv would know that in 2005 the Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision that people who are under 18 at the time of the crime can't be executed for their crimes.

https://cfsy.org/wp-content/uploads/...ns-Opinion.pdf

Not sure if the court need 87 pages to write the decision.

Our whole legal system is up side down. Unbelievable. If he is tried as a adult I wonder if that still applies. I personally think It should!

[Pugchief]

Originally Posted by Rainger99

As far as I can tell, they only go after the parents in a school shooting. Have they gone after parents when the kid kills someone while robbing a gas station or shoots another person on the street? Or just mugs someone?

Excellent point. Charging the parents of gangbangers would go a long way to reducing inner city violence.

Many cities have chosen the alternate option: charge and prosecute no one. How's that working?

[Rainger99]

Originally Posted by Chellybean

Our whole legal system is up side down. Unbelievable. If he is tried as an adult I wonder if that still applies. I personally think It should!

It doesn’t matter if you are tried as adult. If you were under 18 at the time of the crime, you can’t be executed.

[manaboutown]

Originally Posted by Pugchief

Excellent point. Charging the parents of gangbangers would go a long way to reducing inner city violence.

Many cities have chosen the alternate option: charge and prosecute no one. How's that working?

This is an ideal test case because the father is the perfect target as he is not a member of a protected minority. It will be used by the antigun crowd to argue for confiscating guns from responsible citizens.

IMHO the father should not have bought his obviously deranged 14 year old son a gun and so bears some responsibility. If the boy had acquired a gun on his own, say on the street, and the parents were unaware he had one it would be a different story.

Somewhat analogously, If a mentally disturbed boy was older and of driving age perhaps a parent should not allow him to drive as he could drive a vehicle through a crowd, killing and maiming people.

The problem is the boy is mentally disturbed and a parent provided him with a means to murder.

[retiredguy123]

Originally Posted by Pugchief

Excellent point. Charging the parents of gangbangers would go a long way to reducing inner city violence.

Many cities have chosen the alternate option: charge and prosecute no one. How's that working?

I agree. If a teenage gangbanger commits a murder with a firearm, and his mother doesn't even know who the father is, or where her son is most of the time, or when he last attended school, law enforcement doesn't even consider any criminal charges against the mother. But, in this case, the father is being charged with murder. If this isn't selective law enforcement, I don't know what is. Our laws should be evenly enforced.

[Byte1]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

I would just point out that thousands of murders with firearms are committed every day by teens, and the parents are almost never charged with any crime. There should be a more consistent application of the laws.

TOTALLY agree. Charging a parent with murder for something a high school student is guilty of, seems a bit extreme though. It is legal for these kids to operate a motor vehicle, so if they are guilty of DUI, does that mean that the parents are responsible and should lose their license to drive? I agree totally that parents allowing children to handle guns should be responsible to a certain extent, but MURDER? Why are the parents of kids that commit murder in the ghetto treated so lenient? Just saying. Not disagreeing with parents being held responsible. When the powers that be decide that parents are not allowed to discipline their children, it certainly makes it a bit difficult to monitor their kids' actions.

[Byte1]

Originally Posted by Caymus

Times have changed. My High School had a rifle team which practiced on site with live ammo.

We had a rifle safety and target shooting club after school in Junior High/Middle school. Not one accident ever and none of us were even old enough to drive or even get a learner's permit. Society dictates how much violent crime occurs. And that says something of today's violence in society.

[phylt]

We were very "fortunate" that the MI & GA mass shooters were cowards. Rather than being killed by cop, they gave up. That's very good and very rare. Upon investigation and interviews, we are finding that the parents WERE in fact culpable. They KNEW their teen was troubled. They KNEW he was bullied and troubled at school. They provided access to the weapons.

At some point in time WE (the public) MUST point blame to parents - especially when the evidence is so clear.

I'm a Conservative, but SOMETHING MUST BE DONE. I believe that WE CAN abate some of these shootings without impacting the 2nd Amendment. Let's use common sense. I can't imagine our kids having to live (and learn) be concerned that another shooting may happen to their school. And YES - apply these same standards and new laws to "regular" shootings or violence as well...

[Byte1]

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

2nd Amendment says right to a well armed militia and not the individual's right to own military style weapons.

The 2nd does not prohibit the right to own a military style weapon either. Unfortunately, most NON-gun citizens do not know the difference between a military weapon and a non-military weapon. When the 2nd was written, the same weapons for self defense and hunting were used in combat. We can argue all day regarding what weapons should be allowed or disallowed, but it makes no difference when it comes to mass killings. four folks killed in a school can be killed with the average hunting rifle, knife, hatchet, bow and arrow, or a simple 22cal rifle.
This subject is not about type of weapon used, but the fact that the parent was charged with the crime, along with his son.