I think this verdict hit such a nerve because deep down a lot of people know there were warning signs long before the shooting happened.
Most parents would do anything to stop their child hurting themselves or someone else, which is why cases where adults ignore obvious red flags feel so infuriating to people. The tragedy is that accountability only ever seems to arrive after innocent people are already dead.
146
tom906401 day ago
+38
> I think this verdict hit such a nerve because deep down a lot of people know there were warning signs long before the shooting happened.
And at the core is "you can't tell me how to raise my kids".
38
NeedAVeganDinner1 day ago
+125
We're long overdue for a change in liability for gun owners.
> the Crumbleys mentioned in neither meeting that their son had access to a handgun that his father had bought four days before the shooting.
If this breaks the floodgates for nationwide crackdown on liability for gun owners whose guns are used in crimes due to negligence, then f****** FINALLY
125
TruckSecret56171 day ago
+50
In my state, if I let someone borrow my car and they commit crime with it I can be held liable, why wouldn’t guns be treated the same?
50
Substantial_Heat_5501 day ago
+14
Most of those laws exist under a theory of “negligent entrustment” or require the offense to be committed “knowingly”. Meaning you are likely only liable if it can be shown you were negligent in letting them borrow it (knew they were drunk/unlicensed) or you knew they were going to use the vehicle in a crime.
I think you could argue that most general negligence laws and accomplice liability laws already apply to guns in similar circumstances.
14
_____Zoloft_____1 day ago
+31
Because in the US, guns have more rights than women.
31
Bupod1 day ago
+6
You know it’s interesting. Because guns are a right in the U.S. but rights don’t shield you from liability resulting from those rights. So I suspect charging the parents in this way will probably be fairly successful. There’s no real avenue by which 2A groups can argue that gun owners SHOULDN’T be liable. You can already be held liable for what you say, for example.
6
LittleKitty2351 day ago
+6
Slander and liable laws are very narrow, as I suspect the enforceability of liability laws around firearms will be. Criminal speech is even more narrow and basically requires it be a threat that will reasonably be carried out.
Leaving firearms openly accessible with minors in the household seems like it would fall into this category.
6
Gunblazer421 day ago
+1
But he didn't just leave the firearm accessible, no? I thought he directly went out and bought the kid the gun or bought the gun "for himself" (but really for the teen) after being told about the warning signs.
1
LittleKitty2351 day ago
+2
I'm not sure there is a meaningful legal difference. He was the owner of the gun and made no attempt to secure it from his kid who was a minor. At that point it is a crime. Proving it was a straw purchase for a minor is going to be harder to prove. Him ignoring warning signs is going to be viewed as an aggravating factor that will likely increase his sentence, but isn't a crime in itself
2
Lotus-child891 day ago
+6
The Crumbly’s basically set up their son to do it because neither of them wanted to be the one to deal with him as the marriage was failing.
6
ThreadCountHigh1 day ago
+32
Practically every mass shooter had extensive contact with law enforcement for things one would expect a person to do before going on to shoot up a school or other place. The problem is the ones meant to enforce any kind of ”red flag” laws are sympathetic to the perp in regard to even temporarily sequestering their firearms.
32
NeedAVeganDinner1 day ago
+10
Gun owners need to be forced to carry insurance.
10
lightknightrr1 day ago
+13
Does that include the police?
13
Designasim1 day ago
+24
Definitely. Police officers should each personally have to pay for liability insurance seeing how many cases of excessive force there is. I say personally because maybe if they are held financially responsible for the law suits they cause they might use appropriate force.
24
NeedAVeganDinner1 day ago
+8
f*** yes
8
elconquistador19851 day ago
+4
It absolutely should, and not only because of guns. They can also kill you with their car because of doing something stupid with it.
4
imnotslavic1 day ago
+6
Duh? Maybe unless its a gun handed out by the department itself ("work equipment"), I've heard that some departments have leeway for their officers to bring their own stuff, and they would be the ones to have a licence or permit card on hand.
6
IOl0I0lO22 hr ago
+1
We need to go further than that. Law enforcement needs to have a law enforcement license that can be revoked. Track it like they do health care licenses. I have to pay WA $95 every year to renew my CNA license, and $145 every other year to renew my MA license. They can yank my license if I do anything illegal or f*** up at my job, and *I’m not even allowed to bring a gun to work*. Cops need the same oversight.
1
malianx18 hr ago
+1
They already do.
