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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why didn’t the school MAKE them take him home?

They can't. He might be "in a certain situation" (before all this), which gives him more "protections" and his parents have more say, if they know the loopholes.

Also, 4th Amendment - schools can't just search and seize property. Same reason Langley and other high schools got rid of lockers. Not worth the hassle with bad kids and their bad parents.

As we have seen here, where do you think these kids learn their behaviors?

1) they had reasonable suspicion to search backpack
2)even without a search, they could have should have notified police, made a report, and had the kid brought home (for to a psych hospital). But they school didn’t because the parents were being a PIA and they thought it would just be easier to send him back to class than to poke a hornets nest (the ahole parents)

The PARENTS should have insisted on searching the backpack. If I’m sitting in a principals office with my husband and kid, having this discussion about disturbing drawings, my first thought would be….mmmmm… and hubby bought junior a gun, just four days ago. Sweetie I’m fine if you want to stay at school today but let’s just look in your backpack and make sure nothing is there that shouldn’t be. And if he refuses to open it? Well, we do have a problem

How hard is this, for parents who are rational and connected to their kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why didn’t the school MAKE them take him home?

They can't. He might be "in a certain situation" (before all this), which gives him more "protections" and his parents have more say, if they know the loopholes.

Also, 4th Amendment - schools can't just search and seize property. Same reason Langley and other high schools got rid of lockers. Not worth the hassle with bad kids and their bad parents.

As we have seen here, where do you think these kids learn their behaviors?

Schools have pretty wide latitude to search. In this case they had a strong case for reasonable suspicion

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why didn’t the school MAKE them take him home?

They can't. He might be "in a certain situation" (before all this), which gives him more "protections" and his parents have more say, if they know the loopholes.

Also, 4th Amendment - schools can't just search and seize property. Same reason Langley and other high schools got rid of lockers. Not worth the hassle with bad kids and their bad parents.

As we have seen here, where do you think these kids learn their behaviors?

YES they could have MADE him leave.

You want to believe that but without actual violence being done and the parents refusing, there’s not actually grounds. Policy fails us every time.

Yup. Absent actual violence, the school policy would likely not allow him to be removed. Now add uncooperative, entitled, and possibly mentally ill parents to the equation. In fact, the school policy may say to keep him in school if administrators have any inclination of a terrible home life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why didn’t the school MAKE them take him home?

They can't. He might be "in a certain situation" (before all this), which gives him more "protections" and his parents have more say, if they know the loopholes.

Also, 4th Amendment - schools can't just search and seize property. Same reason Langley and other high schools got rid of lockers. Not worth the hassle with bad kids and their bad parents.

As we have seen here, where do you think these kids learn their behaviors?

1) they had reasonable suspicion to search backpack
2)even without a search, they could have should have notified police, made a report, and had the kid brought home (for to a psych hospital). But they school didn’t because the parents were being a PIA and they thought it would just be easier to send him back to class than to poke a hornets nest (the ahole parents)

It isn’t but these aren’t those parents, who were very obviously in on it and possibly even coerced him to do it.


The PARENTS should have insisted on searching the backpack. If I’m sitting in a principals office with my husband and kid, having this discussion about disturbing drawings, my first thought would be….mmmmm… and hubby bought junior a gun, just four days ago. Sweetie I’m fine if you want to stay at school today but let’s just look in your backpack and make sure nothing is there that shouldn’t be. And if he refuses to open it? Well, we do have a problem

How hard is this, for parents who are rational and connected to their kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why didn’t the school MAKE them take him home?

They can't. He might be "in a certain situation" (before all this), which gives him more "protections" and his parents have more say, if they know the loopholes.

Also, 4th Amendment - schools can't just search and seize property. Same reason Langley and other high schools got rid of lockers. Not worth the hassle with bad kids and their bad parents.

As we have seen here, where do you think these kids learn their behaviors?

1) they had reasonable suspicion to search backpack
2)even without a search, they could have should have notified police, made a report, and had the kid brought home (for to a psych hospital). But they school didn’t because the parents were being a PIA and they thought it would just be easier to send him back to class than to poke a hornets nest (the ahole parents)

The PARENTS should have insisted on searching the backpack. If I’m sitting in a principals office with my husband and kid, having this discussion about disturbing drawings, my first thought would be….mmmmm… and hubby bought junior a gun, just four days ago. Sweetie I’m fine if you want to stay at school today but let’s just look in your backpack and make sure nothing is there that shouldn’t be. And if he refuses to open it? Well, we do have a problem

How hard is this, for parents who are rational and connected to their kids?

