It's a slippery slope my friend, sounds good when we're hyped up, charge dad with murder. What if it were a knife from the kitchen drawer? Is that the next step? What if your 16 year old is drinking and kills a family of 4 one night, in YOUR car? After drinking YOUR beer? Is the parent then charged with vehicular homicide? I could think of dozens of what if's. I would think a precedent would be set in a case such as this, and it would open the door for all sorts of legal issues, and lawsuits, where a minor commits some crime, and the parent is charged. Scary stuff. It's a great discussion
![Smile :) :)]()
Thanks!
I think these are all super-interesting test cases, absolutely worthy of further reflection and discussion, but IMO some are not like the others, and this case has some distinctive elements that make charging the parent more understandable IMO.
The kitchen knife in the drawer is not illegal for a child to own and use -- that AR-15 was. And had the parent of the kitchen knife-wielding child previously been interviewed by LE, had protested the involvement of said child in death threats AND promised that the child well knew the difference between dicing onions and attacking classmates and undertook to ensure that kitchen knives were inaccessible to the child, and THEN bought him a whacking great (and illegal) zombie knife for Xmas, we might have a case.
For me, a non-lawyer, there are a few points here:
- Previous history of death threats; specifically, a school shooting
- Parent undertaking to educate CG in proper gun use and to make all guns in the family home inaccessible
- Parent then purchasing a gun that was illegal for CG to own, as a gift
- Parent clearly failing in undertaking to protect access to guns
- School shooting carried out with gifted weapon
Too many points where parent not only failed to discourage access to weapons after receiving fair warning, but actively encouraged access via gifting the AR-15.
For me, this is NOT a case of an over-zealous prosecutor reaching back into the causal chain to punish a parent unfairly for the actions of the child -- for instance, the allegedly abusive mother is NOT charged -- but charging the clear negligence of the father without which the shootings should not have occurred.
Had CG someone filched a weapon from outside the family home, after the father had rendered all family weapons inaccessible, I don't think we see charges for CG senior here. IMO, MOO, etc.