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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, every rationale possible is being used by the PPs in this thread to excuse the gun owners and their kid (the shooter) passing the blame to anyone else.

Not true. I blame:

The kid
The parents (maybe even more than the kid)
The school admin (for not calling police/searching the bag/sending the kid home)
The laws for giving this kid more rights than his fellow students.

I can blame many things at once. An absolutely tragedy that could have been prevented so many ways.

Tell me what rights this kid has that other kids do not. Name one.

You can't because this kid has no more rights than anyone else.

This kid has no more rights than any other kid. You sound like one of those insane anti-public school LCPS haters nutjobs. You are ignorant and don't understand the laws related to education. BTW if you are the same poster blaming IDEA and FAPE, YOU ARE AN IDIOT. FAPE AND IDEA have nothing to do with what happened with this kid and would not stop the school from sending the kid home.

So much ignorance posted here.

The push for the rights of troubled kids absolutely are the reason this kid was not told to go home with his parents. It’s the reason they were allowed to “decline” to take him home. And why the school didn’t search him. Schools searched lockers and bags all the time when we were kids. All they needed was an anonymous tip.

NP. How, precisely, is a school administrator supposed to force a parent to take a child home if that parent declines. Please explain with precision how that works both legally and logistically.[/quote]


x1000000


PP is being obtuse. There is no forcing these types of petulant, aggressive, problematic parents - and our school resources are being wasted every single day by antics like this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oxford High School has a full-time school resource officer, who is a sworn Oakland County sheriff's deputy. There was no need to "call the police," the resource officer literally has an office in the school, presumably mere feet from the principal's office where these meetings took place. The high school brass, for whatever reason, did not loop the deputy into any of this. That is pure negligence.

"Like many schools across the country, Oxford High School has a police officer assigned to patrol its halls and campus. On Tuesday, according to a law enforcement official, that deputy and a responding deputy disarmed and arrested a 15-year-old student."

https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2021/11/30/oxford-high-shooting-police-school-liaison-officer/8813723002/

Why wasn't this deputy looped into the documented violent psych issues of the kid, calls to the parents, and the two meetings with the kid and the other with his parents? The deputy was INTENTIONALLY not looped in and not included in the meetings. The district is so screwed in a civil suit.

For the record, one usually can not locate the resource officer. Not saying this is an excuse, just saying it is an issue.

And it is really, really, really, really difficult to remove a kid when you have aggressive parents who don't care right in front of you. The school was worried about a law suit, and I am sure these people threatened the school with a law suit more than once.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oxford High School has a full-time school resource officer, who is a sworn Oakland County sheriff's deputy. There was no need to "call the police," the resource officer literally has an office in the school, presumably mere feet from the principal's office where these meetings took place. The high school brass, for whatever reason, did not loop the deputy into any of this. That is pure negligence.

"Like many schools across the country, Oxford High School has a police officer assigned to patrol its halls and campus. On Tuesday, according to a law enforcement official, that deputy and a responding deputy disarmed and arrested a 15-year-old student."

https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2021/11/30/oxford-high-shooting-police-school-liaison-officer/8813723002/

Why wasn't this deputy looped into the documented violent psych issues of the kid, calls to the parents, and the two meetings with the kid and the other with his parents? The deputy was INTENTIONALLY not looped in and not included in the meetings. The district is so screwed in a civil suit.

For the record, one usually can not locate the resource officer. Not saying this is an excuse, just saying it is an issue.

And it is really, really, really, really difficult to remove a kid when you have aggressive parents who don't care right in front of you. The school was worried about a law suit, and I am sure these people threatened the school with a law suit more than once.

Nope. They usually have a radio and respond fairly quickly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, every rationale possible is being used by the PPs in this thread to excuse the gun owners and their kid (the shooter) passing the blame to anyone else.

Not true. I blame:

The kid
The parents (maybe even more than the kid)
The school admin (for not calling police/searching the bag/sending the kid home)
The laws for giving this kid more rights than his fellow students.

I can blame many things at once. An absolutely tragedy that could have been prevented so many ways.

Tell me what rights this kid has that other kids do not. Name one.

You can't because this kid has no more rights than anyone else.

This kid has no more rights than any other kid. You sound like one of those insane anti-public school LCPS haters nutjobs. You are ignorant and don't understand the laws related to education. BTW if you are the same poster blaming IDEA and FAPE, YOU ARE AN IDIOT. FAPE AND IDEA have nothing to do with what happened with this kid and would not stop the school from sending the kid home.