1
ThreadCountHigh1 day ago
+5
I strongly agree with this. Actuaries would be very, very good at determining who a problem gun owner is and pricing them out. (Same should apply to police, just like it does for other professionals.)
The actual mechanism is the problem due to the current interpretation of the Second Amendment.
5
LittleKitty2351 day ago
+4
Name a type of insurance that pays out when you commit a crime? Seems like you just want to tax firearm ownship, but think since it is a private company you snuck around the 2nd amendment
4
NeedAVeganDinner1 day ago
+5
Car insurance pays out for involuntary manslaughter and wrongful death - just not murder.
It's literally the perfect model for this.
5
thisistherevolt19 hr ago
+2
There's not a single company in the world that would do this. It would lose money for the carrier instantly. You can't solve a moral problem with capitalism, it'll just get exploited.
2
LittleKitty2351 day ago
+1
This was not involuntary manslaughter. What problem does insurance solve here?
1
somerandomguy1011 day ago
This sounds like a fantastic way to end up with a fascist dictatorship. Moreso than the path we are heading down already.
0
upsidedownshaggy1 day ago
+9
Pray tell how requiring someone who owns and operates a deadly weapon to have insurance leads us to a fascist dictatorship more so than we already are?
9
somerandomguy1011 day ago
+4
Simple, it allows private companies to dictate who is able to exercise a right. Especially given that the government will be very involved in determining who is insurable.
Oh your Transgender? Sorry, you have a higher rate of suicide, can't insure you. Oh your a progressive? Sorry, you might be a part of Antifa, and they're classified as a terrorist now. We can't insure those. Person of Color? Nope, you live in a "high crime" area. Can't insure you.
4
upsidedownshaggy1 day ago
+3
Cool so by your logic every licensed firearm dealer is pushing us closer to a fascist dictatorship because they can deny you the sale of a firearm and denying you the right to exercise your rights even if you pass every background check and your only recourse is to sue them and prove they're violating your civil rights like the examples you listed, the same way you would a private an insurer who denies you for those reasons.
3
somerandomguy10122 hr ago
-1
No. Those 2 things are in no way similar.
The fact that you aren't arguing against my point shows that I'm not wrong here. It happened in 1930's Germany, it happened during 1960's America, and it will happen again.
-1
upsidedownshaggy20 hr ago
+1
They’re exactly the same. Tell me how they aren’t.
Licensed firearms dealers are individual businesses who can deny any firearm sale that would otherwise be legally allowed based on all the made up criteria you provided. And just like a private insurance company it’s on you, the denied prospective fire arm owner, to sue and prove that you were denied based on illegitimate and/or illegal criteria.
As for shit happening again it already has. Federal agents murdered 2 US citizens in cold blood on the streets of Minneapolis and all the 2A LARPers were no where to be found to absolutely no one’s surprise. Having people be forced to carry liability insurance in the event their firearm is used to wrongfully injure or kill someone isn’t some slippery slope that you’re pretending it is.
1
somerandomguy10120 hr ago
+1
Dude. Shut the f*** up. I live in Minneapolis. I was out at every single protest. I wasn't carrying a giant "I own a gun" sign. I also have my CCW and carry concealed. I could have one on me and you wouldn't know.
But to answer your question:
1. People already own guns. You don't need to go go a gun store if you already own one
2. You can buy guns from private parties.
3. You can just make one. P80s, 3d printers, desktop CNC all exist and are very c****.
4. There are 1000's of gun stores, most of them are small businesses. There are only a few companies that actually sell insurance, and they all talk to each other.
1
IOl0I0lO21 hr ago
+2
And how have guns helped stopped our current level of fascism?
2
somerandomguy10120 hr ago
-1
Simple. ICE would have been significantly more terrorizing if we didn't have guns. There's a reason they stopped escalation after they murdered Pretti.
Disarming the people is one of the first steps of fascism.
-1
IOl0I0lO19 hr ago
+3
Pretti had a gun and it didn’t help him. Stop pretending guns are keeping us safe from fascism.
3
Hrmerder1 day ago
+8
That's a fact. 9/10 times there have been signs for YEARS..
