School Shooting in Michigan. 3 Teens DEAD. 1 15-yr old suspect in custody.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Holding the parents responsible for this is one of the best things that can happen in terms of deterring future gun violence of this type.

If we lived in a functional country that could actually pass laws, we should attach liability to anyone who facilitates getting a gun for someone who later commits a violent crime with that gun. We do it for bartenders who over-serve, hell - Texas is doing it for uber drivers who take a passenger to an abortion clinic.

The best way to keep guns out of the hands of violent psychopaths is to make the people who get them those guns think twice.

+1

Exactly. I am a gun owner, and I have no problem with this. It is the irresponsible parents we (those of us with children in public schools) need to worry about. They are simply not tending to their children's basic needs.

The problem is that people like this claim that that they are "responsible gun owners" right up until the point they hand their violent 15 year-old a semiautomatic weapon and tell him to have a great Christmas. I grew up with guns and my parents would rather than cut their own leg off than leave a weapon unsecured around a child. They were, and are, truly responsible gun owners but the irresponsible whackjobs use the exact same words to describe wildly different procedures around guns.

No “responsible gun owner” should have any problems with laws about gun storage and keeping guns away from children.

And of course the parents don’t GAF about this kid. They abandoned him at school and then abandoned him in jail while they went on the lam.

Fewer than half of US states have laws about gun storage, even though public opinion is behind the idea. Why? Well, it's because the NRA has been captured by first the gun manufacturers and then by the Government of Russia. Advocacy groups that represent the interests of actual gun owners, and who therefore have more nuanced takes on various issues, don't have the kind of reach that the NRA does.

[Anonymous]

School shootings have become so frequent that they are usually just a blip in the news. This one is different and has so much stuff to assess.

There are videos of the kid from youth to recent backyard bomb making, social media posts of his parents, stories from kids who stayed home in anticipation of violence, teacher observations (ammo search, really graphic note that contained violent imagery and plea for help) long interaction with school officials on the day of, multiple meetings with parents, multiple examples of really awful parenting, multiple decision points by adults with a series of options not taken, parents on the lam, etc. It's A LOT.

Changing gun laws is a non-starter, but it seems like there could be some useful lessons to take away from this tragedy. I guarantee schools everywhere are going to re-examine how they handle situations like this. That offers the possibility not just of preventing a future shooting but also helping kids in crisis that would have otherwise just suffered alone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:School shootings have become so frequent that they are usually just a blip in the news. This one is different and has so much stuff to assess.

There are videos of the kid from youth to recent backyard bomb making, social media posts of his parents, stories from kids who stayed home in anticipation of violence, teacher observations (ammo search, really graphic note that contained violent imagery and plea for help) long interaction with school officials on the day of, multiple meetings with parents, multiple examples of really awful parenting, multiple decision points by adults with a series of options not taken, parents on the lam, etc. It's A LOT.

Changing gun laws is a non-starter, but it seems like there could be some useful lessons to take away from this tragedy. I guarantee schools everywhere are going to re-examine how they handle situations like this. That offers the possibility not just of preventing a future shooting but also helping kids in crisis that would have otherwise just suffered alone.

I'm not saying you're wrong about this but it's absolutely batshit insane that this is true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:School shootings have become so frequent that they are usually just a blip in the news. This one is different and has so much stuff to assess.

There are videos of the kid from youth to recent backyard bomb making, social media posts of his parents, stories from kids who stayed home in anticipation of violence, teacher observations (ammo search, really graphic note that contained violent imagery and plea for help) long interaction with school officials on the day of, multiple meetings with parents, multiple examples of really awful parenting, multiple decision points by adults with a series of options not taken, parents on the lam, etc. It's A LOT.

Changing gun laws is a non-starter, but it seems like there could be some useful lessons to take away from this tragedy. I guarantee schools everywhere are going to re-examine how they handle situations like this. That offers the possibility not just of preventing a future shooting but also helping kids in crisis that would have otherwise just suffered alone.

+1

I agree, many of these kids suffer alone, and many have neglectful parents, who are simply "too busy" to do the right thing - this needs to change. Parents should not be absolved of their responsibilities. We are all tired. Each and every one of us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Holding the parents responsible for this is one of the best things that can happen in terms of deterring future gun violence of this type.

If we lived in a functional country that could actually pass laws, we should attach liability to anyone who facilitates getting a gun for someone who later commits a violent crime with that gun. We do it for bartenders who over-serve, hell - Texas is doing it for uber drivers who take a passenger to an abortion clinic.

The best way to keep guns out of the hands of violent psychopaths is to make the people who get them those guns think twice.

+1

Exactly. I am a gun owner, and I have no problem with this. It is the irresponsible parents we (those of us with children in public schools) need to worry about. They are simply not tending to their children's basic needs.

