Look, there are cases where it's obvious (bullying/harming small animals, angry outbursts) but there's no guarantee if a teenager is going to lash out violently. If evidence was found that makes sense where he was exhibiting violent behavior multiple times in a pattern and then they gave him a gun (or he had one and they didnt take it away from him), fine, charge the parents and put them in jail. But if the parents or those interacting with kid didn't see it, then you can't say they "ignored" it.
I can't absolutely blame the parents if the kid appeared normal enough to have a gun, then he suddenly snapped and killed others. Because at that point it seems like pearl clutching from gun grabbers.
I can't absolutely blame the parents if the kid appeared normal enough to have a gun, then he suddenly snapped and killed others. Because at that point it seems like pearl clutching from gun grabbers.
This case wasn't anything like that, the kid exhibited murder suicide ideation and the parents did their level best to ignore it while giving him a gun at the same time. Still, I am suspicious of how the legal theory will play out.
With that, I still don't see how it's manslaughter on part of the father simply because it wasn't done by his own hands. If they knowingly let their son have a gun, at most it should be accessory to murder, but I'm assuming the prosecutors were slapping harder charges because the shooter was a juvenile and they possibly don't like guns.
Look, there are cases where it's obvious (bullying/harming small animals, angry outbursts) but there's no guarantee if a teenager is going to lash out violently. If evidence was found that makes sense where he was exhibiting violent behavior multiple times in a pattern and then they gave him a gun (or he had one and they didnt take it away from him), fine, charge the parents and put them in jail. But if the parents or those interacting with kid didn't see it, then you can't say they "ignored" it.
I can't absolutely blame the parents if the kid appeared normal enough to have a gun, then he suddenly snapped and killed others. Because at that point it seems like pearl clutching from gun grabbers.
This case wasn't anything like that, the kid exhibited murder suicide ideation and the parents did their level best to ignore it while giving him a gun at the same time. Still, I am suspicious of how the legal theory will play out.
With that, I still don't see how it's manslaughter on part of the father simply because it wasn't done by his own hands. If they knowingly let their son have a gun, at most it should be accessory to murder, but I'm assuming the prosecutors were slapping harder charges because the shooter was a juvenile and they possibly don't like guns.
They love guns, that's why their goons get the best ones. It's those uppity peasants they don't like.
Aha, that gave me a good laugh!