[precisionshootist]

"The father is partly to blame for not securing his guns, just like a pitbull owner who does not secure his dogs."

No he is not. A civil society can never hold one individual responsible for the actions of others. Is it good practice to keep firearms secure? absolutely. But lets just say the father did keep the guns secured in a safe and the seventeen year old was unable to get to them. So the seventeen year old bent on murder takes dads keys to his ford F350 Super Duty and goes to a public event and mows over 50 people. Do we hold the father responsible because he didn't lock up his keys? What if the kid just went to kitchen and grabbed the chefs knife, went to school and stabbed 22 people to death? Do we arrest the parents for not securing their kitchen knives. How about your power tools and gasoline? do you have those secured?

Forcing the owner of a firearm into liability for limiting access will render the 2nd amendment worthless just as gun bans. Conservatives jumping on this bandwagon are being absolutely foolish. Wake up.

[VideoPaul]

This is why the UAW needs to held responsible for car deaths. KILLERS! DIE UNION MURDERERS!!!!

[JamesP81]

You are correct.

Anyone wanting to lay liability on gun owners who choose not to purchase an expensive, heavy safe, is no friend of the 2A.

[Flaming Conservative]

Good post. Besides, the kid also planted bombs. If he knew what he was doing, he wouldn’t even need a gun.

[caww]

.....”Forcing the owner of a firearm into liability for limiting access will render the 2nd amendment worthless just as gun bans. Conservatives jumping on this bandwagon are being absolutely foolish”......

Yes.

[silverleaf]

Get a grip
This is about adults - parents - securing firearms from children
Especially moody isolated voilence attracted teens

This may not be where the buck stops
But its where the buck starts

You cant pass any law on 300 million Americans that replaces careless parenting

I hold the parents as prime responsible in this case