The problem is that people like this claim that that they are "responsible gun owners" right up until the point they hand their violent 15 year-old a semiautomatic weapon and tell him to have a great Christmas. I grew up with guns and my parents would rather than cut their own leg off than leave a weapon unsecured around a child. They were, and are, truly responsible gun owners but the irresponsible whackjobs use the exact same words to describe wildly different procedures around guns.

No “responsible gun owner” should have any problems with laws about gun storage and keeping guns away from children.

And of course the parents don’t GAF about this kid. They abandoned him at school and then abandoned him in jail while they went on the lam.

+1

Sickening, and not rare behavior, sadly.

[Anonymous]

School officials should have searched him according to prosecutor.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/06/us/michigan-oxford-high-school-shooting-monday/index.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:School shootings have become so frequent that they are usually just a blip in the news. This one is different and has so much stuff to assess.

There are videos of the kid from youth to recent backyard bomb making, social media posts of his parents, stories from kids who stayed home in anticipation of violence, teacher observations (ammo search, really graphic note that contained violent imagery and plea for help) long interaction with school officials on the day of, multiple meetings with parents, multiple examples of really awful parenting, multiple decision points by adults with a series of options not taken, parents on the lam, etc. It's A LOT.

Changing gun laws is a non-starter, but it seems like there could be some useful lessons to take away from this tragedy. I guarantee schools everywhere are going to re-examine how they handle situations like this. That offers the possibility not just of preventing a future shooting but also helping kids in crisis that would have otherwise just suffered alone.

I'm not saying you're wrong about this but it's absolutely batshit insane that this is true.

I mean, melting down all the guns and turning them into playgrounds or something is a nonstarter, but there are some politically popular reforms being blocked by a handful of special interests and maybe we can start with those.

For example, someone on this thread keeps pointing out that the parents didn't break any laws by not securing their guns. They didn't break any laws in Michigan, but that's something the Michigan legislature could examine going forward. It's easy, and should not face political pushback from citizens. You just need lawmakers to have the guts to stand up to lobbying groups.

It wouldn't have helped here, but states can also close loopholes that allow gun sales without background checks. Again, no responsible gun owner opposes this and there's no electoral backlash.

There are absolutely things that can be done, and have been done, but are not happening in specific states.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:School shootings have become so frequent that they are usually just a blip in the news. This one is different and has so much stuff to assess.

There are videos of the kid from youth to recent backyard bomb making, social media posts of his parents, stories from kids who stayed home in anticipation of violence, teacher observations (ammo search, really graphic note that contained violent imagery and plea for help) long interaction with school officials on the day of, multiple meetings with parents, multiple examples of really awful parenting, multiple decision points by adults with a series of options not taken, parents on the lam, etc. It's A LOT.

Changing gun laws is a non-starter, but it seems like there could be some useful lessons to take away from this tragedy. I guarantee schools everywhere are going to re-examine how they handle situations like this. That offers the possibility not just of preventing a future shooting but also helping kids in crisis that would have otherwise just suffered alone.

I'm not saying you're wrong about this but it's absolutely batshit insane that this is true.

PP here. Yeah, after Sandy Hook, I lost all hope. Not that we should give up trying. I do think you never know when a tipping point will come. History is full of surprises.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:School shootings have become so frequent that they are usually just a blip in the news. This one is different and has so much stuff to assess.

There are videos of the kid from youth to recent backyard bomb making, social media posts of his parents, stories from kids who stayed home in anticipation of violence, teacher observations (ammo search, really graphic note that contained violent imagery and plea for help) long interaction with school officials on the day of, multiple meetings with parents, multiple examples of really awful parenting, multiple decision points by adults with a series of options not taken, parents on the lam, etc. It's A LOT.

Changing gun laws is a non-starter, but it seems like there could be some useful lessons to take away from this tragedy. I guarantee schools everywhere are going to re-examine how they handle situations like this. That offers the possibility not just of preventing a future shooting but also helping kids in crisis that would have otherwise just suffered alone.

I'm not saying you're wrong about this but it's absolutely batshit insane that this is true.

I mean, melting down all the guns and turning them into playgrounds or something is a nonstarter, but there are some politically popular reforms being blocked by a handful of special interests and maybe we can start with those.

For example, someone on this thread keeps pointing out that the parents didn't break any laws by not securing their guns. They didn't break any laws in Michigan, but that's something the Michigan legislature could examine going forward. It's easy, and should not face political pushback from citizens. You just need lawmakers to have the guts to stand up to lobbying groups.

It wouldn't have helped here, but states can also close loopholes that allow gun sales without background checks. Again, no responsible gun owner opposes this and there's no electoral backlash.

There are absolutely things that can be done, and have been done, but are not happening in specific states.

