Posted on 12/23/2021 4:18:47 AM PST by marktwain
As this correspondent reads accounts of the latest media-inspired school shooting, there was an obvious theme: blame the parents. Convict them before any evidence is presented in court. Indict them with crimes seldom used in such circumstances. Declare they are fugitives in a “manhunt”.
This is all depressingly familiar. The media smells gun control blood in the water. They launch a narrative: all is the fault of the parents because they own guns and bought one for their child. The narrative advances their political agenda and masks their own liability. The Constitutional rights of gun owners, especially of white gun owners, are not considered worthy of protection. The mother, Jennifer Crumbley, even supported President Trump in 2016!
How dare she!
The Trump-support letter, supposedly a blog post written in November of 2016, is claimed by some to be a hoax. Is it? This correspondent does not know. Time will help clear the confusion.
This correspondent does not know all the details of what happened. No one does at this point. A narrative is being formed and pushed with little fact and little due process. The Michigan prosecutor has announced four counts of involuntary manslaughter charges for each parent, with very little investigation, and lots of publicity. The public is inflamed. The sheriff in the county says this is not the way things are usually done.
Calls for harsh punishment of the Crumbley parents is common on the Internet.
Involuntary manslaughter in Michigan appears to be very close to criminally negligent homicide, generally. The theory appears to be that it was criminally negligent for the parents to have allowed the 15-year-old to have access to the pistol used, and/or perhaps, not to have taken him from school or to have searched his backpack after being shown a disturbing drawing
(Excerpt) Read more at ammoland.com ...
Yes, they are to blame but not criminally
No more than the parents of the “teens” committing crimes in the cities are to blame. Think the leftists will hold those parents responsible? Until they do, they should shut up about Crumbley’s parents.
Last I read the father bought the gun for his son under the false pretense it was for himself.
He lied, IOW.
If that is the case, then yes, they are criminally negligent.
He lied, IOW.
Purchasing a gun for a family member, when it is kept in the same house, is not a crime.
I wish morons, like this writer, would quit using mass shooters names in headlines.
It’s one main reason why they do it.
1. No way in hell a 14 year old can or should legally own a Sig-Sauer 9mm pistol. I have had four children and 14 is just plain too young to understand the inherent dangers of possessing a semiauto pistol. It's also not legal in almost all states.
2. The parents let him fire the pistol the next day - which proves that their intent was to arm him, a 14 year old.
3. That kid of theirs caused the parents to be summoned to his school because of his bizarre scribblings - so even if they didn't know their son was a dangerous squirrel before, they did then.
4. The kid had access to the weapon and the ammunition and was easily able to take it to school and start shooting.
I'm sorry but those parents were directly instrumental in the deaths of those other kids and need to face justice. Every firearm I have is under lock and key, however much I trust my children or have trained them.
The father’s been saying he had the gun locked up. Don’t know if that’s true but if it is it changes the whole analysis.
It is difficult to take your arguments seriously, when you are mistaken about such a basic fact.
If the kid knew the combination/had the key, it wasn’t locked up. I have raised four children: they were all trained in firearms use and safety but none of them had unrestricted access to weapons and ammunition.
Yeah, OK - big difference (Sarc). But I have raised four children successfully with firearms - but NEVER unrestricted access to them. These parents not only bought him a pistol and ammo but they allowed him to get it when he wanted to. Crazy irresponsible.
The other thing is, they left him at the school and nobody bothered to check his backpack, so that implicates the school as well.
The school practiced what is known as “restorative discipline/restorative justice when he was returned to the classroom. Which is liberal psycho-babble that means a troubled person is not really responsible for their issues, but that society and environment is. They believe further discipline is harmful and in this case, return the student to the classroom.
Basically, it is the same theory being practiced in liberal cities by returning thugs to the street.
Wouldn’t have been so troublesome IF they hadn’t tried to run away.
There is a significant difference between 14 and 15, but never mind.
We do *not* know the shooter's parents allowed him unrestricted access to firearms.
We have very little of their side of the story.
But there is at least one claim the pistol was locked up.
Four young men and women are dead, right at the beginnings of their adulthood. their parents will never recover from their loss and all they could have been.
This crime is not just the fault of the screwed-up kid with the gun - it is also the fault of parents who should have known who their kid was and safeguarded their firearms and ammo.
I am not for any new "gun control" but the parents were irresponsible and young people are dead.
If one of my kids did something like this, I would accept my part in his crime and show up at the police station, not try to run and hide.
“Unfortunately, we find that a cross-cutting trait among many profiles of mass shooters is desire for fame,” she said. This quest for fame among mass shooters skyrocketed since the mid-1990s “in correspondence to the emergence of widespread 24-hour news coverage on cable news programs, and the rise of the internet during the same period.”
She cited several media contagion models, most notably one proposed by Towers et al. (2015), which found the rate of mass shootings has escalated to an average of one every 12.5 days, and one school shooting on average every 31.6 days, compared to a pre-2000 level of about three events per year. “A possibility is that news of shooting is spread through social media in addition to mass media,” she said.
The Media gain significantly from these events. They know about Media contagion. They gain money and they believe they advance their gun control agenda from these events.
Since school boards evidently aren’t listening to parents anymore regarding what their children are taught, blame the school board.
I assume that you aren't a parent.
True enough - but how does that pertain?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.