Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by ericgtr12, Jan 11, 2016.
about time a parent gets some consequences from these action. Waiting for the parts have 100% responsibility argument to come in.
I am not saying it I am waiting for a certain person to claim that.
okay - its very dangerous to make absolutes. Rarely is that a good option.
Whether the guns were legal or not really are a by product of the fact an American teenager decided to undertake something so horrific. And that is something that culture fails to address.
Just 2 years?
Agreed, should be 5 years per death.
I have a problem with how he lost his right to own firearms. A man could get a domestic violence protection order against him, for unjust reasons. He should not have permanently lost his 2nd, without a conviction.
A man who illegally owned 6 guns, some of which were stolen by his child resulting in a mass murder, has been banned from owning guns. And you take issue with that?
Interesting and dramatic news-story. Personally I think that father got off far too leniently.
The father wasn't charged with the murders. He was charged for illegally owning a gun.
Not for making them available to his son, not for them being used in a crime - for illegally owning them. And he wasn't even convicted of anything to make him lose his right to own them; the mere allegation caused his ownership of the guns to be illegal. I think it's a shame that he will go to jail at all for this.
This is the extreme of the opposition, it doesn't matter how awful their intentions or neglect, their right to own that firearm is more important than the lives they take in their eyes. Amazing indeed.
I think the basis of his argument is that no one should lose the right to have a firearm due to a domestic dispute, therefore just making the father a victim of theft.
As the owner he should be responsible for properly securing them, had he done so many lives could've been saved. The father wasn't the victim here, those four dead kids were.
But had he not had the guns his kid would not have taken them and shot up 4 people. The father has to bare the responsibility for his kids actions.
There's that matter of owning 6 guns, illegally.
He didn't own the firearms, they were stolen. And his kid shot up four kids and himself. So how is he a responsible gun owner? I thought the gun rights people wanted illegal guns off of the streets? Now that doesn't matter, "his illegal guns were taken from him, he has rights too!"
The father's guns were not stolen guns, they were illegally owned and / or obtained and owned illegally due to a domestic charge.
So he was not supposed to have the guns yet they were still in the house? So did he not turn them in or did he steal them? Either way his kid and 4 others are dead because of him.
Laws vary state by state and I am not familiar with that state's laws. Some states allow you to retain ownership but they cannot be in your possession.
VERY debatable. The kid could have just sought another source.
This turd was smirking and smiling as he left the court room. Unbelievable.
No, the "kid" is 15. He's old enough to know better than to (1) steal, or (2) shoot somebody. The shootings are not the father's fault in any way.
Correct, which is why he's being charged. NOT because somebody stole them and committed a crime; it would be foolish to blame the victim of theft for that.
And had the gun been locked in a safe would the kid still be alive? He is still 15 and under the responsibility of the parents. 15 or not the kid is not an adult. The father is the responsible party here.
The court obviously agrees, as does anyone sane who isn't a rabid gun freak.