Another irresponsible parent should be indicted for murder - Nevada School Shooting

[superprincess]

More irresponsible parents another dead child and more victims.
These parents should be arrested immediately.

(CNN) -- A student opening fire with a handgun he took from his parents. Screaming students running for cover. A teacher, trying to help, shot dead. Two students wounded.

As authorities investigated, details were still trickling out hours after a deadly shooting Monday at a Nevada middle school.

An official used one word to describe the scene at Sparks Middle School: chaos.

The shooter took a handgun from his parents, a federal law enforcement source who was briefed on the situation told CNN's Evan Perez.

Read more at http://www.cnn.com/2013/10/21/justice/nevada-middle-school-shooting/

 

[davcommander]

So when do we hear that it was an automatic assault weapon with a hi capacity clip instead of the semi auto with a standard capacity magazine? My sympathies go out to the teacher's family and loved ones and prayers for speedy recovery of those wounded. To the owner of the gun, your careless acts contributed to this horror and my you be justly punished. To the child that committed this act, one must ask why? There is no excuse for your actions but I am sure there is an explanation.

 

[HoJo]

Mike Landsberry, a popular math teacher at the school, was killed in the shooting, Sparks Mayor Geno Martini told CNN.

In addition to his work as a teacher, Landsberry also had served in the Marines and served several tours in Afghanistan as a member of the Nevada Air National Guard, his brother, Reggie, told CNN's "Anderson Cooper 360."

Had this teacher been armed the outcome could have been very different.

 

[jcreek]

True. But it also goes to show that if this multiple tour combat vet had been allowed to have been armed, he would still be here today.

 

[CoolClownFish]

More irresponsible parents another dead child and more victims.
These parents should be arrested immediately.

(CNN) -- A student opening fire with a handgun he took from his parents. Screaming students running for cover. A teacher, trying to help, shot dead. Two students wounded.

As authorities investigated, details were still trickling out hours after a deadly shooting Monday at a Nevada middle school.

An official used one word to describe the scene at Sparks Middle School: chaos.

The shooter took a handgun from his parents, a federal law enforcement source who was briefed on the situation told CNN's Evan Perez.

Read more at Nevada school shooting: Teacher killed, two students wounded - CNN.com

When I was a kid I wrecked my bike into the neighbors car putting a huge gouge in the door. When the police showed up my parents were told that they were responsible by law for my actions until I was 18 years old. There is no difference here, These parents should be held accountable for the actions of their child. If there were more accountability there would be less of this type of crime. Give me a bill that says the parents are held responsible for their child especially in this kind of situation and I would vote for it in a heartbeat.

So when do we hear that it was an automatic assault weapon with a hi capacity clip instead of the semi auto with a standard capacity magazine? My sympathies go out to the teacher's family and loved ones and prayers for speedy recovery of those wounded. To the owner of the gun, your careless acts contributed to this horror and my you be justly punished. To the child that committed this act, one must ask why? There is no excuse for your actions but I am sure there is an explanation.

It was a "High Capacity Assault Pistol".

 

[wolf_fire]

Even if the parents aren't arrested for their negligence, then I hope the families of the victims take everything they have from them in civil court, just like their son took everything from that teacher.

When, oh when, will states realize that taking away peoples' rights to defend themselves always ends up poorly for the victims, not the criminals?

 

[jcreek]

When I was a kid I wrecked my bike into the neighbors car putting a huge gouge in the door. When the police showed up my parents were told that they were responsible by law for my actions until I was 18 years old. There is no difference here, These parents should be held accountable for the actions of their child. If there were more accountability there would be less of this type of crime. Give me a bill that says the parents are held responsible for their child especially in this kind of situation and I would vote for it in a heartbeat.

That's not completely accurate. You're talking about two different things. Parents are criminally responsible for their children's actions up until they reach the age of culpability which varies from state to state but is usually between 7 and 10 years old. After that, minors are responsible for their own actions, hence the juvenile justice system. Now if the parents played a part in the child's crime, such as leaving a loaded firearm accessible to them, then they are responsible for their OWN negligent actions that contributed to the minors crime.

On the other hand, parents are civilly and financially responsible for any damage their child causes, such as accidentally dinging a door, up until that child reaches legal adulthood at 18.

 

[SR40c]

Unless there is more information than just "The shooter took a handgun from his parents", who are any of us to say what should happen to the parents at this point? Some of you sound just like the jackasses who wanted to fry Zimmerman.

