TEXT NEWSTIPS/PHOTOS - 925-800-NEWS (6397)
Advertisement
Home » The Water Cooler – Should The Suspect’s Parents Be Charged When There’s A School Shooting?

The Water Cooler – Should The Suspect’s Parents Be Charged When There’s A School Shooting?

by CLAYCORD.com
36 comments

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 in the noon hour.

QUESTION: Do you think the parents of school shooting suspects (or any shooting suspect) should be charged with murder if the suspect uses a gun that’s owned by the parent?

Advertisement

Talk about it….

36 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Yes.

26
12

Case by Case basis. In the Current case YES!

46
1

If the child is under the legal age to obtain and own a firearm, YES.

Parents: it’s 10 o’clock… do you know where your guns are??

38
3

No. If the relevant state has criminal negligence statutes, and such charges are reasonably supported by evidence, they should be charged under those statutes.

11
20

No. Unless it can be proven the parent told the shooter where the gun was and to go and commit the crimes, how could they be culpable. If you based it on “owner of the gun,” if someone stole the gun from say, your house, and the state could “prove” your gun was not “adequately secured,” then would you be liable? No. This is the same idiot leftist logic of suing gun makers because a gun they manufactured was used to commit a murder.

19
36

If you allow a minor to have access to a loaded gun it’s kinda on you, right?

34
7

Because kids never do anything their parents don’t allow, right?

8
9

It’s called a gun safe dum dum

13
5

Yes. This is already the law in California.

9
2

The parent purchased the high-power rifle for the kid as a Christmas gift the same year that authorities went to him and told him that his son had posted online about mass shootings. Also, the kid’s aunt had been trying to get the parent to get kid into therapy so he was aware from more than one avenue that he should not have given the kid the gun.

I wonder if the “high-power rifle” had a 30 caliber clip?

Yes. The couple in Michigan already set a precedent for buying theirs kid a gun. Now the father of the Georgia shooter is looking at at least 128 years for buying his son the AR-15 as Christmas present.

28
12

Oh nice, so we can start charging Black kid’s parents for their crimes too, right??

7
14

This argument does not equate. The GA father purchased the high-power rifle for the kid months after authorities told him that his kid had posted shooting threats online.

Hadn’t heard that and don’t know it to be true. If that’s the case, I understand the argument to charge the dad. The gun shouldn’t have been in the kids possession unlocked and unsupervised. Also, wasn’t the kid on a tangent about transvestite something or another? And on some psychological drugs from his Dr? I also thought I heard the feds were aware of him.

2
3

In this case yes, of course. Kid has a history of “misuse” of a firearm 1 yr ago – no precautions taken to keep firearm from the kid… sad thing imho is that he was still allowed in public school and apparently there was no consequence to his actions then …. libs are saying its not his fault of course it’s society’s failure, blah, blah, blah

15
9

addendum – just learned the father BOUGHT the gun for the kid as a Chrstmas present AFTER the previous shooting incident last year …. so yes, the parent has responsibility imho in this case

16
2

What libs are saying that? Do you have a quote, a link?

7
2

For real. No one I know (on both sides of the spectrum) are blaming anyone or anything other than the kid and the parent. Sometimes I wonder if people just say this nonsense to give them a reason to justify their hate for others.

More toxic logic.

If a parent is guilty for their kid’s action then it follows that the kid is not guilty (or at least, not as guilty).

Are kid’s going to more or less likely to commit a crime if society tells them that their parents are actually to blame for the crime?

If a parent is responsible for a gun death, why not vehicular manslaughter? Why not teen pregnancy?

6
20

I’ve never seen both a straw man and a slippery slope in the same paragraph….

11
1

Where’s the strawman? If there is a slippery slope, it is society’s. Not mine. Democrats have used every angle to whittle down gun rights.

If politicians were really serious about ending school shootings, then they would limit media exposure of the shooters. But instead these kids become instant celebrities – gaining the fame they wanted all along.

4
10

You’re clearly not understanding why the parent was found culpable in this instance and it shows.

Hopefully a vehicular manslaughter and a teen pregnancy is an accident and not a CHOICE.

2
1

In the Georgia case, in May 2023, the FBI got a tip about posts made on social media by the shooter threatening a school shooting. The FBI conducted an interview with the shooter, who was 13 at the time, and his father, and concluded there wasn’t enough evidence to make an arrest or to take any action. The father now is being charged with involuntary manslaughter, second degree murder and child cruelty because they claim he knowingly allowed his son to possess a weapon. Considering that the FBI were made aware of the threat, and knowing such a threat should be taken seriously, shouldn’t the FBI also be held accountable?

19
9

Yes. If you raise your child correctly and teach them morals ,, pay attention if you see a problem, LISTEN, monitor their friends and their internet use. Help with anger management. Don’t contribute to their delinquency with drug use or abuse.If you don’t you fail as a parent and should be punished.

17
6

An Assault rifle is not a Christmas present. This parent’s negligence doesn’t even begin to cover the sheer ignorance.

20
3

Reports are that the weapon in Georgia was an AR-15, not an assault rifle. And if I want to buy my wife one for Christmas, am I not allowed to ?

1
8

I know little about guns. But I do know what Christmas is about.

So do I. Aside from the far more important traditional observance of our Savior’s birth, it’s an occasion to exchange gifts among friends and loved ones. What’s your point?

1
3

Absolutely, It’s your responsibility to secure your weapons. A 14yo should never have access to a firearm

17
2

Yes-if the parent fails to secure the weapon or buys a weapon for his son or daughter.

In the Georgia case, the father was told by law enforcement officials that his son was posting threats of gun violence. Seven months later, he gifted his son an assault-type weapon. The aunt repeatedly told the family to get mental health assistance for the kids. The dad knew his kid had a problem and rather than get professional assistance, he bought him a gun. Heck, yes, the father needs to be held accountable

Excellent article this morning in nytime. Georgia doesn’t have any laws on kids possessing rifles.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/06/opinion/school-shooting-georgia-dad-arrested.html

Yes 100% this is great. Look at that guy in his mugshot he is pure trash he deserves life for letting the gun be accessible to his kid.

In the era I grew up in you gave guns, and the keys to the family car, to kids as way of encouraging growth and responsibility. For most kids it works out well. Parents did not get sued or arrested when kids screwed up.
 
One difference between those days and today is that we did not have semi-automatic weapons. Semi-automatic and automatic weapons were used by the military. Police officers and the general public had six-shot revolvers and rifles that were either manually fed or had a three or five cartridge magazine. Much of gun training was knowing exactly what you were going to shoot at and taking your time to aim so that shot brought your target down cleanly. Usually with hunting you don’t get a second shot. You learn patience as you wait for your target to get open and turn to present a clean shot to a vital area.
 
I suspect they were legal for the public at the time but semi-automatic weapons would have been regarded as silly and wasteful. The silly part is that semi-automatic weapons encourage poor shot selection as you always have a second or more shot(s) available. That first poorly selected shot will cause a huge adrenaline dump which fouls the meat. Multiple shots ruin both the meat and hide. Semi-automatic weapons also encourage wasting ammunition. In military situation you don’t care if the enemy’s meat gets fouled nor do you care about how many holes you put into someone. The government is paying for the ammunition meaning the only part you may care about is the weight in your pack.

1
1
Advertisement

Newsletter

Subscribe to our newsletter!

Latest News

© Copyright 2023 Claycord News & Talk