Jennifer Crumbley found guilty. Hope this opens the door for prosecuting parents for their children's violent crimes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We will need to build a ton of prison cells if we are going to put all the negligent parents in jail.

Why did the other Jennifer Crumbley thread disappear?

That would be lovely.

However I will settle for
Columbine parents
Father of Sandy Hook shooter

And VT shooters parents held civilly libel and shunned from society. And any teacher that shit had in his school system and VT.

[Anonymous]

I'm so hopeful- maybe few more cases like these and adults will practice better safety around handguns. We are all afraid of school shootings but my heart also breaks for the kids who accidentally find guns and shoot their siblings, friends, parents.

what must it be like to know that you shot your mom with a handgun in her purse when you were 3 years old? And that isn't the story of a handful, there are literally 100s of kids in this country who have to live with knowing they did that and kids who have watched it happen in front of them. IMO The 2nd amendment isn't going anywhere but having gun safes, having ammunition in a separate safe, decommissioning antique guns for collectors, never having a loaded firearm unsecured is a cultural shift and it will only happen when negligence leads to prison. we did it with drink driving, we can do it with this. No-one is saying you cant have guns- but you have to be safe or face the consequences.

[Anonymous]

Virtually all school shooting cases are from kids who stole their parents' unsecured weapons. There is no reason none of those parents shouldn't be held accountable.

These parents gave a 15 year old his own gun. It wasn't a hunting rifle or a BB gun either. The boy could not have purchased a gun himsel. And then when the school called the parents in for a meeting because he had written very disturbing thing, they didn't tell the school the kid had his own gun or check his backpack.

If a parent gave a 15 year old a car in a state in which 15 year olds can't legally drive and the kid killed someone driving it, I'd hold the parent liable for that too.

[Anonymous]

In this case, the evidence was egregious. This is no opening the door to all parents of criminals being accused or tried.

In this case, there were definite errors by the parents. One of the arguments that frequently comes from conservative gun-supporters is that mental health is more of a problem than guns. In this case, the shooter had mental health issues and the parents knew about them and discounted and ignored them. The shooter had multiple instances of "crying out for help" including describing hallucinations, having anti-socials issues, multiple issues of problems at school, recently lost their best friend and their family pet. Rather than focus MORE attention on the child for their complete lack of social structure, support, or companionship, the mother ignored all the standard cries for help and the child because she was more interested in her affair partner, her swinging life-style and her horses. She couldn't even be bothered to help or make him clean his room. When his room became unhabitable, she moved him into the guest room. Through all this, with a child that was clearly at least mildly disturbed, she thinks it's okay to purchase a gun, then not pay the least attention to the gun safety and security. I understand leaving it up to her husband as the party more knowledgeable, but she should at least know HOW to lock it up, where the code is stored and test the code. The fact that on the day of the shooting, the lock code for the gun was still on the factory setting of 000 is also pretty negligent.

Then came the day of the shooting, and she was called in to school and shown a drawing that was clearly an additional call for help depicting him with a gun, shooting victims and even saying "Blood everywhere" and "The thoughts won't stop". And she doesn't think to mention that he has a gun, or to check whether he might have it with him? She doesn't want to miss work so she won't take him home? She has a flexible work place that she can take him with her or take leave for the day and she sends him back to class. She even says that if he can't go back to class, he'll be walking home and being alone for the day? The school says that they're concerned he's suicidal and don't want him to be alone, so they allow the mother to send him back to class?

The mother was clearly much more selfish than maternal and cared more about her personal life, her affair, saving up her time off for her affairs, her personal activities like her horses, than she cared about her child or caring for him. She also had a history of maternal negligence when he was 8 and she and her husband would go out drinking all afternoon and evening, leaving him alone for hours at a time. The neighbors called CPS multiple times for child abandonment.

This is not an indictment of a parent or parenting. This mother was negligent as a parent and didn't even do some of the basics of parenting and that's why she was convicted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In this case, the evidence was egregious. This is no opening the door to all parents of criminals being accused or tried.

In this case, there were definite errors by the parents. One of the arguments that frequently comes from conservative gun-supporters is that mental health is more of a problem than guns. In this case, the shooter had mental health issues and the parents knew about them and discounted and ignored them. The shooter had multiple instances of "crying out for help" including describing hallucinations, having anti-socials issues, multiple issues of problems at school, recently lost their best friend and their family pet. Rather than focus MORE attention on the child for their complete lack of social structure, support, or companionship, the mother ignored all the standard cries for help and the child because she was more interested in her affair partner, her swinging life-style and her horses. She couldn't even be bothered to help or make him clean his room. When his room became unhabitable, she moved him into the guest room. Through all this, with a child that was clearly at least mildly disturbed, she thinks it's okay to purchase a gun, then not pay the least attention to the gun safety and security. I understand leaving it up to her husband as the party more knowledgeable, but she should at least know HOW to lock it up, where the code is stored and test the code. The fact that on the day of the shooting, the lock code for the gun was still on the factory setting of 000 is also pretty negligent.

Then came the day of the shooting, and she was called in to school and shown a drawing that was clearly an additional call for help depicting him with a gun, shooting victims and even saying "Blood everywhere" and "The thoughts won't stop". And she doesn't think to mention that he has a gun, or to check whether he might have it with him? She doesn't want to miss work so she won't take him home? She has a flexible work place that she can take him with her or take leave for the day and she sends him back to class. She even says that if he can't go back to class, he'll be walking home and being alone for the day? The school says that they're concerned he's suicidal and don't want him to be alone, so they allow the mother to send him back to class?

