😲Multiple injuries reported after Michigan high school shooting; suspect in custody

[icp4life162005]

I feel bad for the teen victims also.

Never said I didn't.

Doesn't mean I can't see the forest beyond the trees.


I don't get hung up on emotional platitudes. Nor do I feel the need to assign some form of emotional grief to a situation that is outside of my control.
That is, quite literally, media "programming".

[Spaceballs]

According to more recent accounts, the father bought the gun for his son. Son's social media posts claimed it was his "new baby" and mother claimed it was a Christmas present for their son. The gun was kept in an unlocked drawer that the kid had unfettered access to. They knew their kid had problems. The mother even texted "don't do it" to the son, but apparently didn't notify the school or law enforcement of her suspicions. I don't like the potential legal precedent charging the parents for their kid's actions sets, but in this case I think the parents were negligent enough in their duties that charges are warranted.

Even if it's not gross negligence (I think it is) it's still a straw man purchase for a prohibited person as a 15 year old is not legally allowed to own a handgun

The parents would have a hard time in court proving that they didn't buy it for the kid when they have made statements that they did and didn't restrict his access to it

I bought a .22 for my daughter.....to shoot. Not to own.

Yes, I bought it for her to teach her with..I would not have bought it for myself.

But....I own it. I ought it with my background check. I keep it locked up and she has no access to it without me. She is only allowed near it with my close supervision. I can make a valid claim that it is mine. These other parents can't do that.

[Bang]

A 15-year-old presumably cannot "own" a handgun in that state.

I'm betting there is no law prohibiting a 15-year-old from shooting a handgun... say, on a pistol range. So, if I'm right, parents buying a handgun for their son to use, supervised, on a range (for example) is no violation. Stating it is "his gun" requires consideration of context.

If the state in question has law requiring specified storage that was violated, the 'but for' result is addressable. (All aside from the parental denial of the son's mental condition).

[Royinmontco]

This seems to mirror the Newtown school shooting (other than the kid didn't shoot the parents). The parents knew the kid was messed up, yet they bought a gun for him. I don't think this is overreach to charge them.

[PickingPA]

Also doesn’t help their defense to withdraw $4000 and be found hiding in a business basement in Detroit, regardless of the dispute over whether the “man hunt” alert was premature.

[Sandcut]

There appears to be a huge disconnect between the prosecutor and the sheriffs office. The sheriff politely blamed it on the administration being new, but his frustration was evident. Seems like the prosecutor has no idea what she is doing or she wants a lot of attention.

Usually for something along this line the parents would be allowed to turn themselves in with their lawyer. Not withstanding, the parents don*t seem to be the brightest bulbs in the pack. Same goes for the school admins who saw his drawings, didn*t expel him with his parents and never checked his back pack. Plenty of responsibility to go around. This thread should be interesting.

I was flicking through channels this morning and CNN was live streaming what I believe was the parent's arraignment. It was being done via ZOOM or some other remote online venue.

The parents' attorneys did a pretty good job of making the prosecutor look like a doofus. Their attorney had reached out to the prosecutor to inform her of the parents' plan to surrender. The prosecutor never returned the call. The parents' attorney was in contact with the Sheriff and was scheduling the surrender, but she had other obligations representing another client in court before they could be present for the surrender. The prosecutor was unaware of all of this, having not returned their call.

However, the judge seemed to me more aligned with the prosecutor and set bail for the parents at $500K a piece.

[Carson]

This seems to mirror the Newtown school shooting (other than the kid didn't shoot the parents). The parents knew the kid was messed up, yet they bought a gun for him. I don't think this is overreach to charge them.

Seems the parents were more interested in being the cool parents or good friend of their child instead of being the parent.

[Carson]

Also doesn*t help their defense to withdraw $4000 and be found hiding in a business basement in Detroit, regardless of the dispute over whether the *man hunt* alert was premature.

Agree. While the prosecutor is grandstanding, the parents don*t appear to be wrapped too tight. Where did they think they were going to hide? Did they all of a sudden abandon their son? They are not getting parents of the year.

[Carson]

I was flicking through channels this morning and CNN was live streaming what I believe was the parent's arraignment. It was being done via ZOOM or some other remote online venue.

The parents' attorneys did a pretty good job of making the prosecutor look like a doofus. Their attorney had reached out to the prosecutor to inform her of the parents' plan to surrender. The prosecutor never returned the call. The parents' attorney was in contact with the Sheriff and was scheduling the surrender, but she had other obligations representing another client in court before they could be present for the surrender. The prosecutor was unaware of all of this, having not returned their call.

However, the judge seemed to me more aligned with the prosecutor and set bail for the parents at $500K a piece.

Yes. The prosecutor is making a shit show out of this for no reason.

[Pag23]

Seems the parents were more interested in being the cool parents or good friend of their child instead of being the parent.

Bingo.....