School shooting in Maryland - resource officer did something

[Ghost]

Seriously? If you have kids and don't lock your guns up, either by putting them in a safe or putting a trigger lock on them, you should go to jail for allowing your child who just killed someone with YOUR gun! It sucks we all get blamed for an irresponsible parent. Would you rather have laws past to have the sheriff come inspect your house to insure your locking your guns up? I don't. If WE 2A believers want to enjoy our rights to freely enjoy our guns, better start being a responsible gun owner and secure your guns when not in use! When my grand kids come over to visit, I lock mine up or put them where they cannot get there hands on them.

I can get behind a penalty for a parent who irresponsibly allowed their minor child to get ahold of a gun and use it to kill someone else. After the fact that is fair to assess. Very much not in favor of inspections or other type of putting penalties on things before something bad happens. If I have no kids at home then how I store a gun is nobody else's business. If I have 100% faith in my 17-year-old kid and know that they are not a threat then how I store a gun is not anyone's business. If I mis-judged things and that kid causes harm or if the kid brings friends over and I didn't lock things up then nail my ass to the wall. I'm responsible in that case. But it is my choice to make and if there is adequate penalty for making a bad one I'll make a good one. But stop telling me what to do in absence of a problem.

Back to the original topic... Now that one of the victims has died I think the media will start talking about this and add it to their portfolio of carnage. When the only dead person was the criminal it wasn't useful to their narrative.

So if a parent buys their 16 year old a car and they use it to intentionally run over someone and kill them, should daddy do time?

[Holland&Holland]

I’m not seeing where they said how he got the gun. Just that it was his fathers. How would be relevant to any debate on locking up the father.

I thought I saw a report where it was his grandfathers?

[Holland&Holland]

Seriously? If you have kids and don't lock your guns up, either by putting them in a safe or putting a trigger lock on them, you should go to jail for allowing your child who just killed someone with YOUR gun! It sucks we all get blamed for an irresponsible parent. Would you rather have laws past to have the sheriff come inspect your house to insure your locking your guns up? I don't. If WE 2A believers want to enjoy our rights to freely enjoy our guns, better start being a responsible gun owner and secure your guns when not in use! When my grand kids come over to visit, I lock mine up or put them where they cannot get there hands on them.

I can get behind a penalty for a parent who irresponsibly allowed their minor child to get ahold of a gun and use it to kill someone else. After the fact that is fair to assess. Very much not in favor of inspections or other type of putting penalties on things before something bad happens. If I have no kids at home then how I store a gun is nobody else's business. If I have 100% faith in my 17-year-old kid and know that they are not a threat then how I store a gun is not anyone's business. If I mis-judged things and that kid causes harm or if the kid brings friends over and I didn't lock things up then nail my ass to the wall. I'm responsible in that case. But it is my choice to make and if there is adequate penalty for making a bad one I'll make a good one. But stop telling me what to do in absence of a problem.

Back to the original topic... Now that one of the victims has died I think the media will start talking about this and add it to their portfolio of carnage. When the only dead person was the criminal it wasn't useful to their narrative.

You do realize your statements are completely contradictory correct?

[BigBlue]

I can get behind a penalty for a parent who irresponsibly allowed their minor child to get ahold of a gun and use it to kill someone else. After the fact that is fair to assess. Very much not in favor of inspections or other type of putting penalties on things before something bad happens. If I have no kids at home then how I store a gun is nobody else's business. If I have 100% faith in my 17-year-old kid and know that they are not a threat then how I store a gun is not anyone's business. If I mis-judged things and that kid causes harm or if the kid brings friends over and I didn't lock things up then nail my ass to the wall. I'm responsible in that case. But it is my choice to make and if there is adequate penalty for making a bad one I'll make a good one. But stop telling me what to do in absence of a problem.

Back to the original topic... Now that one of the victims has died I think the media will start talking about this and add it to their portfolio of carnage. When the only dead person was the criminal it wasn't useful to their narrative.

So if a parent buys their 16 year old a car and they use it to intentionally run over someone and kill them, should daddy do time?