So much ignorance posted here.

The push for the rights of troubled kids absolutely are the reason this kid was not told to go home with his parents. It’s the reason they were allowed to “decline” to take him home. And why the school didn’t search him. Schools searched lockers and bags all the time when we were kids. All they needed was an anonymous tip.

NP. How, precisely, is a school administrator supposed to force a parent to take a child home if that parent declines. Please explain with precision how that works both legally and logistically.

They can’t anymore. But year ago, they had a lot more leeway to suspend a student, and search them.

[b]+1 Also, many of the most troubled kids attended separate schools in years past. If parents really knew the documented backgrounds and behavioral history vlof some of the emotionally disturbed students walking around middle and high school campuses, they would be shocked.[/b]

x1000000000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oxford High School has a full-time school resource officer, who is a sworn Oakland County sheriff's deputy. There was no need to "call the police," the resource officer literally has an office in the school, presumably mere feet from the principal's office where these meetings took place. The high school brass, for whatever reason, did not loop the deputy into any of this. That is pure negligence.

"Like many schools across the country, Oxford High School has a police officer assigned to patrol its halls and campus. On Tuesday, according to a law enforcement official, that deputy and a responding deputy disarmed and arrested a 15-year-old student."

https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2021/11/30/oxford-high-shooting-police-school-liaison-officer/8813723002/

Why wasn't this deputy looped into the documented violent psych issues of the kid, calls to the parents, and the two meetings with the kid and the other with his parents? The deputy was INTENTIONALLY not looped in and not included in the meetings. The district is so screwed in a civil suit.

For the record, one usually can not locate the resource officer. Not saying this is an excuse, just saying it is an issue.

And it is really, really, really, really difficult to remove a kid when you have aggressive parents who don't care right in front of you. The school was worried about a law suit, and I am sure these people threatened the school with a law suit more than once.

Nope. They usually have a radio and respond fairly quickly.

I'm glad you "know every single school situation", but having been in that situation, it is not always the case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:According to details in the Detroit News, the “manhunt” was literally fake. The attention craving hack prosecutor is milking this for media hits and ghosted both the sheriff’s dept. and the parents’ attorney regarding charges. The prosecutor is being called a liar by the sheriff’s dept.

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/detroit-city/2021/12/04/oxford-school-shooting-crumbley-search-james-jennifer-parents-fugitives-search-manhunt/8865466002/

They withdrew $4,000 in cash, went to an industrial area near the Canada border, failed to appear and oh, Mom dyed her hair.

But yeah, totally innocent.

+1

WTAF?

The aggressive denial is strong!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, every rationale possible is being used by the PPs in this thread to excuse the gun owners and their kid (the shooter) passing the blame to anyone else.

Not true. I blame:

The kid
The parents (maybe even more than the kid)
The school admin (for not calling police/searching the bag/sending the kid home)
The laws for giving this kid more rights than his fellow students.

I can blame many things at once. An absolutely tragedy that could have been prevented so many ways.

Tell me what rights this kid has that other kids do not. Name one.

You can't because this kid has no more rights than anyone else.

This kid has no more rights than any other kid. You sound like one of those insane anti-public school LCPS haters nutjobs. You are ignorant and don't understand the laws related to education. BTW if you are the same poster blaming IDEA and FAPE, YOU ARE AN IDIOT. FAPE AND IDEA have nothing to do with what happened with this kid and would not stop the school from sending the kid home.

So much ignorance posted here.

The push for the rights of troubled kids absolutely are the reason this kid was not told to go home with his parents. It’s the reason they were allowed to “decline” to take him home. And why the school didn’t search him. Schools searched lockers and bags all the time when we were kids. All they needed was an anonymous tip.

NP. How, precisely, is a school administrator supposed to force a parent to take a child home if that parent declines. Please explain with precision how that works both legally and logistically.

Suspend him for the safety of the student body and if they leave without him, he’s trespassing. Call. The. Police.

Are you really this simple?

What bizarre fantasy world are you living in? This never happened, not even in whatever imaginary world you think used to exist.

Stick to reality, please.

