Is it right that the shooter’s dad gets charged?

@Rajk999 said
Your attitude is typical of American society - no accountability, no responsibility, no liability for the actions of your children.

"To be clear, I agree with you that parents should take responsibility"---Vivify

@vivify said
"Making parents legally responsible for their child's actions would greatly reduce teen crime, bullying, etc."---Vivify.

Then why did you ask this? Does that include a single mother whose kid is in a gang? Does she get charged for every act of violence that teen gets into?

Sounds like you do not agree with prosecuting a single mother.

@Rajk999 said
Then why did you ask this? Does that include a single mother whose kid is in a gang? Does she get charged for every act of violence that teen gets into?

Sounds like you do not agree with prosecuting a single mother.

Asking questions is a good way to get feedback, especially on a debate forum. I'm simply exploring this topic.

Though you may feel differently, not all topics are black and white. Many social issues have nuance.

@vivify said
Asking questions is a good way to get feedback, especially on a debate forum. I'm simply exploring this topic.

Though you may feel differently, not all topics are black and white. Many social issues have nuance.

Ok then so what is your opinion on this ..

Does that include a single mother whose kid is in a gang? Does she get charged for every act of violence that teen gets into?

@Rajk999 said
Ok then so what is your opinion on this ..

Does that include a single mother whose kid is in a gang? Does she get charged for every act of violence that teen gets into?

I'm not sure. That's why I asked. I want to get some opinions on this.

Sometimes questions I ask are rhetorical. This isn't one of them. My first post in this thread made clear I wasn't sure where I land on this topic.

@vivify said
"If parents were worried that their own kid's actions would land them in jail as well, maybe those parents would step up and do what needs to be done to make sure that child follows the law."---Vivify

How can a parent "make sure" their child follows the law?

This case is a grotesque overcharge. Even if there was some type of inadequate supervision, an indictment for second degree murder is prosecutorial showboating.

@no1marauder said
How can a parent "make sure" their child follows the law?

This case is a grotesque overcharge. Even if there was some type of inadequate supervision, an indictment for second degree murder is prosecutorial showboating.

As I explained to Rajk, I'm just exploring the topic. I'm not stating any conclusions, as evidenced by my use of the word "maybe".

You make valid points as does Moonbus, though you both having opposing views on this issue. I'm just weighing arguments.

@moonbus said
Failure to secure a firearm, failure to supervise a minor. Parents are liable for their childrens‘ behavior. This is an elementary legal principle.

No, they are not criminally liable for offenses committed by their minor children and no parent has ever been charged with murder because their kid is.

@shavixmir said
Uh… CAN YOU READ?

I was posing questions. See that funny little mark after those sentences? That’s called a question mark. It means it’s not a statement, but a question.

Comprende?

Yea and I put questions out there too, and?

@no1marauder said
No, they are not criminally liable for offenses committed by their minor children and no parent has ever been charged with murder because their kid is.

Parents certainly can be held liable for damages caused by their children. If a kid steals the family car and crashes it, the insurance won’t pay (unauthorized driver), so the parents can be sued for damages. This case is merely an extension of the same principle. Moreover,

"In the Crumbley case, as well as in this case, parents are not being charged for their child's crimes," said Carey. "The parents are being punished for their own criminal misconduct of enabling this violence to occur."

McDonald does not consider her prosecution of the Crumbleys or the charges against Colin Gray to necessarily be about creating a new type of deterrence for gun-owning parents, nor does she think parents of school shooters should always be held responsible for the acts of their children.
"I'd rather focus on what the public should learn, not as a warning you might get prosecuted," McDonald said. "Are you really more worried about being prosecuted, or about kids dying? Just secure your firearm, it takes seconds to do."

Source:

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/teen-suspected-georgia-school-shooting-appear-court-2024-09-06/

@no1marauder said
How can a parent "make sure" their child follows the law?

This case is a grotesque overcharge. Even if there was some type of inadequate supervision, an indictment for second degree murder is prosecutorial showboating.

👍

@moonbus said
Parents certainly can be held liable for damages caused by their children. If a kid steals the family car and crashes it, the insurance won’t pay (unauthorized driver), so the parents can be sued for damages. This case is merely an extension of the same principle. Moreover,

"In the Crumbley case, as well as in this case, parents are not being charged for their child's cri ...[text shortened]...

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/teen-suspected-georgia-school-shooting-appear-court-2024-09-06/

I've read stories where someone broke into an elderly couple's home tied them up and was robbing them, but the robber hurt themselves as he was moving unimpeded in their home due to an issue with a stairway. The couple was charged because it was unsafe and they didn't warn him, so I'm not asking only about the law, because it is possible to take a law and abuse it, but is it also the right thing to do?

I see no reason for that, had they had access to a gun and blown his brains out they would have been justified. So he trips while doing something in a place where he could be killed for what he was doing seems stupid to me.

@moonbus said
Parents certainly can be held liable for damages caused by their children. If a kid steals the family car and crashes it, the insurance won’t pay (unauthorized driver), so the parents can be sued for damages. This case is merely an extension of the same principle. Moreover,

"In the Crumbley case, as well as in this case, parents are not being charged for their child's cri ...[text shortened]...

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/teen-suspected-georgia-school-shooting-appear-court-2024-09-06/

The Crumbley case was bad enough, but at least there they weren't charged with the underlying crime though involuntary manslaughter is a stretch, too. There are no, that is ZERO cases, ever pursued in the US on a similar theory and the Crumbley case is currently under appeal.

No, this case is beyond any principle ever established in the criminal law unless it can be shown the parents actually had knowledge that their child was going to use the weapon to kill.

@vivify said
Asking questions is a good way to get feedback, especially on a debate forum. I'm simply exploring this topic.

Though you may feel differently, not all topics are black and white. Many social issues have nuance.

I think this is a difficult subject, mainly because we want justice and someone to blame, and it doesn't seem enough only to charge the 14-year-old, because the crime is so horrific. That may be true we all "feel" that way, but that doesn't make it right, or lawful.

@KellyJay said
I've read stories where someone broke into an elderly couple's home tied them up and was robbing them, but the robber hurt themselves as he was moving unimpeded in their home due to an issue with a stairway. The couple was charged because it was unsafe and they didn't warn him, so I'm not asking only about the law, because it is possible to take a law and abuse it, but is i ...[text shortened]... while doing something in a place where he could be killed for what he was doing seems stupid to me.

Your law, your law-makers and most of your society are stupid people, who are dishonest, manipulative, greedy and irresponsible. Your society is designed to encourage criminal activity. There is no accountability, no sense of responsibility for ones actions or the actions of their children. Your society is shallow and materialistic and your focus is money either getting it or escaping from paying it.

In the case of the winnings of a child is a good example of the opposite situation where a child wins a lottery. Children are not allowed to buy lottery tickets but they can be given one as a gift [same with guns]. If the child wins they are not able to collect the winnings. The parents can. The winnings belong to the parent.

If you share the winnings of your child by virtue of your parental status then you share the liability if the child incurs liability. In the case of murder, there is some accountability and liability.

Anyone who says otherwise are damn fools.