The “Water Cooler” is a feature on Claycord.com where we ask you a question or provide a topic, and you talk about it.
The “Water Cooler” will be up Monday-Friday at noon.
Today’s question:
QUESTION: Do you think parents should face criminal punishment if their child under the age of 18 murders another person? Why or why not?
Talk about it….
Yes. It’s called responsibility.
Absolutely theyre the parents they should know what’s wrong with them. If you have firearms
Lock them up. They should get prison time just as the child should.
How about knives? Murders are committed with knives. How about vehicles? Murders are committed with vehicles. How about bare hands? Murders are committed with bare hands.
YES, TO ALL
So we should lock up all our knives, cars and hands?
And lock up the judge that let out the repeat offender!
This is the latest in a long line of bad parenting.
.
Raising children is a responsibility as is fire arms ownership.
.
“The parents were convicted at separate trials in February as juries found they callously ignored their son’s pleas for mental health help while buying him the firearm he used to massacre four classmates in 2021.”…
.
“The sentence was read shortly after the heartbroken mother of one of Ethan Crumbley’s victims slammed his parents for a lack of remorse, as she pleaded with a judge to impose the maximum sentence of 15 years, which they ultimately received.
.
Speaking at the sentencing hearing, Nicole Beausoliel, the mother of slain Madisyn Baldwin, 17, scathed the couple as ‘failed parents.’ ”
dailymail https://tinyurl.com/3p5mrrsf
.
Holding parents responsible, it’s long overdue !
Towards end of dailymail piece is photo of a turned in maths homework.
Upon see that both Police and child services should have been given copies.
MY opinion, school should also be blamed for not taking further action.
We’ll never know if school taking further action would have prevented tragedy.
So is holding politicians long overdue
Here we have another tactic to persuade people to give up their guns. And if it can be applied to firearms, why not in cases of vehicular manslaughter?
What would happen if a child murders one parent? Would the other parent be reponsible?
Of course – parents have responsibility if their child is less than 18 yrs… could even be longer under certain circumstances
If it can be proven at law that the parents aided and abetted, or were criminally negligent contributing to the crime, then perhaps.
Yes, by gun, knife, car, all should have consequences.
If the child is under 18 and not declared legally independent, yes. It is their child and they are responsible for what it does. Don’t have them if you can’t raise them and teach what is/isn’t acceptable.
No the rule in Calunicornia
No instead you just lock up those running this state. Always letting them do whatever
It starts at birth. Be there, talk to them, listen, know where they are, know their friends and don’t abuse them.or degrade. The rewards later on will be abundant.
Yes
If parents are to be held liable when their child commits a murder, then it shouldn’t stop there. I’d like to see judges and DA’s put in jail when they knowingly release a violent felon back into society without bail, and that felon commits a murder.
What’s good for the goose, is good for the gander.
Why the school wasn’t faced w/any punishment ??
It’s their turn next.
Sadly we have decimated our schools with Howard Jarvis era policies and they are spread far too thin.
Yes, by all means let’s go back to hurling taxpayer money at corrupt, inefficient, incompetent teachers unions.
Many people who escalate their pattern of violence to murder have been arrested and released many times. DA’s who ignored the signs should be held liable. If that were the case, people such as George Gascon would suddenly, for the first time, be concerned with the safety of someone other than the criminal.
So, will the parents of the “children” be charged for the Apple river stabbing? Their THUG kids thought it was okay to attack a 50 year old man.
It kind of depends, really. In most cases, I would think not. If it could be proven that the parent(s) promoted such actions/activities, that would be one thing, but I do believe (and maybe it is naive of me, or more indicative of the families I hang with) most parents are trying to raise their children to not strive to take another’s life. Yes, there are exceptions, but I think that would be rare.
The social message of such a conviction would be that it is not the kid’s fault. If the kid doesn’t think he is to blame for his actions, will there be less crime or more crime?
And what would with institutions like colleges that are often legally understood to be acting In Loco Parentis – in place of the parents? Would they have liability too?
If they buy the weapon, teach the kid how to use the weapon, fail to secure the weapon, don’t tell the school that the kid has access to a weapon when the school calls them in to report the kid is displaying disturbing behavior, and decline to remove the kid from school when the school reports s/he is displaying disturbing behavior, the parents are liable.
If firearms are involved there are already laws in place concerning accessibility & secure storage. As far as all other methods are concerned anything is possible, parents may have some liability but that is what Police, DA & Courts are for, they will determine the answer on a case to case basis…. isn’t that how it already works?
Should we lock up every family that has one or more dogs? Dogs cause far more harm to people than upset people in possession of knives and firearms.
I feel that for both dogs and firearms that parents should not be held criminally liable unless there is a clear and documented record of a parent using a child or dog as a weapon.
There is a philosophy that if you treat people with respect that they will tend to be respectful. That’s why children and teens are given access to firearms. Nearly always, they take the responsibility seriously. The parent’s job does not end there in that children and teens have less self regulation. They will get distracted playing a game and forget to look before jumping into a street, etc. Likewise, childhood tiffs can escalate from name calling to physical acts. Some adults, including 70 year olds, also don’t seem to have much self regulation but they are a minority.
This is not a black and white issue. You would have to look into what went on before the murder was committed. If the under age person showed signs of mental illness, anger issues, etc. and the parents did nothing then you could make a case. However, sometimes people and teenager just snaps with no prior indication in that case you cannot blame the parents.
“It’s the school’s job”, have heard parents say that.
A Parent’s task is to be actively involved in raising a productive member of society.
They don’t deserve a pass for failing.
If they’re not capable of raising a child they should not have a dog either.
.
“To educate a man in mind and not in morals
is to educate a menace to society.”
–Theodore Roosevelt
If the evidence shows complicit actions, behaviors by the parents, then by all means, yes.
Not being capable of raising a child, and have a child turn to crime or murder is two different things. Many criminals and murders come from perfectly normal backgrounds, with parents that cared. Haven’t we all heard of families with several children and most of them turn into productive members of society, but one child will define the norm and turn to crime, murder or other anti social behaviors.
Yes, only if the minor used a firearm owned by the parents. Otherwise, unless the parents were actively involved as an accomplice or provided assistance in any way, then they are innocent and are simply unengaged parents. Also, if the minor is >16 1/2, they should be tried as an adult.