CCB wrote:
Yes the parents could have taken him home.
You don't know what was discussed at that meeting. You don't know what was concluded. All you know if the version of the story that the school is putting out. Not only do they have a huge incentive to lie, but now the school is refusing to let the State Attorney General investigate.
well this wrote:
Do you think that they may have been bad parents but didn't break any laws and are just being singled out by antigun liberals?
0/10
FoulPlay wrote:
daytripper wrote:
the school teacher, principal and guidance counselors did nothing to prevent the attack; a kid can be suspended for making some offensive remark, the school should have suspended him, and also searched him, searched his backpack and his locker, the school did nothing; the parents are worthless pieces of crap, they should be charged if they broke any law, same for the school people
There is a ton of pressure on school administrators not to discipline kids especially at the cost of school time. Keep in mind that they are government workers and therefore drones. Besides that, some of them love these policies. What I am getting at is don't mistake this for individual incompetence when it's policy.
Most posters the past three or four pages are not debating if defendants are legally guilty of murder as the thread title stated. Most posters the past three or four pages are debating the culpability of school system. Culpability of school system will be a civil court case. School system culpability has nothing to do with this manslaughter case. The question is did negligence of parents rise to level of manslaughter. Victim families sue those whom are responsible with largest bank accounts. School system with face a civil law suit. I wish posters would stop bringing up school system. These manslaughter charges are unique. We should be debating merits of manslaughter charges.
Usually I can call it. I cannot this time. wrote:
FoulPlay wrote:
There is a ton of pressure on school administrators not to discipline kids especially at the cost of school time. Keep in mind that they are government workers and therefore drones. Besides that, some of them love these policies. What I am getting at is don't mistake this for individual incompetence when it's policy.
Most posters the past three or four pages are not debating if defendants are legally guilty of murder as the thread title stated. Most posters the past three or four pages are debating the culpability of school system. Culpability of school system will be a civil court case. School system culpability has nothing to do with this manslaughter case. The question is did negligence of parents rise to level of manslaughter. Victim families sue those whom are responsible with largest bank accounts. School system with face a civil law suit. I wish posters would stop bringing up school system. These manslaughter charges are unique. We should be debating merits of manslaughter charges.
You are wrong and need to keep up. The county prosecutor threatened school officials with criminal charges.
https://www.foxnews.com/us/michigan-school-shooting-school-officials-could-be-chargedUsually I can call it. I cannot this time. wrote:
I wish posters would stop bringing up school system. These manslaughter charges are unique. We should be debating merits of manslaughter charges.
There's no point in debating the merits of the manslaughter charges because we don't know the merits. We only know the school's version of the story, and they have the most incentive to lie.
How can the school let a kid roam the halls with a gun in his backpack after he drew violent pictures with the words "The thoughts won't stop. Help me", "Blood everywhere", "My life is useless", and "The world is dead." He was literally asking for help.
By the time the parents arrive, their son scribbled over those parts.
Bound4Glory wrote:
SDSU Aztec wrote:
Their disturbed kid using a gun they purchased for him to murder people, are "facts" damning enough to warrant punishment for the parents.
How do you know that? Did the parents say the gun was a gift for their son? Did the parents say they say they left possession of the gun with their kid?
You're repeating a narrative that was crafted by people who are trying to avoid responsibility for a mass murder.
Don't give me the "narrative" crap. According to the D.A., in social media the mother said the gun purchase was a Christmas present for Ethan.
Anyway, these are bad parents and I have no sympathy for them. On the other hand, I don't know if trying a 15-year old kid as an adult and putting him in prison for life is the right thing to do.
Bound4Glory wrote:
CCB wrote:
Yes the parents could have taken him home.
You don't know what was discussed at that meeting. You don't know what was concluded. All you know if the version of the story that the school is putting out. Not only do they have a huge incentive to lie, but now the school is refusing to let the State Attorney General investigate.
Yet you are drawing all sorts of conclusions from the same information you're castigating others for drawing their conclusions.
They knew he had the gun!
That’s why the mother texted “don’t do it “when the travesty was already done. That’s why the father drove straight back to the house to check for the gun after he heard about the shooter. When they were sitting in that office you know damn well that the thought crossed her mind that he had access to that gun. Do not search that backpack and just allow him to go back to class was absolutely insane. They are absolute monsters.
I’m not even so sure that the kid should be tried as an adult. He obviously had mental issues and was obviously crying for help and his own demented way.
Yes, the school has some capability. But not near as much as the parents. Again, THEY KNEW HE HAD THE GUN!
Bound4Glory wrote:
testosteronedoesit wrote:
Your politicalization of this issue has led to a peculiar stance.
This is the least political issue in the news right now. Both Democrats and Republicans want to lynch the parents (all based on a narrative provided entirely by one of the potentially guilty parties: School District).
If the Michigan AG investigated the issue and pointed blame at the school district, not the parents, that would change the narrative. So it's not pointless.
I commend you for towing the Neo-Con/Trump company line - 'School System Bad!' regardless of the situation.