 

[jcreek]

Unless there is more information than just "The shooter took a handgun from his parents", who are any of us to say what should happen to the parents at this point? Some of you sound just like the jackasses who wanted to fry Zimmerman.

If he was in high school, and 17 or 18 years old I'd be more understanding of your point. However, IMO, no middle school student that's 12-13 years old should have unsupervised access to a loaded handgun. Unless he somehow cut his way into his parents' gun safe, then I agree that they should face charges.

 

[shotz90s]

If he was in high school, and 17 or 18 years old I'd be more understanding of your point. However, IMO, no middle school student that's 12-13 years old should have unsupervised access to a loaded handgun. Unless he somehow cut his way into his parents' gun safe, then I agree that they should face charges.

I understand the point you're trying to make and agree that 12 year olds should have limited access to handguns but I think the bigger picture that most make every effort to ignore is WHAT is causing kids to go nuts and do this? Is it the massive amounts of Ritalin or other drugs? Is it video games? Lack of parental structure? Seriously we need to start asking the hard questions even if it goes against our societal urge to medicate the crap out of everyone instead of either realizing that some people are just hyper and maybe need a spanking once in a while. Its not abuse and it isn't the whole cure either. Going back to institutionalizing people with problems w/ out worrying about their rights/feelings would have most likely prevented Sandy Hook and Columbine. The individuals in this case were all nuts and had been to doctors. I can say from experience that getting someone help for mental issues is NOT easy to do. They worry more about stigmatizing than they do the possible effect of releasing them into public. Hell, I had open access to handguns, rifles and shotguns growing up and by 10 knew how to load and fire. So did my friends. NONE of us went on shooting sprees nor do I remember any happening back in the 70s - early part of the 90's. It seems that when we turned to medicating vs. discipline things went haywire. Anyhow, thats just my opinion and WTF do I know LOL.

As far as responsibility, was the gun in the safe? Was it in a drawer for protection in the bedroom? Too many variables to be tossing around right now.

 

[BC1]

Had this teacher been armed the outcome could have been very different.

Had the parents been responsible the outcome could have been very different too. Indict them.

 

[superprincess]

I agree BC1 and most likely the kid didn't cut his way into the gunsafe. He probably took the gun from his parents bedroom.
We all know kids are into everything liquor cabinets, medicine cabinets, illegal drugs and sex. Yes they should be held responsible for the actions of their child. The government should take off their blinders, this is not the fault of responsible gunowners, do not take away our rights for the irresponsible actions of a few grownups. I hope you agree.

 

[BluesStringer]

Had the parents been responsible the outcome could have been very different too. Indict them.

Surely you would demand that the parents not be indicted if there wasn't a criminal statute in place to indict them on, right? Here's the only statute I found in NV concerning a minor's access to firearms, and it talks only about civil liability, not criminality of the parents or legal guardians:

NRS 41.472 Imposition of liability for minor's negligence or willful misconduct regarding firearm.

1. If a parent, guardian or other person legally responsible for a minor under the age of 18 years:

(a) Knows that the minor has previously been adjudicated delinquent or has been convicted of a criminal offense;

(b) Knows that the minor has a propensity to commit violent acts; or

(c) Knows or has reason to know that the minor intends to use the firearm for unlawful purposes,

and permits the minor to use or possess a firearm, any negligence or willful misconduct of the minor in connection with such use or possession is imputed to the person who permits such use or possession for all purposes of civil damages, and, notwithstanding the provisions of subsection 2 of NRS 41.470, that person is jointly and severally liable with the minor for any and all damages caused by such negligence or willful misconduct.

2. As used in this section, "firearm" has the meaning ascribed to it in NRS 202.253.

Knowing nothing of the kid's criminal or delinquency record prior to yesterday's shootings, I can't say if that code section applies to his parents/guardians or not, but I can say that's a pretty difficult threshold to cross for most kids. The article in the OP doesn't identify the shooter or specifically say his age, but it does quote two of his "classmates" who are identified as being 12 years old. I would think only a small minority of 12 year olds would have criminal, violent, or delinquent histories that their parents/guardians even could be aware of prior to such an extreme going-off-the-rails event. If this kid falls within that rarefied category, it's going to be difficult in NV to even hold the parents/guardians civilly liable, much less indict them for a crime.

It was a very cursory investigation that I made to find that code section. There may well be other sections upon which a criminal indictment could be based, but I found that code on the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence website in a post entitled "Child Access Prevention Policy Summary" and that was the only law they listed in NV that has to do with access prevention of children to firearms.