The mother was clearly much more selfish than maternal and cared more about her personal life, her affair, saving up her time off for her affairs, her personal activities like her horses, than she cared about her child or caring for him. She also had a history of maternal negligence when he was 8 and she and her husband would go out drinking all afternoon and evening, leaving him alone for hours at a time. The neighbors called CPS multiple times for child abandonment.

This is not an indictment of a parent or parenting. This mother was negligent as a parent and didn't even do some of the basics of parenting and that's why she was convicted.

That is all very sad. I feel for kids like this. Why do people like this have children? The kid would have undoubtedly been better off if she had just left him in a basket at the fire station. He might have had some of the same issues, but he probably would have had a chance to grow up and live a somewhat functional and free life.

[Anonymous]

I'm still dumbfounded how the murderer's parents were not charged i the Sandy Hook shooting. It's infuriating.

These shootings nearly never occur in a vacuum, and both parents are responsible for not taking warning signs seriously.

So many parents abdicate responsibility by thinking their son could never go these lengths. The denial is massive, and I'm sure there are some parents on DCUM who are denial about their kids issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the guilty sentence was deserved. I live in DC. I would like to see parents of all the children carjacking and murdering also charged. The only hope of the U.S. is for us to demand better, more stable, more engaged parenting. Schools can't solve it all.

You can't really think those are analogous? You all are incredible.

In a different poster but yes I think a kid who shoots kids at school is analogous to a kid who shoots someone for their car. Both kids whose parents should have prevented it.

[Anonymous]

She's 45?! She looks 65, at least. What a monster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm still dumbfounded how the murderer's parents were not charged i the Sandy Hook shooting. It's infuriating.

These shootings nearly never occur in a vacuum, and both parents are responsible for not taking warning signs seriously.

So many parents abdicate responsibility by thinking their son could never go these lengths. The denial is massive, and I'm sure there are some parents on DCUM who are denial about their kids issues.

The Sandy Hook shooter killed his mother. He had not seen his father in two years. There was no one to charge.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
In this case the case had merit. But there are children who are violent despite the best parental efforts to keep the community safe. I hope long-suffering parents of such kids aren’t punished needlessly.

I agree. I also think that if parents choose to keep firearms in their home, and their child uses one to kill people, then the parents are responsible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She's 45?! She looks 65, at least. What a monster.

She's gained a lot of weight while incarcerated. She used to be thinner.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm still dumbfounded how the murderer's parents were not charged i the Sandy Hook shooting. It's infuriating.

These shootings nearly never occur in a vacuum, and both parents are responsible for not taking warning signs seriously.

So many parents abdicate responsibility by thinking their son could never go these lengths. The denial is massive, and I'm sure there are some parents on DCUM who are denial about their kids issues.

The Sandy Hook shooter killed his mother. He had not seen his father in two years. There was no one to charge.

Was there any evidence that the dad had tried to get help for his son, during that time? He had massive mental health issues for far beyond those 2 years.

[Anonymous]

Regarding Columbine, I guess I don’t understand how Dylan Klebold’s parents were negligent. He was basically suicidal, which is really hard to know as a parent. They did not have guns — Klebold bought them from someone else.

I have a relative who took his own life, and it came as a 100% surprise to us. We had no idea why, until his letter was found — and even then, it still did not make much sense. I know parents who did everything they could to get their kid help, no no avail. Some thing you just cannot control.

Maybe the Crumbley’s were negligent in terms of not keeping their guns safe, but I think it’s a dangerous precedent to blame parents for their kids’ behavior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She's 45?! She looks 65, at least. What a monster.

She's gained a lot of weight while incarcerated. She used to be thinner.

Prison food is terrible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm still dumbfounded how the murderer's parents were not charged i the Sandy Hook shooting. It's infuriating.

These shootings nearly never occur in a vacuum, and both parents are responsible for not taking warning signs seriously.

So many parents abdicate responsibility by thinking their son could never go these lengths. The denial is massive, and I'm sure there are some parents on DCUM who are denial about their kids issues.

The Sandy Hook shooter killed his mother. He had not seen his father in two years. There was no one to charge.

Was there any evidence that the dad had tried to get help for his son, during that time? He had massive mental health issues for far beyond those 2 years.

Read the New Yorker article The Reckoning, or the state attorney’s exhaustive report on Adam Lanza.

Yes, his father and mother went to great lengths to get him diagnosed and treated. After he reached 18 he refused a lot of the interventions they encouraged and our system is not set up to force treatment on people when they do not meet the criteria for involuntary commitment. Many experts weighed in that the Sandy Hook shooting was not something that could have been predicted by the known facts, especially the very little that Peter Lanza could know given that his son had refused to communicate with him for two years preceding the event despite repeated attempts at contact. Arguably Nancy Lanza went too far in coddling him and his erratic behavior, and certainly she was negligent in allowing him access to firearms when he certainly had mental issues. She was tried and convicted by four .22 caliber rifle shots to the head at Adam’s hand. There is no legal theory under which Peter Lanza could be held criminally responsible for Adam’s behavior. If you read the interview with Andrew Solomon in the New Yorker, it is evident that unlike Jennifer Crumbley, Peter Lanza was anguished over his son’s issues and now lives in deep despair over the 27 murders his son perpetrated.