There was a different power dynamic. The school had the power and authority. Principals in the 70s did not play. If the parents wouldn’t take the kid. They would have had them escorted from campus. The litigious nature of our society and changes in law have made is such that schools are wary about exercising authority in situations such as this which is what got us here. It is my hope that this will help bring more balance back to the schools and recognize that kids that aren’t troubled have rights and need protection and care as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There was a report that the disturbing drawing was “updated” after the teacher saw it and reported it, prior to the meeting with the parents. The school did many things right. Probably more things than most large HS’s in this country would’ve done. Teacher reported the note and the school admin called for urgent, immediate meeting with parents. But the drawing changed before the meeting and the enabling/head-in-the sand parents pushed back on taking kid home. He had no prior disciplinary issues.Where the school failed IMHO 1.) didn’t ask whether they had guns in their home that were currently accounted for and 2.) didn’t insist on searching kids backpack and locker before sending back to class.

I agree the families that lost their children should be compensated through the civil suits that will likely follow.I hope that monies will be found to outfit every HS with metal detectors to avoid future gun violence in schools. This HS did many things right but it still wasn’t enough to prevent this tragedy.

Doesn’t the standard risk assessment script for school include the question about whether there are weapons in the home/ available to the child? We were asked those questions once when a 1st grader told my dd that he was going to bring his dad’s pistol to school and shoot him. My son replied that he was going to bring his mom’s musket to school and shoot back. It was a long week, but we learned about the process whereby schools determine if a comment is a credible threat. There was a call with the assistant principal and she had a series of questions she asked us.

(And for the record I don’t own a musket- that was just the only gun name DA knew.)

She must have been studying the Revolutionary War.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, every rationale possible is being used by the PPs in this thread to excuse the gun owners and their kid (the shooter) passing the blame to anyone else.

Not true. I blame:

The kid
The parents (maybe even more than the kid)
The school admin (for not calling police/searching the bag/sending the kid home)
The laws for giving this kid more rights than his fellow students.

I can blame many things at once. An absolutely tragedy that could have been prevented so many ways.

Tell me what rights this kid has that other kids do not. Name one.

You can't because this kid has no more rights than anyone else.

This kid has no more rights than any other kid. You sound like one of those insane anti-public school LCPS haters nutjobs. You are ignorant and don't understand the laws related to education. BTW if you are the same poster blaming IDEA and FAPE, YOU ARE AN IDIOT. FAPE AND IDEA have nothing to do with what happened with this kid and would not stop the school from sending the kid home.

So much ignorance posted here.

The push for the rights of troubled kids absolutely are the reason this kid was not told to go home with his parents. It’s the reason they were allowed to “decline” to take him home. And why the school didn’t search him. Schools searched lockers and bags all the time when we were kids. All they needed was an anonymous tip.

NP. How, precisely, is a school administrator supposed to force a parent to take a child home if that parent declines. Please explain with precision how that works both legally and logistically.

They can’t anymore. But year ago, they had a lot more leeway to suspend a student, and search them.

+1 Also, many of the most troubled kids attended separate schools in years past. If parents really knew the documented backgrounds and behavioral history vlof some of the emotionally disturbed students walking around middle and high school campuses, they would be shocked.

So none of you can answer the basic question of how, in years past, administrators used to force parents to remove children from the school when the parents refused, yet you are all positive this used to happen regularly. Got it.

Because the aggressive, troubled parents with troubled kids have been at this for years, since the kid was little and "sweet" (LOL) - their goal is to keep their troubled kid in school, so they don't have to deal with him - at any (ANY) cost. That includes, but is not limited to, multiple loopholes, as more troubled kids are surfacing, there are more resources for parents like this. The school had no reason to believe they owned a gun, and the parents, who knew the exact situation, purposely did not offer that information. Do you think this was the first time for those parents in a principal's office?

Don't be so dim. Unless you have experienced this, you know nothing about the day to day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, every rationale possible is being used by the PPs in this thread to excuse the gun owners and their kid (the shooter) passing the blame to anyone else.

Not true. I blame:

The kid
The parents (maybe even more than the kid)
The school admin (for not calling police/searching the bag/sending the kid home)
The laws for giving this kid more rights than his fellow students.

I can blame many things at once. An absolutely tragedy that could have been prevented so many ways.

Tell me what rights this kid has that other kids do not. Name one.

You can't because this kid has no more rights than anyone else.

