what a wild take

that is absolutely not why his father is being charged



his dad wasnt supposed to treat him like a terrorist lmao (I do miss the Goom hyperbole, its great), he just wasnt supposed to buy him a fucking Ar-15 at 14 years old less than a year after he was investigated by the FBI for threatening to do the very THING he actually DID
thats like buying your kid a grenade launcher and acting like a victim when he blows up his classroom despite him making the exact same threat a year prior


it wasnt that his father 'kept a gun at home', he purchased a GUN for his CHILD who was known to be unstable and MADE THREATS to shoot up a school !
I dont know how to explain it any simpler for you buddy. read the fuckin arrest warrant

This post was edited by gnarjay on Sep 6 2024 07:21pm

Tbh if this is factual then yeah, the dad is definitely worthy of being an accomplice to the actions of the child imo

Again, the FBI and sheriff investigated and found nothing actionable. They did not find that he threatened to shoot up a school, and the father very pointedly said that if there had been any truth to the threats he would have made sure his son had no access to guns. That's what he said then.

The premise here is that the dad was required to treat his son as a threat, to treat him like a terrorist and assume that even having access to a gun would lead to children getting murdered. That's the basis for the indictment, that "knowingly allowing" his son access to a gun constituted felony cruelty to children- out of the potential for an act a year removed, committed by someone independently and with adult responsibility for their own actions. There is a massive leap being made between "The parents, FBI, sheriffs all said the kid wasn't a threat at the time" and "The father commits a felony by not treating his kid as an imminent threat"
This isn't a hard concept, I shouldn't have to explain it to you multiple times.

As I said, about 6th time now, 99.99% of the time a child had behavioral issues or accusations of threatening behavior, with far more cases with much more direct and substantiated incidents than this kid's possible discord posts- 99.99% of the time that amounts to nothing. We don't go around locking kids in juvie because we're paranoid they might become a danger in some future day even though they've done nothing wrong in the present. Do you seriously not understand how wild it is to suppose someone is criminally liable for treating a kid normally when there's no provable threat to consider and investigators already dismissed a vague accusation? Because per the facts of this case, the other 99.99% of parents who don't treat their kids as killers would now also be committing felonies if they let them have access to guns, knives, matches in their household. All while conspicuously avoiding applying this same standard to all the parents of kids who join gangs and shoot each other up in drivebys

The dad gave his son the gun to keep in his possession?

That's super illegal.

are you purposefully ignoring the fact that his father bought him the gun after he made the threats? youre missing the forest for the trees

This post was edited by gnarjay on Sep 6 2024 07:48pm

Are you ESL?

Buying a firearm for your youth child is not illegal or wrong.
But that firearm must be kept in the possession of the parent who bought it.

If it's true the father allowed the son to keep the firearm in the son's possession.
Then the father is absolutely in part to blame because if that's the case the father broke the law before the shooting.

e- I previously was under the impression the son stole it or took it without permission.

This post was edited by Mondain on Sep 6 2024 07:55pm

I mean if it was my son i would have restricted his pc access or tracked it until i worked it out.

I think most people wouldn't disown their kids without a little proof. The interview transcript is reported by the media and the dad talks about how he was wary. Without any proof your kid did anything wrong or threatened anyone, just some online account the police can't say is linked to him, where does that leave a parent? Treat him as a normal child and give him a good chance in life, try to support him as he gets bullied at school for being queer- or treat him like a potential school shooter and watch his every move, restrict his access, lock down your house.

This is a real pernicious hindsight we have as illogical human beings. The rational answer is that there's a 99.99% chance you're doing more harm than good through suspicion and witch hunting. We see only the 4 total cases in 5 years where kids have shot up their school, rather than the 49,999,996 where they didn't. We're conditioned to be paranoid about the least likely scenarios even as we often turn a total blind eye to rampant crime and violence by youths. They're black, after all, so they don't matter. But when its our kids? Little jimmy sulking in an emo phase because wendy called him ugly, he might be the next adam lanza.