• 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

Bucky said:
www.cnn.com

Michigan shooting suspect's parents willfully disregarded signs that their son was a threat, prosecutors say | CNN

Prosecutors in a filing say the parents of alleged Oxford High School shooter Ethan Crumbley are at a "greater risk of flight" now than when they were arraigned on involuntary manslaughter charges earlier this month and allege the couple "willfully ignored the needs and well-being of their son...
www.cnn.com www.cnn.com

The parents should be charged and thrown in prison. It's a damn shame these parents bought their kid a gun. What is wrong with society where parents are buying their underaged mentally deranged son a gun?

So much for responsible gun owners. Give me a break!
Click to expand...

What does the "So much for responsible gun owners" statement mean?
 
Rich2018 said:
After "Rat Trap", probably his best.
Click to expand...
my favorite-https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ks_HIeRo7fU

37 years ago I was with my team I coached in a van on our way to West Point for the ISRA nationals, and I put a tape in the deck and had this on it. We had a little chubby kid from NJ who would always comment about artists-be it Bob Geldof, Dylan, Jorma Kaukonen, who were Jewish. And one of the law students, who helped coach the team, who was a conservative Jewish guy, would always say STFU Rob. I still remember that.
 
TurtleDude said:
my favorite-https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ks_HIeRo7fU

37 years ago I was with my team I coached in a van on our way to West Point for the ISRA nationals, and I put a tape in the deck and had this on it. We had a little chubby kid from NJ who would always comment about artists-be it Bob Geldof, Dylan, Jorma Kaukonen, who were Jewish. And one of the law students, who helped coach the team, who was a conservative Jewish guy, would always say STFU Rob. I still remember that.
Click to expand...

"She's so Modern" was a good one. I also liked "Someone's Looking at You"

Not sure what the Jewish reference is about though.
 
Hamish Howl said:
That reminds me. You know who else got a gun as a gift?

Earnest Hemingway.

Of course, he knew why.
Click to expand...
I was also gifted with a firearm for my 10th birthday by my father, which I still own.

The prosecutor is going to have a very difficult time trying to convince a jury that parents buying their child a firearm as a gift is somehow being "criminally negligent" when there is no crime being committed.
 
Glitch said:
I was also gifted with a firearm for my 10th birthday by my father, which I still own.

The prosecutor is going to have a very difficult time trying to convince a jury that parents buying their child a firearm as a gift is somehow being "criminally negligent" when there is no crime being committed.
Click to expand...

Of course it's negigent to gift a gun to a child - why do you think children are banned from buying guns
It's like gifting a child a crate of beer.
 
Rich2018 said:
Of course it's negigent to gift a gun to a child - why do you think children are banned from buying guns
It's like gifting a child a crate of beer.
Click to expand...
I thought alcohol could not be analogous to guns?

Just jn case you've now decided it is...

In many places, it is legal for a child to consume alcohol with parental supervision. Since it is so often illegal for a child to buy alcohol in those places, we must assume the supervising parent "gifts" the child.
 
Glitch said:
I was also gifted with a firearm for my 10th birthday by my father, which I still own.

The prosecutor is going to have a very difficult time trying to convince a jury that parents buying their child a firearm as a gift is somehow being "criminally negligent" when there is no crime being committed.
Click to expand...

I don't think the prosecution will have any trouble at all.
 
Glitch said:
I was also gifted with a firearm for my 10th birthday by my father, which I still own.

The prosecutor is going to have a very difficult time trying to convince a jury that parents buying their child a firearm as a gift is somehow being "criminally negligent" when there is no crime being committed.
Click to expand...
I got a .410 around that age. Loved quail hunting with the grownups.

If the kid hadn’t committed a crime and this was just some weird DA making a point case I would agree, however that is not the case and the fact that a horrific crime happened makes the case much easier to win
 
Chillfolks said:
I got a .410 around that age. Loved quail hunting with the grownups.

If the kid hadn’t committed a crime and this was just some weird DA making a point case I would agree, however that is not the case and the fact that a horrific crime happened makes the case much easier to win
Click to expand...
Except that the prosecutor has to obtain a conviction based upon evidence, not upon irrational emotion. The parents committed no crime, only their child has. In the US we don't punish parents for the crimes of their children. They would have to be mentally-unhinged to even consider something so monumentally stupid and infantile. Which explains why leftist filth are so keen on the idea.
 
Glitch said:
Except that the prosecutor has to obtain a conviction based upon evidence, not upon irrational emotion. The parents committed no crime, only their child has. In the US we don't punish parents for the crimes of their children. They would have to be mentally-unhinged to even consider something so monumentally stupid and infantile. Which explains why leftist filth are so keen on the idea.
Click to expand...


"Some states have laws holding gun owners liable for failing to secure weapons around children, but Michigan does not. That means prosecutors will be relying on traditional criminal law, under which they must prove that the Crumbleys were not merely negligent, but grossly negligent or reckless, the experts said...
...the case appears to be the first against parents of a teenage school shooter. While other parents have been charged for deaths resulting from unsecured guns, those cases have involved much younger children, experts said.
In one case, in a neighboring Michigan county, the owner of a gun used by a six-year-old to shoot a classmate pleaded no contest to involuntary manslaughter in 2000. April Zeoli, a professor at the School of Criminal Justice at Michigan State University, said that prosecution offered the closest parallel to the Crumbleys, and a legal precedent for holding them liable...

...however, Robert Leider, a professor at George Mason University's Antonin Scalia Law School, said that and other cases were different from the Crumbleys' because young children legally cannot have criminal intent.

"Here you have a teenager who can form his own criminal intent," Leider said. "That weighs in favor of breaking the chain of causation" between the Crumbleys and the shooting.