The Michigan legislature is a gerrymandered AF Republican majority in a 50-50 state and has zero interest in examining any of these issues going forward. The right is all lined up already blaming the prosecutor for overreach, blaming the schools for as little remote learning as I’ve seen anywhere, and imaginary bullies of this kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What law was the kid breaking google searching bullets on his iPhone? Spoiler alert: None.

That factoid hurts the school district in the civil suit far more than the parents in the bogus criminal case.

It shows the parents had notice of his mental state, especially when combined with the violent drawing. And yet the armed him and did not secure the gun. And this is not the first time for parents to be charged with criminal actions by their children. In general, parents do have civil and criminal liability if they are negligent in preventing their child from causing harm. This is why good parents carry umbrella insurance (especially once kids begin to drive) and don’t buy their children firearms or otherwise leave unsecured firearms in their home. I personally would like to see more parents charged when their children access a gun from home. Parents need to start treating gun ownership like the serious responsibility that it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Holding the parents responsible for this is one of the best things that can happen in terms of deterring future gun violence of this type.

If we lived in a functional country that could actually pass laws, we should attach liability to anyone who facilitates getting a gun for someone who later commits a violent crime with that gun. We do it for bartenders who over-serve, hell - Texas is doing it for uber drivers who take a passenger to an abortion clinic.

The best way to keep guns out of the hands of violent psychopaths is to make the people who get them those guns think twice.

+1

Exactly. I am a gun owner, and I have no problem with this. It is the irresponsible parents we (those of us with children in public schools) need to worry about. They are simply not tending to their children's basic needs.

I wish more responsible gun owners would jump on board with supporting this type of gun reform. I know gun owners aren’t a monolith, so there has to be a large fraction of people who support reasonable rights to gun ownership, but also want to prevent their kids from being mass murdered at school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:School shootings have become so frequent that they are usually just a blip in the news. This one is different and has so much stuff to assess.

There are videos of the kid from youth to recent backyard bomb making, social media posts of his parents, stories from kids who stayed home in anticipation of violence, teacher observations (ammo search, really graphic note that contained violent imagery and plea for help) long interaction with school officials on the day of, multiple meetings with parents, multiple examples of really awful parenting, multiple decision points by adults with a series of options not taken, parents on the lam, etc. It's A LOT.

Changing gun laws is a non-starter, but it seems like there could be some useful lessons to take away from this tragedy. I guarantee schools everywhere are going to re-examine how they handle situations like this. That offers the possibility not just of preventing a future shooting but also helping kids in crisis that would have otherwise just suffered alone.

I'm not saying you're wrong about this but it's absolutely batshit insane that this is true.

I mean, melting down all the guns and turning them into playgrounds or something is a nonstarter, but there are some politically popular reforms being blocked by a handful of special interests and maybe we can start with those.

For example, someone on this thread keeps pointing out that the parents didn't break any laws by not securing their guns. They didn't break any laws in Michigan, but that's something the Michigan legislature could examine going forward. It's easy, and should not face political pushback from citizens. You just need lawmakers to have the guts to stand up to lobbying groups.

It wouldn't have helped here, but states can also close loopholes that allow gun sales without background checks. Again, no responsible gun owner opposes this and there's no electoral backlash.

There are absolutely things that can be done, and have been done, but are not happening in specific states.

The Michigan legislature is a gerrymandered AF Republican majority in a 50-50 state and has zero interest in examining any of these issues going forward. The right is all lined up already blaming the prosecutor for overreach, blaming the schools for as little remote learning as I’ve seen anywhere, and imaginary bullies of this kid.

That's exactly why we need all of the "responsible gun owners" to come out and make it clear that they care. Let the GOP hash it out in the primaries between the whackadoos with their gun-flavored Xmas cards and the reasonable backers of the 2nd Amendment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What law was the kid breaking google searching bullets on his iPhone? Spoiler alert: None.

That factoid hurts the school district in the civil suit far more than the parents in the bogus criminal case.

It shows the parents had notice of his mental state, especially when combined with the violent drawing. And yet the armed him and did not secure the gun. And this is not the first time for parents to be charged with criminal actions by their children. In general, parents do have civil and criminal liability if they are negligent in preventing their child from causing harm. This is why good parents carry umbrella insurance (especially once kids begin to drive) and don’t buy their children firearms or otherwise leave unsecured firearms in their home. I personally would like to see more parents charged when their children access a gun from home. Parents need to start treating gun ownership like the serious responsibility that it is.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you look at his old YouTube videos from a few years ago, he appears like a sweet, polite child talking about his boat collection and playing basketball with a group of friends; in one he his conscientious of the cost of a souvenir at a bear attraction.His parents can use these as evidence that they had no idea of his decline into a dark world.

Even the day of, while they had him locked in an office (?) for 2 hours -- waiting for his parents to arrive from work? -- he asked if he could do his science homework because he was worried about missing class work!