I am not trying to say that this kid's parents/guardians are responsible people. I have no earthly idea what the answer to that question is. I do know though that as early as 10 years old, I had full access in my mom's home to my .22, a pellet gun and ammo for both. Neither my mom nor the men who advised her on how to handle my deep interest in guns and competitive shooting were irresponsible people simply by virtue of leaving my stuff accessible to me. And as I said in another thread, there are several fairly recent stories where kids have defended their homes with their parents' weapons and no one was prosecuted or even criticized, so accessibility by itself is an inadequate criteria upon which to base an indictment, and NV's code section on child accessibility appears to me to preclude an indictment unless prior knowledge of the kid's evil propensities was held by the parents/guardians at the very least.

In short, I sure as heck don't want local or federal LE or prosecutors or DoJ just making up laws to comport with an indictment they wish was already supported by existing laws. So if you say "Indict them," please also say what you would indict them on and cite the code that supports such an indictment.

Blues

 

[missoak]

Had this teacher been armed the outcome could have been very different.

The media has called the teacher a HERO. Had this teacher been armed & no innocent lives were lost, then he would be a hero.
He was a martyr IMHO.
The kids parents should be held accountable for his actions.

 

[superprincess]

Blues, if we can have laws holding a store responsible for selling cigarettes to minors. Then why is there not a specific law for parents to be held responsible for leaving a handgun out for their minor child to access and shoot up the school. Ultimately something has to be done concerning this ongoing problem in America. It is sad to think in our society anyone can be carrying a firearm including a two year old.

 

[BC1]

Surely you would demand that the parents not be indicted if there wasn't a criminal statute in place to indict them on, right? Here's the only statute I found in NV concerning a minor's access to firearms, and it talks only about civil liability, not criminality of the parents or legal guardians:



Knowing nothing of the kid's criminal or delinquency record prior to yesterday's shootings, I can't say if that code section applies to his parents/guardians or not, but I can say that's a pretty difficult threshold to cross for most kids. The article in the OP doesn't identify the shooter or specifically say his age, but it does quote two of his "classmates" who are identified as being 12 years old. I would think only a small minority of 12 year olds would have criminal, violent, or delinquent histories that their parents/guardians even could be aware of prior to such an extreme going-off-the-rails event. If this kid falls within that rarefied category, it's going to be difficult in NV to even hold the parents/guardians civilly liable, much less indict them for a crime.

It was a very cursory investigation that I made to find that code section. There may well be other sections upon which a criminal indictment could be based, but I found that code on the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence website in a post entitled "Child Access Prevention Policy Summary" and that was the only law they listed in NV that has to do with access prevention of children to firearms.

I am not trying to say that this kid's parents/guardians are responsible people. I have no earthly idea what the answer to that question is. I do know though that as early as 10 years old, I had full access in my mom's home to my .22, a pellet gun and ammo for both. Neither my mom nor the men who advised her on how to handle my deep interest in guns and competitive shooting were irresponsible people simply by virtue of leaving my stuff accessible to me. And as I said in another thread, there are several fairly recent stories where kids have defended their homes with their parents' weapons and no one was prosecuted or even criticized, so accessibility by itself is an inadequate criteria upon which to base an indictment, and NV's code section on child accessibility appears to me to preclude an indictment unless prior knowledge of the kid's evil propensities was held by the parents/guardians at the very least.

In short, I sure as heck don't want local or federal LE or prosecutors or DoJ just making up laws to comport with an indictment they wish was already supported by existing laws. So if you say "Indict them," please also say what you would indict them on and cite the code that supports such an indictment.

Blues

A lawsuit against the parents will probably commence. There seems to be some form of contributory or comparative negligence on their part. Is the negligence of such magnitude that it rises to a criminal act? Depends on the state. But if we want to make schools safer there needs to be a lot of things done. For starters, parents need to be more responsible.
.
Usually one must intentionally assist, encourage or opportune the child in a crime to be convicted of contributing to the delinquency of a minor. Some states cover the parental negligence under statutes of endangering the welfare of a child. A sample definition would be...
.
S 260.10 Endangering the welfare of a child. A person is guilty of endangering the welfare of a child when:
2. Being a parent, guardian or other person legally charged with the care or custody of a child less than eighteen years old, he or she fails or refuses to exercise reasonable diligence in the control of such child to prevent him or her from becoming an "abused child," a "neglected child," a "juvenile delinquent" or a "person in need of supervision," as
those terms are defined in articles ten, three and seven of the family court act.
.
based on the endangerment definition I'd lock-up every ghetto parent who's young kids are hanging-out at known drug locations at 1:30 AM. We have laws that no one enforces.