Eric Ruben, a professor at Southern Methodist University's Dedman School of Law, said whether prosecutors succeed depends on the facts and on their approach. He said a case focusing on what the Crumbleys did - like buying the gun despite knowing it posed a high risk - is likely stronger than one homing in on what they failed to do.

To convict them for failing to do something, he said, prosecutors would need to show that the parents had a duty to the victims.

Michigan law prohibits those under age 18 from buying or possessing firearms, except in limited circumstances such as hunting with a license and a supervising adult. Oakland County Prosecutor Karen McDonald told a news conference the charges were intended to "send a message: that gun owners have a responsibility."

Ruben said the parents would likely defend themselves by arguing that they could not have reasonably foreseen that their actions would lead to the shooting, meaning they could not be responsible for causing it.
Lawrence Dubin, a professor of law at University of Detroit Mercy, said that if the parents knew that their son had a dangerous state of mind but gave him easy access to the gun anyway, it could support the manslaughter charges.
Leider said the facts, as alleged by the prosecutors, seemed "egregious."
"They clearly knew their child was very troubled and seemed to have gone out of their way to arm him," he said."


www.reuters.com

Manslaughter charges against Michigan shooter's parents break new legal ground

There is little precedent for the criminal charges against the parents of Ethan Crumbley, the Michigan teenager who fatally shot four of his high school classmates with a handgun on Tuesday, but prosecutors may have a strong case, legal experts said.
www.reuters.com www.reuters.com
 
Last edited:
Glitch said:
Except that the prosecutor has to obtain a conviction based upon evidence, not upon irrational emotion. The parents committed no crime, only their child has. In the US we don't punish parents for the crimes of their children. They would have to be mentally-unhinged to even consider something so monumentally stupid and infantile. Which explains why leftist filth are so keen on the idea.
Click to expand...

They're going to jail.
 
Glitch said:
The parents committed no crime, only their child has. In the US we don't punish parents for the crimes of their children.
Click to expand...
Not true.

In the US we do punish parents for the crimes of their children.

"Each state imposes legal responsibility on parents and legal guardians for the delinquent and criminal acts of minors in their charge. Parental responsibility statutes have been in effect in the U.S. for at least 100 years."

Parental Responsibility for a Child's Criminal Actions

Each state imposes legal responsibility on parents and legal guardians for the delinquent and criminal acts of minors in their charge.
www.criminaldefenselawyer.com www.criminaldefenselawyer.com
 
They may go to jail; I think the texts between the mother and son indicate she knew what was about to happen. However, buying a gun for your child is not illegal and they will not be convicted for that. Millions of people buy guns for their children every year and just because a couple of kids abuse that gift does not make it illegal. I got a BB gun when I was about 6 and had a 22 and a shotgun before I was 12.

Being a poor parent is not a crime either. It appears this child was overly indulged. He got anything he wanted and never learned that he wasn't the center of the universe. His parents seem self-absorbed, and he does as well.
 
Hamish Howl said:
They're going to jail.
Click to expand...
I'd like to think so, too, but I'm not so sure. They made a bad decision, sure, but the evidence I've heard about (prior to purchasing the gun) is not very strong. Unless he decapitated that baby bird, keeping something 'gross' around for ewwww potential isn't that unusual for boys. He was bummed his best friend moved... sad stuff happens every day to kids.

What shows negligence more, to me, is them not hiring Ethan a lawyer and then bolting for Detroit when they were charged. And their leaving him home alone while they went out drinking when he was 8 or 9. A long pattern of not giving a shit. When you look at their decision to go back to work that day and not take Ethan home, it's more damning in light of everything else they did (or didn't do). But even though they sound like pretty poor parents, I'm not sure it will be enough to put them in jail. Despite being self absorbed assholes, of course they never dreamed Ethan would do what he did. What parent would?
 
Rich2018 said:
"She's so Modern" was a good one. I also liked "Someone's Looking at You"

Not sure what the Jewish reference is about though.
Click to expand...
I hadn't thought much about Sir Bob until you mentioned him here, and that caused me to remember that trip to Princeton
 
NolanVoyd said:
Not true.

In the US we do punish parents for the crimes of their children.

"Each state imposes legal responsibility on parents and legal guardians for the delinquent and criminal acts of minors in their charge. Parental responsibility statutes have been in effect in the U.S. for at least 100 years."

Parental Responsibility for a Child's Criminal Actions

Each state imposes legal responsibility on parents and legal guardians for the delinquent and criminal acts of minors in their charge.
www.criminaldefenselawyer.com www.criminaldefenselawyer.com
Click to expand...
how many single mothers of the thuggins who cause so much inner city violence, get charged? many of them know their kids are gangsters and often help them
 
TurtleDude said:
how many single mothers of the thuggins who cause so much inner city violence, get charged? many of them know their kids are gangsters and often help them
Click to expand...
I don't know how many. What does that have to do with my point?

(You sure don't argue like somone who used to be an attorney).
 
NolanVoyd said:
I don't know how many. What does that have to do with my point?

(You sure don't argue like somone who used to be an attorney).
Click to expand...
what would you know about being an attorney? It is a relevant question.
 
TurtleDude said:
what would you know about being an attorney? It is a relevant question.
Click to expand...
No it isnt. An attorney would understand that.

Other potential cases have no bearing on this one.

The criteria for deciding this one.....is there a law? Yes. Are these two 8n violation of it,? Most likely yes.
 
NolanVoyd said:
No it isnt. An attorney would understand that.

Other potential cases have no bearing on this one.

The criteria for deciding this one.....is there a law? Yes. Are these two 8n violation of it,? Most likely yes.
Click to expand...
so case law has no relevance: Okie dokie
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom