Michigan School Shooting. Hope No AR15 or 10+ Mags Were Involved

[bbbass]

ummmm? I've got a drawer of cable locks if the need one (well, probably not any more). LNIB

Hey, you're not planning to suicide are you? Better get those cable locks on!!!! LOLZ

 

[bkroger86]

Not to quibble, but IMHO, a $500 safe isn't going to get you very far against thieves and fires.
Start at around $2,000-$3,000 for the going rate for bottom-line security and fire protection.
And before anyone reignites the Safe Flame Wars, I did state that this was my opinion only, having bought more than a few safes over the years...

But I concur; as much as I ABHOR the .gov getting into my home and personal affairs, get a safe, people...

An uncrackable consumer safe doesn't exist. They are deterrents. People want to smash and grab, or do something in the heat of the moment. You slow them down by 10 mins, 30 mins, an hour, or you require them to use substantial tools and force to break in (they might not be knowledgeable or strong enough, or they might make too much noise) and they reconsider. Or the heat of the moment passes and they rethink things.

Do I think a $500 safe would have kept a scraggly 15 year old from getting a handgun without his parents knowledge? Yes, I do.

 

[ma96782]

I was just thinking about those Govt Approved Lists.

Rrrrrright.......someone makes a lot of money off of those lists.

Fake n95 masks on amazon, how to spot 3m fraud made from china

Even as public health officials urge us to improve our mask game, fakes and little-known brands continue. Here is what you can do.

www.mebere.com

MSN

Then think.....
What about that "spec. steel" used in the construction of your safe?
OMG!
More like a license/list to steal.
Is that another pun?



Aloha, Mark

PS.........does it make you/leave you to wonder about your safety glasses and hearing protection? Yeah.....those numbers on the package. Maybe FAKE, Fake, fake....

Anyone get caught?

Widespread fake N95 mask scam under investigation

Counterfeit N95 masks have reportedly been sold to health care workers.

thehill.com

 

[bkroger86]

Hey, you're not planning to suicide are you? Better get those cable locks on!!!! LOLZ

No, but I just read on the news all three Crumbleys are in isolation on suicide watch.

 

[titsonritz]

ummmm? I've got a drawer of cable locks if the need one (well, probably not any more). LNIB

I throw all mine in the garbage because...well they ARE garbage.

 

[RVTECH]

Question - how is everybody with charging the parents ?

Is the general consensus it was justified and the right thing to do - AND that (from a news article):

Charging James and Jennifer Crumbly in this case serves as a wake-up call to parents and other gun owners that they need to be more responsible when it comes to safeguarding their weapons.

Just wanting forum member opinions as I am getting 'mixed messages' from people I talk to, and stories I read.

 

[awshoot]

Question - how is everybody with charging the parents ?

Is the general consensus it was justified and the right thing to do - AND that (from a news article):

Charging James and Jennifer Crumbly in this case serves as a wake-up call to parents and other gun owners that they need to be more responsible when it comes to safeguarding their weapons.

Just wanting forum member opinions as I am getting 'mixed messages' from people I talks to, and stories I read.

Against. Charging the parents is an Anti's wet dream.

 

[awshoot]

Here's why I favor lists of approved items. I do not think such laws should exist and I totally recognize the costs both to makers and consumers. In a perfect world, we would not need a list because the crime would be pinned on the doer. I however, live in the real world, one where a woke prosecutor could say "hmmm, that lock Ruger included with that blackhawk does not meet our [arbitrary undefined] standards, your gun got stolen and used in an armed robbery, I'm going to put you through a trial now." $100k later I either "win" or I go to prison and lose everything. No matter what perfect utopia I wish existed, this is the cold dead fact of the world I do live in.

With a list I can look up my locks/boxes/safes and if they're on there and my gun gets stolen, I'm home free. I'm not financially gutted. I'm not utterly destroyed.

Never let utopian dreams interfere with getting the best deal you can get in the real world -- a world that is full of Bingers looking to bubblegum you up because they hate you. Against those people, you need as bright a line rule as you can get.

 

[ilikegunspdx]

.

Question - how is everybody with charging the parents ?

Is the general consensus it was justified and the right thing to do - AND that (from a news article):

Charging James and Jennifer Crumbly in this case serves as a wake-up call to parents and other gun owners that they need to be more responsible when it comes to safeguarding their weapons.

Just wanting forum member opinions as I am getting 'mixed messages' from people I talk to, and stories I read.

I have to say I agree with prosecutor's statement "owning a gun is a right, but gun owners must be responsible" (not an exact quote, from first minute or so of her press conference).

Now how that translates to the parents I'm unsure. I think the justice system will sort it out, like it did with Rittenhouse. Fwiw I don't think the prosecutor is going on any sort of anti-gun crusade, she sounds genuine to me in trying to bring about justice.

I'm also unsure about the whole setting a precedent thing. If it does seek to set a precedent then I'm against it, just like I'm against the ridiculous attempts to hold gun manufacturers responsible. May as well hold Ford responsible for that psycho who mowed down kids ina parade, that kind of bs is ridiculous imo.

 

[bkroger86]

Question - how is everybody with charging the parents ?

Is the general consensus it was justified and the right thing to do - AND that (from a news article):

Charging James and Jennifer Crumbly in this case serves as a wake-up call to parents and other gun owners that they need to be more responsible when it comes to safeguarding their weapons.

Just wanting forum member opinions as I am getting 'mixed messages' from people I talk to, and stories I read.

I get the feeling like a lot of small town gun-owning Michiganders are pissed the parents bought a Sig for their psycho kid and did nothing about it after multiple red flags, and now their sons and daughters are paying the price.