Look, no one is excusing the horrible parents and their behavior. But the buck should have stopped at the school and the school had the authority and means to search the backpack AND/OR call the police when parents failed to remove him. But the didn’t. They dropped the ball when the potentially could have changed the trajectory of what happened

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why didn’t the school MAKE them take him home?

They can't. He might be "in a certain situation" (before all this), which gives him more "protections" and his parents have more say, if they know the loopholes.

Also, 4th Amendment - schools can't just search and seize property. Same reason Langley and other high schools got rid of lockers. Not worth the hassle with bad kids and their bad parents.

As we have seen here, where do you think these kids learn their behaviors?

1) they had reasonable suspicion to search backpack
2)even without a search, they could have should have notified police, made a report, and had the kid brought home (for to a psych hospital). But they school didn’t because the parents were being a PIA and they thought it would just be easier to send him back to class than to poke a hornets nest (the ahole parents)

The PARENTS should have insisted on searching the backpack. If I’m sitting in a principals office with my husband and kid, having this discussion about disturbing drawings, my first thought would be….mmmmm… and hubby bought junior a gun, just four days ago. Sweetie I’m fine if you want to stay at school today but let’s just look in your backpack and make sure nothing is there that shouldn’t be. And if he refuses to open it? Well, we do have a problem

How hard is this, for parents who are rational and connected to their kids?

It isn’t hard but these aren’t those parents. These parents likely helped him plan his attack. They bought the weapon. They knew he was searching ammo. They insisted he stay on school after being shown his drawings. You could say that by doing those things at school where a teacher could see, the student might have been crying out for help. I think his parents helped him plan it and possibly convinced or coerced him to do it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're on the run in Detroit proper, east side of Detroit? I suspected all week they're drug addicts. Opioid crisis has slaughter over 3,000 in Michigan this year alone.

+1

They certainly seem like they are familiar with that type of lifestyle.

Dude. They are on the east side becuase they were trying to get to Canada. They lived 50 miles away, in a community that was overwhelmingly white and middle class. The mom was a real estate agent, the dad was worked in the technology industry.

Stop trying to make this about Black people.

[Anonymous]

^puck, not buck!

[Anonymous]

The mom was not a realtor, she had a license for it years ago, it’s apparentpy long lapsed. It’s pretty obvious from their crummy jobs or lack thereof, their crummy house, their behavior, and their kid’s neglect they’re some sort of addicts. Maybe just booze but that area is a hotbed for opioids, meth, heroin.

[Anonymous]

The more I learn about these parents I actually start feeling bad for the kid!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're on the run in Detroit proper, east side of Detroit? I suspected all week they're drug addicts. Opioid crisis has slaughter over 3,000 in Michigan this year alone.

+1

They certainly seem like they are familiar with that type of lifestyle.

Dude. They are on the east side becuase they were trying to get to Canada. They lived 50 miles away, in a community that was overwhelmingly white and middle class. The mom was a real estate agent, the dad was worked in the technology industry.

Stop trying to make this about Black people.

They are poor and uneducated. They are not middle class. They live in a dump. Oxford has a lot of white trash run down sections of town.

[Anonymous]

Did the kid have a freshman year of high school or was he at home alone all day alone doing virtual? Sounds like he likely went off the rails and was radicalized recently — probably by 24/7 access to Internet and the solitude of virtual learning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Did the kid have a freshman year of high school or was he at home alone all day alone doing virtual? Sounds like he likely went off the rails and was radicalized recently — probably by 24/7 access to Internet and the solitude of virtual learning.

Y’all will do absolutely anything to avoid admitting entitled angry white parental raise violent entitled angry white sons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're on the run in Detroit proper, east side of Detroit? I suspected all week they're drug addicts. Opioid crisis has slaughter over 3,000 in Michigan this year alone.

+1

They certainly seem like they are familiar with that type of lifestyle.

Dude. They are on the east side becuase they were trying to get to Canada. They lived 50 miles away, in a community that was overwhelmingly white and middle class. The mom was a real estate agent, the dad was worked in the technology industry.

Stop trying to make this about Black people.

They are poor and uneducated. They are not middle class. They live in a dump. Oxford has a lot of white trash run down sections of town.

I mean, their house looks FINE to me? It's not Bethesda beautiful, but it's a pretty common home in the Oakland County exurbs.

[Anonymous]

Frankly even the new build middle class and UMC sections of Oxford with McMansions are a little “off”. If you have the money to afford a $500k-$1m McMansion and were in any way sophisticated you’d live in Oakland Twp, Rochester, Birmingham, Troy — not a podunk exurb like Oxford.