I believe parents need to have some responsibility for things their minor children do. I'm not sure if "doing time" is the penalty for that situation but definitely they can be penalized. Typically the parent wouldn't have as much responsibility as the kid that committed the crime but they have some. They already are penalized in terms of insurance and liability that is in the name of the parent. Penalties would be different for just having bought a car and allowed the kid general access versus if the parent knew the kid was drunk and let them leave home in the car anyway. All things need logic applied.

[BigBlue]

You do realize your statements are completely contradictory correct?

How so? The gist of it was: hold a parent accountable if their actions led to the kid committing a crime. Don't penalize the parent if there is no crime.

[Holland&Holland]

You do realize your statements are completely contradictory correct?

How so? The gist of it was: hold a parent accountable if their actions led to the kid committing a crime. Don't penalize the parent if there is no crime.

So the government should not tell you how to store your firearms because your kid is 17 and mature, however they should dictate to others. What if your kid decided to use one of your guns in a crime?

[BigBlue]

You do realize your statements are completely contradictory correct?

How so? The gist of it was: hold a parent accountable if their actions led to the kid committing a crime. Don't penalize the parent if there is no crime.

So the government should not tell you how to store your firearms because your kid is 17 and mature, however they should dictate to others. What if your kid decided to use one of your guns in a crime?

Don't tell me how to do things, hold me responsible if something bad happens from my decisions.

[BigBlue]

My stance really comes from two things:

1. The fact that I think parenting is done very poorly in a lot of cases these days. I'm fine making a parent responsible for the bad actions of their kid as a way to reinforce that they better start doing a better job as a parent. If you know your kid is starting to be a gangbanger you better fix that crap. If you don't then when they go kill someone you bear responsibility. If you know your HS kid is having challenges with behavior, mental issues, depression, etc. then help them. Get involved and make it better. If you leave them have access to a gun in those situations you made a bad decision. On the other hand, if you're kid is well adjusted, mature, kind, and responsible and you let them have access to their hunting rifle without keeping it in the safe and the kid does nothing wrong then neither did you. Life is not black and white. People who can make good decisions should be rewarded and people who make bad decisions should be held responsible. Which leads to ...

2. Personal responsibility. People should generally be trusted and not nannied to death. But they should be held responsible for their actions. If they don't behave or don't make good decisions there are consequences. But assume the best to start with. Stop making a million laws telling everybody exactly what they can and can't do. But stick with penalties for causing harm to others and other bad things that result from their actions.

[Holland&Holland]

My stance really comes from two things:

1. The fact that I think parenting is done very poorly in a lot of cases these days. I'm fine making a parent responsible for the bad actions of their kid as a way to reinforce that they better start doing a better job as a parent. If you know your kid is starting to be a gangbanger you better fix that crap. If you don't then when they go kill someone you bear responsibility. If you know your HS kid is having challenges with behavior, mental issues, depression, etc. then help them. Get involved and make it better. If you leave them have access to a gun in those situations you made a bad decision. On the other hand, if you're kid is well adjusted, mature, kind, and responsible and you let them have access to their hunting rifle without keeping it in the safe and the kid does nothing wrong then neither did you. Life is not black and white. People who can make good decisions should be rewarded and people who make bad decisions should be held responsible. Which leads to ...

2. Personal responsibility. People should generally be trusted and not nannied to death. But they should be held responsible for their actions. If they don't behave or don't make good decisions there are consequences. But assume the best to start with. Stop making a million laws telling everybody exactly what they can and can't do. But stick with penalties for causing harm to others and other bad things that result from their actions.

So hold you responsible for others actions. Got it check.

Just checking, at what age does this expire? Or does it?

[Ghost]

My stance really comes from two things:

1. The fact that I think parenting is done very poorly in a lot of cases these days. I'm fine making a parent responsible for the bad actions of their kid as a way to reinforce that they better start doing a better job as a parent. If you know your kid is starting to be a gangbanger you better fix that crap. If you don't then when they go kill someone you bear responsibility. If you know your HS kid is having challenges with behavior, mental issues, depression, etc. then help them. Get involved and make it better. If you leave them have access to a gun in those situations you made a bad decision. On the other hand, if you're kid is well adjusted, mature, kind, and responsible and you let them have access to their hunting rifle without keeping it in the safe and the kid does nothing wrong then neither did you. Life is not black and white. People who can make good decisions should be rewarded and people who make bad decisions should be held responsible. Which leads to ...