Not sure what I'd do if it was my son or daughter in a casket right now.

 

[bbbass]

No, but I just read on the news all three Crumbleys are in isolation on suicide watch.

Better get them some cable locks in their cells. I heard @Lazyfaire has some spares...

 

[bbbass]

With the info I currently have, I'm against charging the parents.

And I don't think the prosecutor can make the charges stick.

But that may change as more info comes out.

 

[awshoot]

...
I'm also unsure about the whole setting a precedent thing. If it does seek to set a precedent then I'm against it, just like I'm against the ridiculous attempts to hold gun manufacturers responsible. May as well hold Ford responsible for that psycho who mowed down kids ina parade, that kind of bs is ridiculous imo.

"Precedent" is the case law made by higher courts on appeal. The decision out of a trial court is not precedent. That said, if they are convicted, there absolutely will be an appeal due to the legislative history of safe storage acts in MI (i.e., the rejection of proposed laws on this topic). This is an obvious legal hook where it will be argued that a conviction in the absence of law forbidding the conduct is abhorrent to justice (seriously, think about how dangerous the world will become if prosecutors can lock you up not because you broke a law, but because they don't like your lawful behavior).

It is almost impossible for this prosecution to not face appellate scrutiny with the obvious legal issue and so if a conviction results, this case will absolutely become true precedent in MI after the appeals are done.

The old saw: "Bad facts make bad law" is one we can so easily ignore out of disgust toward the bad facts, but the bad laws? We live with those and the unintended consequences forever.

 

[CRBMoA]

.................................................................(seriously, think about how dangerous the world will become if prosecutors can lock you up not because you broke a law, but because they don't like your lawful behavior).
...................................................................

I live in Oregon - That is my reality.

 

[awshoot]

I live in Oregon - That is my reality.

So let me edit that my quote:

seriously, think about how dangerous the world will become if prosecutors can let you go when you break the law, merely because they approve of your unlawful behavior.

Put that together with the first formulation and you basically get distributed totalitarianism where every woke bastard gets to decide on the spot what is and is not punishable and there's no place you can look for a guide to stay out of trouble. It's just arbitrary state violence. Some have also called this state of affairs "anarcho-tyranny". Not good.

 

[ma96782]

Simple. IMHO.....
Thou shall not steal.
Thou shall not commit murder.

Placing more laws in place to punish more people beyond the actual person pulling the trigger just confuses the issue.

Or perhaps.....
It's just in an effort to make more lawyers and law corporations RICH/RICHER.

Civil lawsuits?

Really. Anyone can get sued for almost anything.

Note : The law is in place. Yet.....really?

Nevada Supreme Court rules gunmakers not responsible for 2017 Las Vegas shooting

The Nevada Supreme Court ruled Thursday that gunmakers are not responsible for the 2017 mass shooting in Las Vegas because the companies have immunity, citing a state law shielding manufacturers fr…

thehill.com

BUT, But, but.....some will still try.

Yeah. Maybe, it's about trying to get some, "settlement money"?

That's the REALITY too.

So, maybe if......
Our society was to operate on a policy of LOSER PAYS for all the costs involved? That would/might cut down on those "frivolous" lawsuits. Hummmmm.....BUT.....why do you suppose we don't have that?



Rrrrright.....
No lawmaker (most of them are lawyers) wants to hinder the money-making abilities of their fellow lawyers. And, they might just have to go back to being a lawyer should their next re-election fail.

Aloha, Mark

 

[User 1234]

Parents of Oxford school shooting suspect Ethan Crumbley charged with involuntary manslaughter

Their son is already being held without bail on murder and terrorism charges over Tuesday’s Oxford High School rampage that left four dead and seven injured.

nypost.com

If the facts described in this article turn out to be true at trial, then the parents should be thrown in prison.

 

[bbbass]

Parents of Oxford school shooting suspect Ethan Crumbley charged with involuntary manslaughter

Their son is already being held without bail on murder and terrorism charges over Tuesday’s Oxford High School rampage that left four dead and seven injured.

nypost.com

If the facts described in this article turn out to be true at trial, then the parents should be thrown in prison.

Which facts?

I'm having an issue with the logic the prosecutor is using to charge the parents.

And if the parents are responsible because they didn't remove their kid from school that day, then shouldn't the school officials be doubly held responsible, since they let him go back to class, they didn't check his backpack, and they didn't send him immediately to a shrink. Let's arrest and charge the school officials.

(ETA: plus I have a whole big problem with parents being held criminally responsible for the act of another.)

 

[bkroger86]

And I don't think the prosecutor can make the charges stick.

Prosecutor has a 100% conviction rate: https://mcdonaldforprosecutor.com/about/

Parents are being represented by the lawyer who defended Larry Nassar, the child molester currently serving a 235 year prison sentence (aka life without parole): https://www.newsweek.com/who-shanno...-reps-alleged-oxford-shooters-parents-1655983

 

[Soli]

Question - how is everybody with charging the parents ?

I'm torn.

Bad cases make bad laws is perfect.

Legislation (law) was never meant to handle every single human interaction. Yet here we are, not just this but "society's" attitude towards people getting along. Or not. "Is it illegal?" "I'll sue!" "They can't prove it." "Kind of a loophole, so I did it." "There should be a law about __________." "Yeah it's the law, but it's a bad law." On and on.

I think there's too much law, that it has become too integral to how people think all the time, and it has crippled people knowing how to be in society.

On the tragic bubblegumshow that is the question, I'm torn.