Is it possible the line of questioning from school officials to he and his parents is maybe what triggered something in him?

This ridiculous fan fiction ignores the fact that he had the gun and ammunition on his person.

Fan fiction? It's on the record fact he was asking if he could do science homework while in the office Tuesday morning, because he was worried about missing class assignments:
https://www.mlive.com/news/2021/12/superintendent-asks-for-third-party-review-on-events-that-led-up-to-oxford-high-school-shooting.html

The science thing is odd and it either is evidence that he was a sociopath calmly pretending it was all fine or (more likely) a kid with a significant cognitive disconnect. My own kid was in a police car being taken to an ER for suicidal threats and was making plans about buying tickets for something they wanted to do. I was thinking WTF do they not realize if they kill themselves we will not be attending that. Their brains can just run on two totally different tracks.

Also, if the kid denied suicidal ideation and told the counselor it was just for a video game he was designing, I’m really not sure most counselors would have done anything differently for a kid that has not disciplinary history and seemed to be otherwise engaged in school and responding appropriately to questions. I might not be understanding the totality of what they had, though.

My take is that the counselors were asking what might about to screening questions and may not have had the skill set for this level of immediate assessment the way someone experienced in psych assessment would. The note was an indicator of suicidal ideation and as such would have warranted a check of locker and backpack and maybe requiring parents to confirm guns were CURRENTLY secure to rule out access to weapons at the time.

I was thinking a little differently, that the counselors were focused on the kid's mental health, but erred on what they thought would keep him safe-- IOW, they thought he'd be safer at school than home alone where he could self-harm. If the principal and vice principals had been looped in, they would have brought the mindset of assuring the safety of everyone else from this kid as well. Counselors are geared toward helping the individuals in front of them, while principals are tasked with managing the entire school. The problem was that the kid was a danger to self and others, so there was a mismatch between the nature and scope of the problem and the responsibilities of the particular school personnel who were making the decisions that day. Same with the school resource officer, whose primary responsibility is to the school as a whole. His involvement would have almost surely made a difference.

Long way of saying that the principal would have probably insisted on checking his backpack.

Also, I bet the counselor sitting there with the kid for all that time, was falsely reassured watching the kid worry about his science homework and other normal behavior. A principal would have probably been coming in and out and would be less likely to let his skepticism down.

Just speculating here, obviously, but it's good to remember that these are all regular human beings acting as humans do-- They bring their own preconceived ideas, gut instincts, empathy, bias, naïveté, analytic skills, good intentions, flawed reasoning and just human imperfection to every situation.

This.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:School shootings have become so frequent that they are usually just a blip in the news. This one is different and has so much stuff to assess.

There are videos of the kid from youth to recent backyard bomb making, social media posts of his parents, stories from kids who stayed home in anticipation of violence, teacher observations (ammo search, really graphic note that contained violent imagery and plea for help) long interaction with school officials on the day of, multiple meetings with parents, multiple examples of really awful parenting, multiple decision points by adults with a series of options not taken, parents on the lam, etc. It's A LOT.

Changing gun laws is a non-starter, but it seems like there could be some useful lessons to take away from this tragedy. I guarantee schools everywhere are going to re-examine how they handle situations like this. That offers the possibility not just of preventing a future shooting but also helping kids in crisis that would have otherwise just suffered alone.

I'm not saying you're wrong about this but it's absolutely batshit insane that this is true.

I mean, melting down all the guns and turning them into playgrounds or something is a nonstarter, but there are some politically popular reforms being blocked by a handful of special interests and maybe we can start with those.

For example, someone on this thread keeps pointing out that the parents didn't break any laws by not securing their guns. They didn't break any laws in Michigan, but that's something the Michigan legislature could examine going forward. It's easy, and should not face political pushback from citizens. You just need lawmakers to have the guts to stand up to lobbying groups.

It wouldn't have helped here, but states can also close loopholes that allow gun sales without background checks. Again, no responsible gun owner opposes this and there's no electoral backlash.

There are absolutely things that can be done, and have been done, but are not happening in specific states.

The Michigan legislature is a gerrymandered AF Republican majority in a 50-50 state and has zero interest in examining any of these issues going forward. The right is all lined up already blaming the prosecutor for overreach, blaming the schools for as little remote learning as I’ve seen anywhere, and imaginary bullies of this kid.

That's exactly why we need all of the "responsible gun owners" to come out and make it clear that they care. Let the GOP hash it out in the primaries between the whackadoos with their gun-flavored Xmas cards and the reasonable backers of the 2nd Amendment.

Nearly eight out of ten Americans support safe storage laws. Republican state legislatures don’t care.
https://wamu.org/story/19/10/02/most-americans-support-safe-storage-laws-according-to-new-poll/