The father is partly to blame for not securing his guns, just like a pitbull owner who does not secure his dogs.
No, I won’t agree with your statement. Where there a will, there a way.
I’ll also disagree. Could be dad taught him to help defend the house as I did my girls at a younger age then this. I’ll wager odds he was bullied for years. quiet kept to himself. likely on anti-depressants...if his parents took him to a shrink.
Revenge/vengence is a powerful motivation...if that was the case.
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.
....”The father is partly to blame for not securing his guns”....
Wrong. The son is 17 and knew how to shoot. Likely practiced with his father. Our Family has secured weapons but it is no secret to have access if needed.
No the shooter is totally to blame.
A gun locked away in a gun safe is as useless as not having one at all. His blame is that he was not in touch with his son's mental disorder, whether it be conversion to Islam, liberalism, CNN/(P)MSBC watching, or whatever set him off.