There's a lot to unpack here. First, one of the things about America is that when something goes wrong the public demands a scapegoat. I think small minds don't want to deal with the fact that rarely is a problem just one (or a few) person's fault, that systems can and do fail both regularly and spectacularly. They want things tied up in a neat bow, and this conviction gives it to them: it was all a warped kid his parents failed to stop him. Let's put those three in jail, and all is right with the world. You can return to your regularly scheduled programming.
The second is that this is a further step in the gun control agenda. Anti-gun groups have been clamoring for years to hold gun owners responsible when someone gets ahold of and misuses their gun. They hit the gold mine with two very unsympathetic parents who are undoubtedly negligent. But don't think for a second these are the only kind of people they want to hold to this level of liability. Left-leaning states are already passing laws that if your firearm is stolen and you don't immediately report it to the police you are liable for anything the thief later does with it. Their goal is to dissuade people from owning guns because they become too much of a liability risk if they are lost or stolen.
Finally, even though the parents have the lion's share of the blame here, let's not forget that on the very day the shooting occurred the school did not feel that he was such a threat that he had to be sent home or the police be notified, and it sounds like they didn't even ask:
Staff at Oxford High School did not demand that he go home but were surprised when the Crumbleys didn’t volunteer it during a brief meeting.
So if the very people who were on the ground at the shooting mere hours away from it occurring didn't see an imminent threat is it reasonable to expect that his parents would have had clairvoyance into his violent future?
There's a lot to unpack here. First, one of the things about America is that when something goes wrong the public demands a scapegoat. I think small minds don't want to deal with the fact that rarely is a problem just one (or a few) person's fault, that systems can and do fail both regularly and spectacularly. They want things tied up in a neat bow, and this conviction gives it to them: it was all a warped kid his parents failed to stop him. Let's put those three in jail, and all is right with the world. You can return to your regularly scheduled programming.
The second is that this is a further step in the gun control agenda. Anti-gun groups have been clamoring for years to hold gun owners responsible when someone gets ahold of and misuses their gun. They hit the gold mine with two very unsympathetic parents who are undoubtedly negligent. But don't think for a second these are the only kind of people they want to hold to this level of liability. Left-leaning states are already passing laws that if your firearm is stolen and you don't immediately report it to the police you are liable for anything the thief later does with it. Their goal is to dissuade people from owning guns because they become too much of a liability risk if they are lost or stolen.
Finally, even though the parents have the lion's share of the blame here, let's not forget that on the very day the shooting occurred the school did not feel that he was such a threat that he had to be sent home or the police be notified, and it sounds like they didn't even ask:
So if the very people who were on the ground at the shooting mere hours away from it occurring didn't see an imminent threat is it reasonable to expect that his parents would have had clairvoyance into his violent future?