This kid has no more rights than any other kid. You sound like one of those insane anti-public school LCPS haters nutjobs. You are ignorant and don't understand the laws related to education. BTW if you are the same poster blaming IDEA and FAPE, YOU ARE AN IDIOT. FAPE AND IDEA have nothing to do with what happened with this kid and would not stop the school from sending the kid home.

So much ignorance posted here.

The push for the rights of troubled kids absolutely are the reason this kid was not told to go home with his parents. It’s the reason they were allowed to “decline” to take him home. And why the school didn’t search him. Schools searched lockers and bags all the time when we were kids. All they needed was an anonymous tip.

NP. How, precisely, is a school administrator supposed to force a parent to take a child home if that parent declines. Please explain with precision how that works both legally and logistically.

Suspend him for the safety of the student body and if they leave without him, he’s trespassing. Call. The. Police.

Are you really this simple?

What bizarre fantasy world are you living in? This never happened, not even in whatever imaginary world you think used to exist.

Stick to reality, please.

There was a different power dynamic. The school had the power and authority. Principals in the 70s did not play. If the parents wouldn’t take the kid. They would have had them escorted from campus. The litigious nature of our society and changes in law have made is such that schools are wary about exercising authority in situations such as this which is what got us here. It is my hope that this will help bring more balance back to the schools and recognize that kids that aren’t troubled have rights and need protection and care as well.

x100000

EXACTLY THIS.

PP is either obtuse or one of those parents (who wants to see how much the other parents know).

[Anonymous]

Parents of non violent kids have rights, too.

Such as - a right to go to school and learn without being physically assailed, and well, a right to live through the school day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, every rationale possible is being used by the PPs in this thread to excuse the gun owners and their kid (the shooter) passing the blame to anyone else.

Not true. I blame:

The kid
The parents (maybe even more than the kid)
The school admin (for not calling police/searching the bag/sending the kid home)
The laws for giving this kid more rights than his fellow students.

I can blame many things at once. An absolutely tragedy that could have been prevented so many ways.

Tell me what rights this kid has that other kids do not. Name one.

You can't because this kid has no more rights than anyone else.

This kid has no more rights than any other kid. You sound like one of those insane anti-public school LCPS haters nutjobs. You are ignorant and don't understand the laws related to education. BTW if you are the same poster blaming IDEA and FAPE, YOU ARE AN IDIOT. FAPE AND IDEA have nothing to do with what happened with this kid and would not stop the school from sending the kid home.

So much ignorance posted here.

The push for the rights of troubled kids absolutely are the reason this kid was not told to go home with his parents. It’s the reason they were allowed to “decline” to take him home. And why the school didn’t search him. Schools searched lockers and bags all the time when we were kids. All they needed was an anonymous tip.

NP. How, precisely, is a school administrator supposed to force a parent to take a child home if that parent declines. Please explain with precision how that works both legally and logistically.

Suspend him for the safety of the student body and if they leave without him, he’s trespassing. Call. The. Police.

Are you really this simple?

What bizarre fantasy world are you living in? This never happened, not even in whatever imaginary world you think used to exist.

Stick to reality, please.

There was a different power dynamic. The school had the power and authority. Principals in the 70s did not play. If the parents wouldn’t take the kid. They would have had them escorted from campus. The litigious nature of our society and changes in law have made is such that schools are wary about exercising authority in situations such as this which is what got us here. It is my hope that this will help bring more balance back to the schools and recognize that kids that aren’t troubled have rights and need protection and care as well.

x100000

EXACTLY THIS.

PP is either obtuse or one of those parents (who wants to see how much the other parents know).

Yes, and the parents of the difficult kids either scream IEP! (if they have one) or BULLYING! (if they don’t) to get their way and not admit wrong doing from their child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oxford High School has a full-time school resource officer, who is a sworn Oakland County sheriff's deputy. There was no need to "call the police," the resource officer literally has an office in the school, presumably mere feet from the principal's office where these meetings took place. The high school brass, for whatever reason, did not loop the deputy into any of this. That is pure negligence.

"Like many schools across the country, Oxford High School has a police officer assigned to patrol its halls and campus. On Tuesday, according to a law enforcement official, that deputy and a responding deputy disarmed and arrested a 15-year-old student."

https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2021/11/30/oxford-high-shooting-police-school-liaison-officer/8813723002/

Why wasn't this deputy looped into the documented violent psych issues of the kid, calls to the parents, and the two meetings with the kid and the other with his parents? The deputy was INTENTIONALLY not looped in and not included in the meetings. The district is so screwed in a civil suit.