 

[BluesStringer]

Blues, if we can have laws holding a store responsible for selling cigarettes to minors. Then why is there not a specific law for parents to be held responsible for leaving a handgun out for their minor child to access and shoot up the school.

There "can" be such a law, but my only point was that it doesn't appear that there is one in Nevada at this time. I could however, be mistaken about that, and as it applies to this specific case, I hope I am. I just don't want the powers that be (TPTB) to make up laws to fit an indictment that they're only bringing because of the (understandable) emotional response to another school shooting by the public. Whether the people who are so emotionally responding know it or not, they would only be hurting themselves and the future of their kids' rights to due process if TPTB succumbed to indicting the parents with no real law underpinning it.

Ultimately something has to be done concerning this ongoing problem in America. It is sad to think in our society anyone can be carrying a firearm including a two year old.

I completely disagree that there is much of an "ongoing problem" to begin with. The thing about the 2-year-old is such a wild-card anomaly that it doesn't belong in a serious discussion about kids with guns shooting up schools. Besides, the 2-year-old that you made another thread about wasn't "carrying" a weapon, she found a loaded weapon inside her own home and the Huffington Post (!!!) post or article (whatever they call the garbage that comes from that website) that you cited didn't describe a single circumstance about what measures the mother or grandmother did or didn't take to prevent her access to the weapon. Obviously, whatever they did wasn't enough, or maybe neither one of them did a thing to prevent her access, but in any case you're calling for something to be done about an ostensibly ongoing problem while conflating the issues of children gaining access to firearms and going on a shooting spree and babies finding a gun in their own home and shooting themselves. It's hardly the same "ongoing problem," and if you study actual statistics of gun-related deaths by children at school in a multiple murder scenario, you will find that even if you eliminated every single such event over the last 30 years or so, it wouldn't move the statistic even one whole percentage point towards lowering the percentage of deaths by gunfire per 100,000 population. My perception is that most mass shootings at schools are committed by adults who either owned their guns legally or were eligible to have purchased them legally.

The access to virtually immediate news of these kinds of events cannot be overstated as to how significant it is to the nation's collective perceptions about them. The media is so quick to try to be the first with information, that false and wholly erroneous details about a shooting and/or the shooter get disseminated nationwide in the blink of an eye, and the next week or two following the biggest events are spent correcting the record with consumers thinking to themselves, "Why did I believe those media hacks again?" People are always saying something about how big of an increase we've seen in recent years in these kinds of events. Not true. The worst school attack in US history was by Andrew Kehoe in 1927, was committed by an adult former school board member and he used bombs instead of guns to kill 44 people, 38 of whom were school children, and wound 58. Columbine and Sandy Hook combined don't even come anywhere near equaling such carnage perpetrated against children, yet we're led to believe these incidents are on the rise.

Honestly, I don't have the answers, and I'm not here saying that we shrug our shoulders and turn away from the carnage doing nothing either, but I do know that there are literally millions of kids who either have, or had while they were comin' up (like myself), access to firearms without any injury or death caused by any of them. I grew up in suburban California and all my friends started shooting around the same time I did at age 9. Not one of the friends who have passed on since then were killed by gunfire. Accessibility is not necessarily the cause of things like what happened yesterday in NV. If all killing and crimes committed with guns could be prevented by limiting accessibility, well, everyone here knows where that train of thought goes, and it is unacceptable under any honest reading of The Constitution.

The more kids that are taught to handle firearms safely and responsibly, the fewer incidents like the Sparks Middle School shooting will happen. Or at least the fewer children will be the shooters.

Blues

 

[arkansas ducker]

Unless there is more information than just "The shooter took a handgun from his parents", who are any of us to say what should happen to the parents at this point? Some of you sound just like the jackasses who wanted to fry Zimmerman.

Should a parent be responsible if their teenager were texting or driving under the influence and killed someone. We need to hold the person that did the deed responsible. Not someone that wasn't there. :shout:

 

[Ringo]

If anything is to blame it's our ridiculous laws.

Isn't it amazing that parents are severely restrained by law when it comes to disciplining or controlling their children, however, at the same time parents be held accountable for the adverse actions and behavior of said children when they destroy property or break the law. If anything is to blame it's our ridiculous laws. America, still got to love it, eh?

~ We Reap What We Sow, More Than What We Sow, Later Than We Sow ~​

 

[Buster04]

The only reason the names are not released is because the entire family was here illegally and the media is covering it so they can focus on their Anti gun agenda and not Illegal immigration