• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Michigan shooting suspect's parents willfully disregarded signs that their son was a threat

Apparently yet another "good guy with a gun" failed epically...

... Johnson said the guard told investigators she walked past Tate Myre, who had already been shot, and believed he was participating in a shooting drill, wearing very realistic makeup to depict injury. Myre died in the shooting. ...


"Wearing very realistic makeup to depict injury", no less

All those armed cowards down in Uvalde, and now this loser...
 
Apparently yet another "good guy with a gun" failed epically...

... Johnson said the guard told investigators she walked past Tate Myre, who had already been shot, and believed he was participating in a shooting drill, wearing very realistic makeup to depict injury. Myre died in the shooting. ...


"Wearing very realistic makeup to depict injury", no less

All those armed cowards down in Uvalde, and now this loser...

Kind of undermines the bats**t crazy idea to arm school teachers.
 
If you want more gun control fine, the police and military should be subject to the same gun control that the citizen is. To allow police and military personnel access to guns and not citizens is a double standard.

They are.
 
That's what you got from the article?
No, that is their dumb trolling technique to deflect, ask a moronic questions and never offer anything of intelligence. THe right wing way.
 
Not if your country's been invaded.

What is the relevance to this thread? Is it supporting a point, or critiquing one? Or just babble for babble's sake?
 
"James and Jennifer Crumbley didn't just ignore their "troubled" son, but exposed him to years of domestic disputes that involved loud fights, heavy drinking, infidelity and rants about money problems, and often put him in the middle of their spats, prosecutors argue in a new court filing."

 
"James and Jennifer Crumbley didn't just ignore their "troubled" son, but exposed him to years of domestic disputes that involved loud fights, heavy drinking, infidelity and rants about money problems, and often put him in the middle of their spats, prosecutors argue in a new court filing."


And?
 
It’s quite a leap to go from knowing your kid is sad to somehow knowing he would murder someone. What evidence does the prosecutor have to connect those very distant dots?
 
Back
Top Bottom