Caribou Gear Tarp

Interesting verdict related to 2A

S

SAJ-99

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 5, 2019
Messages
7,807
Location
E Washington
I have thoughts, but more just thought the news was interesting. Might be testing the quality of discussions on HT after the other "threats to 2A" thread got nixed, but I like different perspectives on how we can move toward common ground on hot-button issues. Let's try to keep this one open.

foxbaltimore.com

Georgia father who gave son gun gets murder verdict after deadly high school shooting

A Georgia man who gave his teenage son the gun he's accused of using to kill two students and two teachers at a high school was convicted on Tuesday.
foxbaltimore.com foxbaltimore.com
 
As someone who struggled immensely with mental health in my younger years... I can say I now would give up easy or convenient access to my guns and ammo if I thought anyone in my family was struggling in that way, or any way. I can't speak to the legal repercussions, but I also know acknowledging that something is "wrong" is often a hard thing to do. Without making assumptions or knowing the full facts, would the father's choice to disregard the mothers' concerns be a part of the verdict?
 
As a son who received rifle(s) as Christmas gifts from the age of 7, and beyond, and had my dad buy me handguns before I was 21yo- I was 18 (relax, the statute of limitations is long since expired, and so is Dad at this point), I can appreciate the mixed feelings on this one.

That said, giving a 14yo an AR-style rifle and then allowing him to have unfettered access to that rifle and ammunition is f@cking stupid and bad parenting (yes, I said it).

Yes, we have a 2nd Ammendment, but rights come with responsibilities. Act accordingly.
 
Sure sounds like criminal negligence on part of the dad to let a teenage son have access to a gun while also having a shrine to a school shooter to me. Not all the time, but a lot of times some terrible accident befalls a young person, there's often a negligent parent.
 
I am split on this. IF the son had issues then parent should be held with some type of responsibility. I got my first gun for my 10th birthday, and 1 almost every year after that. But I was raised in a different time, when kids were very clear on right and wrong.

My issues with this is what president does this open up. Are parents responsible for if a kid steals something, gets a girl pregnant, gets in a fight at school. Its a slippery slop and I don't like either side of it.

My 2cents.
 
I teach youth shooting classes. Firearms safety is ingrained into me, and also my family and many that I have influence with. I can’t imagine letting my kids under my roof just keep their guns in their room and do whatever they wanted with them, even though I know that they have been taught to be safe with them. I let my kids shoot BB guns and air rifles unsupervised when they are in the garage range, and occasionally when they ask my permission in the backyard, but not with other kids. They keep their bb and air rifles cased in their rooms. They are earning trust with those.

My guns stay locked in a safe, except for one that is hidden with quick access in case of emergency. I’m not as worried about my kids as much as other kids coming into the house, but kids are kids, and even good kids have bad days and lapses in judgment. Not saying that kids shouldn’t be able to go hunting on their own if they are mature and responsible in the right setting, but we don’t have that setting at our house.

The above is very different than this case BASED UPON THE EVIDENCE THAT WE HAFE SEEN IN PUBLIC. I feel that a reasonable person would find this judgment the same as this jury did UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES. I don’t think that this case should provide any precedent for 2A infringements. It is just the justice system working with the facts of this case. A reasonable parent would have taken that gun from the kid
 
morley.tyler said:
That said, giving a 14yo an AR-style rifle and then allowing him to have unfettered access to that rifle and ammunition is f@cking stupid and bad parenting (yes, I said it).
Click to expand...
For the most part I agree and I think it depends on the kids at that age. However an AR style weapon doesn't really have much to do with it. Imo.
 
belshawelk said:
I am split on this. IF the son had issues then parent should be held with some type of responsibility. I got my first gun for my 10th birthday, and 1 almost every year after that. But I was raised in a different time, when kids were very clear on right and wrong.

My issues with this is what president does this open up. Are parents responsible for if a kid steals something, gets a girl pregnant, gets in a fight at school. Its a slippery slop and I don't like either side of it.