8
Workingdad_831 day ago
+96
I am from Winder, Ga. This is low key insane. The fact that he allowed his son to have access to guns after already being alerted A YEAR before the incident is crazy. He deserves to be in jail. I was at work when we got this call. I still remember all the parents outside waiting for any information about our kids. Sitting there helpless as SWAT swept the school. Not being able to get to my children was the hardest part. Kids texting their parents from under desks, scared to death to be at school. The shooter’s mom had called the school and told them that she believed her son was going to do something. The school administrators went to look for him, but couldn’t find him. 20 mins later shots ring out, blood everywhere, total chaos. I don’t wish that on anyone.
96
EdwardoftheEast1 day ago
+30
My wife worked for the Barrow County EMS when this went down. It really affected her for almost 3 months due to the chaos on the scene. She hated how she couldn’t tell any of the parents what was going on because she herself didn’t know either. She was just there to triage and transport patients
30
Workingdad_831 day ago
+15
I can’t imagine how difficult that must have been. To remain calm and do your job, when you are looking at kids bodies and blood everywhere. This is a small town. So if you are from here, you know you can’t go anywhere without seeing someone you know. I am glad your wife was able to get through it. I know it took time to get back to normal Because that was devastating. My kids were sending pictures of blood all over the walls and lockers. Pools of blood in the hallway. Drag marks where kids were trying to get to safety after being shot. That is scary for an adult to deal with, let alone a child. I hope that your wife was able to get past it, and I thank her for doing what she does and locking in in a moment where that seems impossible.
15
EdwardoftheEast1 day ago
+6
I’m so sorry your children had to even experience something so traumatizing. I hope they’re getting on well now, and I pray they won’t have to go through something like that ever again. No child should ever experience that. She’s doing much better, thank you, but it was an effort to get her to want to go back to work. She was fine up until she got home and the whole situation really set in, but therapy, some time to process it all, and my support helped out a lot. I remember she said she was ready to go back, but she almost had a breakdown the morning she was going to return. She still went regardless, and I think that helped as well since she had coworkers who were on that call, too. Gives her people who could talk about it better than I could since I don’t have any experience in the medical field.
6
Workingdad_831 day ago
+4
Thank you for your well wishes. And I am happy to hear that your wife is able to get back to some sort of normality. My kids are ok. Kids are pretty resilient these days. It did take some time, counseling, and overall just being available for them to share and process those emotions and feelings. It is a terrible situation for everyone involved and I pray that no one has to experience that. Unfortunately that isn’t realistic these days. People are crazy, bullying is a constant issue. It is not an excuse to shoot up your school, but cause and effect. They teach this in kindergarten. Kids can be mean, and it starts at home.
4
EdwardoftheEast1 day ago
+4
I agree that it starts at home. We have a child on the way, and it’s been changing my outlook on things. My wife’s late father was a drinker had anger issues, and her mom was very passive so she let him get away with a lot. He wasn’t physically abusive, but would get into heated verbal bouts with my wife when she lived with them. She told me she doesn’t want that life in our home, which I agree with. We don’t drink, we communicate through issues, and respect one another. We want our child to grow up in a happy, loving home and teach them to be kind to others. I’m glad your kids were able to get the help they needed and that they had resources available to them. It broke my heart seeing my wife struggle from that event, but I always find it hit a bit harder for the kids who were witness to the chaos.
4
Workingdad_831 day ago
+4
That’s all we can do as parents. Be present, don’t be a helicopter parent. Allow the kids to live and experience life themselves. I have always been very open with my kids about what the world is. I feel like it is a disservice to them to act like the world is all hand holding and rainbows only to find out that life is hard. As hard as it is, I let my kids experience what life is. I give them the tools to make the right decisions, but it is up to them to use those tools. Personally I have had a crazy life( that’s a whole other story) and I would do anything to keep my kids from experiencing the life that I did. But trying to shield them from everything doesn’t help. What helps the most imo is allowing them to live, being available for them to talk to you without judgement, and giving them the tools they need to survive. I have always tried to be open with my kids about my past mistakes, so they know I am not just preaching at them, but that I have lived it. Also I didn’t want them to grow up thinking I am a saint, only to google me and figure out I was hell on wheels for 15 years of my life. I learned life the hard way, and will do whatever necessary to keep them from having to learn that way. But there is only so much we can do. They are going to do it their way. At a certain point as a teenager, they feel like they know everything better than you. So I can’t stress enough that availability and being open minded to what they are going through without judgement and anger has helped with my kids more than grounding and spanking and taking their stuff. That all causes them to push harder and hide things from you. I am definitely not a perfect parent ( far from it), but it is better this way than trying to shield them from what life really is. I feel like generation after generation just overcorrects from their experiences growing up. But congratulations on the new baby. Is it your first? Boy or Girl? I am 43 years old now and would be terrified to bring a child into the world with everything that is going on. Again, I am not trying to be preachy or act like I know it all. Because I don’t. Far from it actually.
