dstieger wrote:Why haven't the killer's parents been arrested?
If anything, they've been 'praised' for issuing a 'thoughtful', sympathetic statement. I don't know if Texas has a specific law requiring gun owners to keep their guns locked away from children....but if not, then perhaps they should. Nothing about them says 'responsible gun owner' to me.
Aside from access to the guns, what about general parental responsibility. I ALWAYS assumed that I was responsible for the conduct of my minor children....I have no idea if there was a legal mandate, but that didn't matter. I get that by the time kids are 16, 17, it may not always be reasonable to 'control' their actions, but even still, the parents MUST, IMO, be responsible for the utter lack of moral sense (barring significant, medically verifiable mental illness.)
Parents as 'friends'...stigmas against 'discipline'... laziness....'nobody's feelings should ever be hurt'....all these things prevalent in today's American parenting are contributing factors that I don't hear anybody talking about.
Texas has Child Access Prevention Laws
and Texas has State Laws Based on Negligent Storage
also Texas has laws Imposing Criminal Liability for Allowing a Child to Gain Access to the
Firearm, Regardless of Whether the Child Uses the Firearm or Causes Injury
So with this being the case if the guns belonged to the parents then they should have been arrested unless the guns was kept in a non Negligent way and the child broke what ever safety devices was being used. If the parents did not have the guns locked up, Trigger safety locks ect then according to Texas state law the parents should be in jail. If this is the case and they are not jail then, this is another fine example of what laws we have not being enforced.
Now the " Parents as Friends" You are correct. It has now become to where in a lot of homes across the US being a friend to the child has become first with the parenting aspect taking a 5th or 6th position. At times my wife would get upset with me saying "You dont talk with him, go places with him, etc in other words being my sons "Friend." She hates it when I tell her I am his Father first, The friend part comes in very last and only if he becomes the type of person I want to be friends with. This means he has to act morally because I do not have friends I do not respect and that rule includes him! I think as most modern parents now a days, they confuse being a "Friend" with a siblings as "Love" which is a whole different thing.
Now as far as the parents being responsible for the utter lack of moral sense (barring significant, medically verifiable mental illness.) You are correct. As a parent this is also a major responsibility. To do any less would be abuse to the child IMHO. But again, this falls back on the "But I cant put him/her in a mental institution because I am their friend. Thus denying proper medical treatment which again is against the law because it is abuse when a minor is involved.
It is really odd, If you are the caretaker of an elderly person, deny them medical treatment one time, you will see laws enforced for elderly abuse in a blink of an eye. But yet you will not see it enforced as quickly for a teenage child. I wonder why this is?
Ok off my soap box. Who is next its all yours.