2. Personal responsibility. People should generally be trusted and not nannied to death. But they should be held responsible for their actions. If they don't behave or don't make good decisions there are consequences. But assume the best to start with. Stop making a million laws telling everybody exactly what they can and can't do. But stick with penalties for causing harm to others and other bad things that result from their actions.

So hold you responsible for others actions. Got it check.

Just checking, at what age does this expire? Or does it?

I think he’s saying you’d have to prove negligence. Don’t piss your kid off though, little bastard could frame your ass in their quest for infamy.

[BigBlue]

So hold you responsible for others actions. Got it check.

Just checking, at what age does this expire? Or does it?

Your minor child is a fairly special case of 'other'. As a parent you're responsible for them in many ways. I don't see this as a problem. You have to provide their auto insurance and you get penalized if they crash. You have to provide their health insurance. If your kid hits someone in school you go in to meet with the principal. That's kind of what a 'dependent' is and involves.

Expire? Age of adulthood. 18.

[BigBlue]

I think he’s saying you’d have to prove negligence. Don’t piss your kid off though, little bastard could frame your ass in their quest for infamy.

Of course. And everything involves shades of gray. I'm not saying anything about the process to hold a parent responsible should be black & white or easy. Just that some type of responsibility should be applied. Is it feasible to do in the legal system?? I don't know. But it *should* happen somehow.

[Holland&Holland]

So hold you responsible for others actions. Got it check.

Just checking, at what age does this expire? Or does it?

Your minor child is a fairly special case of 'other'. As a parent you're responsible for them in many ways. I don't see this as a problem. You have to provide their auto insurance and you get penalized if they crash. You have to provide their health insurance. If your kid hits someone in school you go in to meet with the principal. That's kind of what a 'dependent' is and involves.

Expire? Age of adulthood. 18.

Ok, just checking. So in THIS case, since the "kid" went and took grandpa's gun from not their residence who is to get held accountable? Dad or grandpa?

For FL since the "kid" is 19 then no? Or since we are changing the law to 21 maybe that is the new age of adult hood? Or wait, Obama care says 26 so maybe then?

I think you are opening up a can of worms you might not want to know all the implications of.

[BigBlue]

Ok, just checking. So in THIS case, since the "kid" went and took grandpa's gun from not their residence who is to get held accountable? Dad or grandpa?

For FL since the "kid" is 19 then no? Or since we are changing the law to 21 maybe that is the new age of adult hood? Or wait, Obama care says 26 so maybe then?

I think you are opening up a can of worms you might not want to know all the implications of.

You're finding a lot of things to argue about for something I was merely stating as a general concept... Parents should have responsibility but don't nanny us into your view of how to do it.

If this kid took the gun from his grandparents that's really getting into the gray... Did the kid normally have access to their house? Did he live there? Did they know he could get in? If he was regularly there and/or came & went freely then they may bear some responsibility. If not, it's more like a stranger theft situation.

Adulthood happens at 18 here in the US, regardless of all the $hit happening with new laws being pushed for AR purchases. It's 18 to me unless something actually changes across the board as a rule for everything. For the FL shooting he wasn't a kid, he was an adult. We have established rules for shared responsibility/culpability for one adult helping or aiding another in a crime. But he bought his own damn gun so bringing this up as some type of a related example is not relevant.

[Ghost]

I think he’s saying you’d have to prove negligence. Don’t piss your kid off though, little bastard could frame your ass in their quest for infamy.

Of course. And everything involves shades of gray. I'm not saying anything about the process to hold a parent responsible should be black & white or easy. Just that some type of responsibility should be applied. Is it feasible to do in the legal system?? I don't know. But it *should* happen somehow.

Typically the kids that do this spend a lot of time planning and consider very minute details in their plans, so I’ve read.