4
EdwardoftheEast1 day ago
+2
Thank you! Yes it is our first, we should find out the gender any day now. They’re due the day before my 30th. I do have some apprehension with how things are going, but I still have hope that things will turn around. I just want to say that you have some wonderful comments that I am going to keep in mind when raising this child. I want them to have some independence, but I also don’t want to be a helicopter parent. I don’t want to shield them from reality as well. I’m a fairly open-minded person on things. I’m also ignorant about things, but I’m willing to educate myself rather than act like I know what I’m talking about. I want to be a parent they can come to about anything and not be afraid that I’ll see them differently. Id like them to know I would never judge them or see them as less than my child. I’d also just like to have a friend I can share experiences and make memories with. I don’t believe in physical punishment being the immediate reaction to any wrongdoing, let alone giving out physical discipline in general. I’d rather talk about the issue at hand. You’ve just given me some things to think about and to keep in mind, so I’d like to thank you for sharing. I hope things go well for you and yours!
2
Workingdad_831 day ago
+2
Awesome man. Congratulations on being a first time dad. There is no feeling like it in the world. When my daughter was born the doctor accidentally cut into my wife’s bladder a little during the C-section. It took an extra 45 mins or so to sew her back up and insert a catheter. But those 45 mins I was able to be alone in the room with my daughter. Just me and her and I was able to look and talk to her and just be in awe of bringing a life into this world and what that meant for us. ( I was assured my wife was going to be fine) But boy or girl it will be amazing. I feel like if I would have had a boy I would have been a different kind of dad. Because I am a guy and boys are just different. But being a girl dad taught me all of those things that I was just talking to you about. It forced me to raise her differently. To be gentle, and nurturing, light hearted and fun. It gave me a completely different outlook on life. And just by the reply, I know that you are going to take this seriously, that you are already putting thoughts into how you want to raise your child and be there for them. And what it means to be there for them. You will do great man. And I appreciate your kind words. Like I said I don’t know everything by a long shot, but i do know that I went from hell on wheels to a girl dad overnight. She changed my entire life the moment I saw her. But time flies man. So savor and cherish every moment. You are gonna do great.!!
2
oldteen1 day ago
+2
Since you mentioned it, honestly-curious how you feel about kids/students having their cells phone in school _to be able to_ text their parents, during/after shootings and other emergencies, versus recent efforts for schools to _not allow_ kids/students to have their cell phones (given there's potential for future school shootings and other emergencies)?
2
YourPadre1 day ago
+3
In my opinion, this is an example of treating the symptoms of school shootings, instead of the shootings themselves. Students don’t need phones at school, but they especially shouldn’t have guns.
3
Workingdad_831 day ago
+1
While phones are 100% a distraction in the classroom, I feel like they need to have them. 3 times in the last 2 weeks I have gotten emails from the school the next day about a kid bringing a weapon to school or making a threat. But if my kid is late or absent I get that email 2 mins after the fact. The kids should have to keep their phones put away while in class and get disciplined if they don’t adhere to the rules. But to take them away completely or ban them from having it at all is a non starter for me. They need to able to reach out to their parents or the police or an ambulance for that matter.
1
Capitol621 day ago
+4
Why do they need to be able to reach out? In virtually every case, the police have already been notified and their parents can't do anything for them.
I'm a parent. The spectre of school violence is terrifying but if it happens, I want my kids listening to instructions and staying quiet. I want to tell them I love them and reassure them but I don't want them on their phone. I want to see them or hear them but I know I can't help them.
4
Workingdad_831 day ago
+1
Personally I want my child to be able to reach out in the moment of fear. When the child is in the most vulnerable and fearful position of their life. I want to be able to comfort them when nobody else is. And if God forbid something happened to them. I want to be able to tell them I love them.
1
Bobinct1 day ago
+38
Local police had already interviewed Gray and his son the year before about online threats to commit a school shooting. At the time, Gray admitted that he owned guns that were accessible to his son and that the two often went shooting together. Seven months after that, he bought his son a rifle as a Christmas gift.
Wow.