For the record, one usually can not locate the resource officer. Not saying this is an excuse, just saying it is an issue.

And it is really, really, really, really difficult to remove a kid when you have aggressive parents who don't care right in front of you. The school was worried about a law suit, and I am sure these people threatened the school with a law suit more than once.

Nope. They usually have a radio and respond fairly quickly.

No it isn't "really really difficult" to call the police, if the resource officer doesn't answer, you call the police directly. Police come and handle it. They respond to lesser calls all the time. Having a student you are concerned about and has threatened the school, was asked to go home but won't, would be a call they absolutely would come out to immediately. The parents don't like it, too bad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Imagine waking up one morning and realizing as a couple you're facing 30 years in jail AND $1 million in property bonds for something you didn't even do. What a time to be a parent.

It’s exactly what needs to happen and I am, for once, proud that they will be made an example. If this serves as even a slight deterrence to other parents who allow their child access (whither intentional or not - blood is on their hands) that is a GREAT thing for this country. Shame them, and punish them to the fullest extent of the law. Zero sympathy.

Yep. Maybe the next set of parents will think twice before getting a gun for their antisocial idiot of a child.

Yup. We won't have another mother publishing books and going on speaking tours, making herself into a victim.

Did the mom of a shooter do this?

They’re talking about Sue Klebold, but they’re wrong.she donated the proceeds of her book and her speaking engagements. She DEFINITELY has not “made herself into a victim.” Instead she’s gone around the country and out herself out there for ill-informed ridicule and derision, telling her embarrassing and upsetting story over and over again and dedicating her life to school shooting and gun violence preve

I for one appreciated her book. It’s helpful to try and understand the events leading up. She didn’t profit from the book. I find her courageous to put her story out there, knowing she would most likely be vilified. Most important, she did NOT make excuses for anyone, including herself and her son.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, every rationale possible is being used by the PPs in this thread to excuse the gun owners and their kid (the shooter) passing the blame to anyone else.

Not true. I blame:

The kid
The parents (maybe even more than the kid)
The school admin (for not calling police/searching the bag/sending the kid home)
The laws for giving this kid more rights than his fellow students.

I can blame many things at once. An absolutely tragedy that could have been prevented so many ways.

Tell me what rights this kid has that other kids do not. Name one.

You can't because this kid has no more rights than anyone else.

This kid has no more rights than any other kid. You sound like one of those insane anti-public school LCPS haters nutjobs. You are ignorant and don't understand the laws related to education. BTW if you are the same poster blaming IDEA and FAPE, YOU ARE AN IDIOT. FAPE AND IDEA have nothing to do with what happened with this kid and would not stop the school from sending the kid home.

So much ignorance posted here.

The push for the rights of troubled kids absolutely are the reason this kid was not told to go home with his parents. It’s the reason they were allowed to “decline” to take him home. And why the school didn’t search him. Schools searched lockers and bags all the time when we were kids. All they needed was an anonymous tip.

NP. How, precisely, is a school administrator supposed to force a parent to take a child home if that parent declines. Please explain with precision how that works both legally and logistically.

They can’t anymore. But year ago, they had a lot more leeway to suspend a student, and search them.

+1 Also, many of the most troubled kids attended separate schools in years past. If parents really knew the documented backgrounds and behavioral history vlof some of the emotionally disturbed students walking around middle and high school campuses, they would be shocked.

So none of you can answer the basic question of how, in years past, administrators used to force parents to remove children from the school when the parents refused, yet you are all positive this used to happen regularly. Got it.

Because the aggressive, troubled parents with troubled kids have been at this for years, since the kid was little and "sweet" (LOL) - their goal is to keep their troubled kid in school, so they don't have to deal with him - at any (ANY) cost. That includes, but is not limited to, multiple loopholes, as more troubled kids are surfacing, there are more resources for parents like this. The school had no reason to believe they owned a gun, and the parents, who knew the exact situation, purposely did not offer that information. Do you think this was the first time for those parents in a principal's office?

Don't be so dim. Unless you have experienced this, you know nothing about the day to day.

I could tell you after hearing two words out of those parents' mouths- they likely had guns at home. If they were at all known to the school, which they obviously were, anyone with an ounce of sense would assume they would likely be gun owners.