So, What Are Your Thoughts About The Mother Of The School Shooter Being Convicted?

[retrieverman]

It depends. Did they buy the phone and truck for their child when they knew their child was a danger to others?

These parents bought a rifle for their kid, allowed unfettered access to it, and they knew he had serious mental issues. Then 5 days later were called to the school for a meeting with the principal because their kid was messed up in the head and didn't pull their kid out of school. Had they not been negligent as parents then this doesn't happen.

My wife and I have raised three kids, and she’s been a high school English teacher for 27 years. From what I’ve seen in my own kids and the thousands that have passed through her classroom or been classmates of our kids, I most certainly think every single kid with a cell phone and a vehicle is potential danger to themselves and everyone around them on the road. What I don’t think is that the parents that bought those kids phones and vehicles should be held accountable for little Johnny or little Susie texting and driving and killing someone. Just my

 

[Glocktogo]

It can be both a correct judgement and a novel legal gambit that will ultimately be abused.

That’s why I always distinguish between the “justice” system they say we have, and the two-tiered legal system we actually have.

 

[John6185]

It sets a precedent for other similar court cases where parents have let their children run wild. The kid was too young to have a pistol unsupervised and he had problems.
Other parents “might” try and manage their children properly due to the results of this case but it’s probably too late. Obedience training starts when they are Young.

 

[FlyGuyGSP]

My wife and I have raised three kids, and she’s been a high school English teacher for 27 years. From what I’ve seen in my own kids and the thousands that have passed through her classroom or been classmates of our kids, I most certainly think every single kid with a cell phone and a vehicle is potential danger to themselves and everyone around them on the road. What I don’t think is that the parents that bought those kids phones and vehicles should be held accountable for little Johnny or little Susie texting and driving and killing someone. Just my

I don’t think texting and driving and the actions of a school shooter are a direct comparison.

 

[BobbyV]

Four counts of involuntary manslaughter….

I have mixed thoughts about it.

If it played out like things were presented she deserves jail time.

 

[BobbyV]

Already on their agenda. They keep suing the gun manufacturers saying they are responsible for an inanimate object that doesn't kill anyone by itself. It takes criminal human interaction to make that happen.

It's a pretty big leap for them to make to go from convicting this parent to using it with the hopes of winning a case against a manufacturer. But it wouldn't shock me if they tried to do so.

 

[retrieverman]

I don’t think texting and driving and the actions of a school shooter are a direct comparison.

I’m not in any way comparing crimes. I’m saying it’s a bad precedent to hold a parent accountable for a kid’s actions. Today, it’s for a school shooting, but tomorrow, it could be drunk driving or texting and driving. It’s a slippery slope.

 

[Hworth18]

If I heard the news correctly, she went out and bought her underage child the gun. She should be held accountable and I think justice was served on her end. Outright negligence should be punished and I think in these cases, parents should be responsible for the child's actions.
"Prosecutors argued Jennifer Crumbley knew her son – 15 at the time of the shooting – was struggling with alarming mental health issues. They said instead of getting him the help he needed, she and her husband, James, bought their son the gun used in the attack"

 

[FlyGuyGSP]

I’m not in any way comparing crimes. I’m saying it’s a bad precedent to hold a parent accountable for a kid’s actions. Today, it’s for a school shooting, but tomorrow, it could be drunk driving or texting and driving. It’s a slippery slope.

I understand. It just feels like a leap to say that precedent has been set. They bought a gun for their child with mental health issues.

I don’t think we should let fear of the future keep us from doing the right thing now.

 

[Firpo]

If we’re going to use the car metaphor then we need to paint the whole picture. We as parents can clearly see our 15 year old child is experiencing severe mental stability issues and rather than getting him some psychiatric help we decide to buy him a sports car and leave the keys on the kitchen counter for him to grab whenever he likes. Sometime later we get a call from a concerned school principal who shows us several drawings our disturbed son has made depicting him running over his classmates with a car. Rather than being alarmed we once again choose to ignore the child’s cries for help and decide to “go back to work”. A couple hours later our son uses the car we bought him and to which we allowed him unrestricted access to mow down his classmates killing 4 and injuring several others. Our response as parents should have been to be there to deal with situation but instead we choose to think only of ourselves and run across the country hiding from police and our responsibility as parents of a minor. Hell yes we should be held responsible.
I understand this isn’t an exact comparison to the cell phone / car situation but I don’t know how to compare the two. With the cell phone scenario the child is mentally stable, can legally possess a phone as well as the car and their actions where irresponsible not intentional. This young man was mentally unstable, couldn’t legally possess a gun and intentionally killed/injured all those people. Just not remotely the same.