My 2cents.
Click to expand...
This brings up a unique thought experiment- at what point are parents/guardians held liable/responsible? Take theft- If parents know of their intent to steal vs knowledge of it after the fact? Slippery slope indeed.
 
Maybe it should be noted that this isn’t the first case to go this way or be charged similarly. Every case is unique, but there is a trend. Some are less straight forward (Crumbley, I think).

My thought experiment is to eliminate the gun to eliminate the emotional 2a issue. What if the parent bought the kid alcohol and then the kid snuck out in the car later and killed someone? Same? Different?

The overall trend is parents are being held accountable for the actions of the child. And jurys are generally doing it quickly, so maybe society is changing too?
 
SAJ-99 said:
The overall trend is parents are being held accountable for the actions of the child. And jurys are generally doing it quickly, so maybe society is changing too?
Click to expand...

It seems in many cases there are laws on the books about firearms legally being required to be inaccessible to minors. That makes it less about being responsible for the childs actions and more about, according to the laws on the books, an adult having enabled actions not securely storing something they legally were required to securely store and the minor should not legally be able to access.

A couple of years ago some minors in Colorado were driving around in a truck throwing large landscaping rocks at oncoming cars late at night on a rural highway. They killed a 20 year old girl.

The parents didn't get in trouble for that. Though technically one of them did get in trouble for interfering with law enforcement during his sons arrest. And those kids are now in jail for the rest of their lives (charged as adults). Now, if those kids had taken one of their parents handguns that was supposed to be inaccessible tot hem and shot at oncoming cars killing the same girl, the gunowning parent(s) would be in a heap of trouble.

Weirdly, the result is the same, dead girl. But, guns are technically more deadly than rocks. And usually when a minor sneaks away with his dad's handgun it's to try and pile up bodies at school, not indiscriminately shoot at cars. The stakes are indeed higher.
 
SAJ-99 said:
My thought experiment is to eliminate the gun to eliminate the emotional 2a issue. What if the parent bought the kid alcohol and then the kid snuck out in the car later and killed someone? Same? Different?
Click to expand...
There are cases where this has happened and the parents were held criminally responsible. Far more of these cases than fire arm related ones.
 
Dave N said:
Funny how parents are responsible when kids do something wrong but kept out of the loop if the school helps a kid transition.
Click to expand...
Whether Colorado schools can keep a student's gender status private from parents is a highly contested, evolving issue, but recent legal developments and district policies are trending toward requiring parental notification. While schools historically aimed to protect student privacy, new policies and court interpretations, such as HB24-1039, now require informing parents if students ask to change their name or gender in records.
 
Yes, parents can be sued and held legally liable for their children's actions, particularly involving intentional, malicious, or negligent behavior resulting in property damage or personal injury. Through "parental responsibility laws," parents may be financially responsible for damages, often capped at specific amounts (e.g., up to $25000

in some states).
 

Attachments

  • 1772578157322.gif
    1772578157322.gif
    43 bytes · Views: 0
SAJ-99 said:
Took 11 posts to transition to different topic. Congrats. Might be a new record.
Click to expand...
Just saying, what are the limits for the parents being responsible or not? Just like age limits. You can join the military at 18 and carry a weapon but not be allowed to drink. Two sides to every situation.
 
Dave N said:
Just saying, what are the limits for the parents being responsible or not? Just like age limits. You can join the military at 18 and carry a weapon but not be allowed to drink. Two sides to every situation.
Click to expand...
It's ok Dave I'll send some monopoly money should you end up in Forum jail.
 
I agree, parenting goes a long way, but kids also have to be "adult" enough to have responsibility for their actions. If they know it's wrong and do it anyway they should be the one in trouble. Gun access is tricky.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
118,526
Messages
2,197,046
Members
38,577
Latest member
zurich

Share this page

Back
Top