But the parents should be held accountable just based on the facts that can be confirmed.
They bought a weapon did not secure it and their child used it to murder other children.
I can't help but wonder how many of the posters in this thread would change their positions if the Crumbley family were black.
Hucklebuck, Ali wrote:
Usually I can call it. I cannot this time. wrote:
Most posters the past three or four pages are not debating if defendants are legally guilty of murder as the thread title stated. Most posters the past three or four pages are debating the culpability of school system. Culpability of school system will be a civil court case. School system culpability has nothing to do with this manslaughter case. The question is did negligence of parents rise to level of manslaughter. Victim families sue those whom are responsible with largest bank accounts. School system with face a civil law suit. I wish posters would stop bringing up school system. These manslaughter charges are unique. We should be debating merits of manslaughter charges.
You are wrong and need to keep up. The county prosecutor threatened school officials with criminal charges.
https://www.foxnews.com/us/michigan-school-shooting-school-officials-could-be-charged
I am not wrong. Threatening criminal charges is not the same as a judge signing a warrant for arrest. You are too soon. YOU NEED TO KEEP UP. I doubt criminal charges for any school officials.
well this wrote:
Do you think that they may have been bad parents but didn't break any laws and are just being singled out by antigun liberals?
They have been charged with actual crimes. If you want to debate the merits of the case then you need to at least mention the crimes they are charged with. Then discuss the facts as we know them.
Without any discussion of the law or the facts, your question is really just a proxy for, "Should people be allowed to do whatever they want with their guns no matter how irresponsible they are?"
The answer to that question is obviously, "No".
Legality of charges aside, the whole family looks so stupid with the family mugshots on display on the Internet, especially after all those smug social media posts bragging about having gotten their son a gun for a Christmas present.
I personally would like to know the political leanings of the Crumbleys before I condemn them or their sons actions.
Maybe it was a false flag set up by the deep state to take er guns! Quick! Someone call Donald Trump!
BOPA wrote:
They knew he had the gun!
That’s why the mother texted “don’t do it “when the travesty was already done.
Again, THEY KNEW HE HAD THE GUN!
A) The parents did not know he had the gun until after the shootings occurred. We both agree on that.
B) We don't know what was discussed with the school officials during their meeting. Did the school ask the parents if they had guns in the house? Did Ethan have access to guns? If those questions were not asked, then the school is negligent. If they were asked and the parents lied, then the parents are negligent. Simple as that.
C) When his mom texted "Don't do it", the shootings had already occurred 30 minutes ago and were widely reported. She was telling Ethan to not kill himself.
Raddison wrote:
I can't help but wonder how many of the posters in this thread would change their positions if the Crumbley family were black.
At least one (you).
Bound4Glory wrote:
BOPA wrote:
They knew he had the gun!
That’s why the mother texted “don’t do it “when the travesty was already done.
Again, THEY KNEW HE HAD THE GUN!
A) The parents did not know he had the gun until after the shootings occurred. We both agree on that.
B) We don't know what was discussed with the school officials during their meeting. Did the school ask the parents if they had guns in the house? Did Ethan have access to guns? If those questions were not asked, then the school is negligent. If they were asked and the parents lied, then the parents are negligent. Simple as that.
C) When his mom texted "Don't do it", the shootings had already occurred 30 minutes ago and were widely reported. She was telling Ethan to not kill himself.
The parents bought the gun and their son used it to murder people. The school did neither of those things.
SDSU Aztec wrote:
The parents bought the gun and their son used it to murder people. The school did neither of those things.
The school saw Ethan's violent drawings with "The thoughts won't stop. Help me", "Blood everywhere", "My life is useless", and "The world is dead." The parents never saw that.
Hashington wrote:
wow... wrote:
I'm amazed at the number of sociopaths on this forum. I wonder how you would feel differently if it were one of your kids who was shot and killed in this situation. If not at all, then point proven.
Same with the death penalty. If you are against the death penalty, you are incapable of feeling how the victim’s family feels, and that proves the point that you are a sociopath.
It's been shown that plenty of people on death row were innocent. If even one innocent person is killed by the so called justice system, then the system is failed. That's why we shouldn't have the death penalty. It doesn't deter crime (studies have shown that capital punishment fails to deter violent offenders). Sure, there are plenty of crimes where the most just punishment is execution, but that justice should never come at the cost of an innocent life. People have been executed that never should have been on death row in the first place.
Herbert Lee Richardson was a black war veteran who was mentally ill after returning and suffered from PTSD. He became infatuated with a nurse who'd helped him recover. As part of a misguided plan to win her affections, he planned to detonate a small bomb on her porch and then rush in to save her just like he'd done while serving in the military. He was mentally ill and not thinking straight, and as a complete accident the bomb ended up killing to children who'd run up to look at the bomb after he'd placed it. The state convicted him of capital murder. He was mentally ill and never should have been on death row, yet the state executed him without any legal representation of his mental health struggles. This is just one example of a man killed unjustly by the state. We should never trade lives in the name of justice. No one is qualified to make that call.