38
breadandbuns21 hr ago
+6
According to reports, the family had been visited by local police and [also FBI agents](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_Apalachee_High_School_shooting) from the Atlanta field office.
The father subsequently bought his son a rifle –not just an ordinary hunting rifle, but a “semi-automatic AR-15 style rifle”.
6
Traditional_Sign49411 day ago
+8
> “The goal of these lawsuits and prosecutions is to deter parents from being careless with their guns and put pressure on their children to stay away from firearms,” said Nila Bala, a law professor at UC Davis who specializes in children’s law and parental liability.
> The hope is to change the parents’ behavior directly, she added, and that children will factor in their parents’ legal risk when thinking through their own actions.
All well and good, but why do I get the feeling that this won't have a meaningful impact on people who are so careless and/or stupid in the first place?
I suspect this won't do a darn thing to prevent/reduce school shootings. The best way to prevent/reduce school shootings is to make sure people this careless can't own guns in the first place.
8
ih-shah-may-ehl1 day ago
+30
Many people calling themselves responsible gun owners, are anything but.
Friend of mine permanently had a c**** disposable .45 stuck to a magnet under his dashboard 'in case he was carjacked' and he always left it there, in view, even when his car was parked at a theatre or supermarket so that it was always there. When I pointed out that things like this are giving criminals a free supply of guns and he was part of the problem, he said that he should not be held responsible for someone breaking the law (stealing that gun).
Imo that sums up the biggest problem with gun owners in the USA: leaving guns where criminals or kids can find them and cause grief.
30
somerandomguy1011 day ago
+21
Between 30-50% of Americans are gun owners. With most responsible gun owners, you won't even know if they own a gun.
Your friend is a dumbass and is probably breaking multiple laws.
21
NeedAVeganDinner1 day ago
+27
I feel like you friend is already in violation of any number of safe storage laws if he does that, and a casual tip to local enforcement when his car is parked and no one is around is a great way to have all his weapons seized.
27
Zarkanthrex1 day ago
+7
Aren't there laws that forbid this? I know in GA, it states that you can't have it in plain view for this specific reason and can be fined if caught. Guess nobody ever decided a weapon on the dash was a red flag for them x.x
7
ih-shah-may-ehl1 day ago
+4
I have no clue. I guess it depends by state and I live in Europe so to me it's all insanity 😄
4
SaltyShawarma1 day ago
+3
I live in the US and it is all insanity.
3
endosurgery1 day ago
+9
Both the parents in michigan and the parents in this case are clearly believers that guns don’t kill people and are in alignment with our current head of the department of health in that mental health can be solved with a brisk walk. We have to change this mindset. Guns have one function and that is to kill something that is currently alive. They are inherently dangerous and are not toys. At the base, not treating them and their handling with the respect that they deserve is a large part of the problem. The other is the lack of serious concern about clearly significant mental health issues in both of these boys. If the boy had cancer or an infection, we would call it what it is — parental neglect. Instead, it is a psychiatric issue, so we can laugh it off. Both sets of parents doubled down when they found out about their kids. They did not get them the mental health support they needed nor did they keep them away from the guns. They are complicit.
9
Ranger1761 day ago
+6
He named his son Colt. I think that says enough.
If we won’t do the responsible thing and ban weapons completely then holding idiotic parents accountable is the next best thing.
6
PigFarmer122 hr ago
+1
Parental accountability is long overdue. Raise a monster, go to prison.
1
A_Nonny_Muse1 day ago
-6
This is merely a continuation of the boundary testing they did with[ that kid in Detroit.](https://apnews.com/article/james-crumbley-jennifer-crumbley-oxford-school-shooting-e5888f615c76c3b26153c34dc36d5436)
-6
graveybrains1 day ago
+15
I don't remember anybody around here thinking that one was stretching any boundaries. They didn't just fail to secure the weapon, they bragged about buying it **for** the shooter for Christmas.
And then there was the whole fleeing arrest thing, and the threatening the prosecutor thing.
In short; F*** them people.
15
A_Nonny_Muse1 day ago
+20
Of course, in that case, the parents were absolutely shit tier POS human beings - not just bad parents. Their kid is sitting in jail. But instead of trying to bail him out, they try to sneak into Canada. Failing that, they tried to hide in an abandoned warehouse. That's where authorities caught them. Even after that, they made statements that only highlight themselves as horrible people.
65 Comments