• Buelldozer@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    9 months ago

    As a 2A Advocate / Gun Guy all I can say is GOOD. Parents who do this deserve to held legally responsible.

      • acceptable_pumpkin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        9 months ago

        If a minor gets a gun and does something illegal, including killing themselves, the parents should 100% be charged. There is no scenario where it would be ok for a minor to get access to a gun without supervision and approval by their parents.

        • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          Not sure how I feel about that one. 1. I believe suicide/assisted suicide shouldnt be 100% illegal. 2. I would have to say that a kid who slits their wrists or overdoses would have to see the same charges there. Someone wanting to kill themselves always has the means. Run at a cop with a knife, happened earlier today. Step in front of a truck, off a bridge, down all the pills in the medicine cabinet. If I had done any of those when I was a teen, I don’t think my parents should be charged with it. I think due to it having an effect on another person’s life is where it comes in.

          Not knowing exactly what your child is going through and how much it is effecting them I would say all parents are guilty of. It is near impossible. Negligence might be a charge in some way, but charging them with manslaughter is a lot

          • PoliticalAgitator@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            I believe suicide/assisted suicide shouldnt be 100% illegal.

            Not what assisted suicide is. People seeking assisted suicide have terminal illnesses and want to die with as much dignity and as little trauma as possible.

            “They can just blow their brains out in the bedroom with a cool gun” isn’t a solution, it’s the pro-gun crowd trying to pretend they’re actually deeply compassionate people for advocating dogshit gun laws.

            I would have to say that a kid who slits their wrists or overdoses would have to see the same charges there. Someone wanting to kill themselves always has the means.

            Not how suicide works. Means reduction has been repeatedly shown to be an effective method of suicide prevention.

            But it doesn’t stop there. Only 1 in 10 people who survive a suicide attempt will go on to die by suicide but functionally nobody survives an attempt with a gun.

            And of course, what’s currently the suicide method of choice for radicalized teenagers? Grabbing a poorly secured gun and killing as many people with it as you can before the police shoot you in the head or you get bored and blow your brains out.

            But I guess if we didn’t supply them with semi-automatic weapons, they’d just go out and do a mass hanging or mass wrist slitting instead.

          • acceptable_pumpkin@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            My point is that the guns should be secured in such a way that even if the kid wanted to kill themselves, the gun is not an option. It’s locked away.

        • Buelldozer@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          If a minor gets a gun and does something illegal, including killing themselves, the parents should 100% be charged.

          Sounds good on paper but that’s going to a lead to a LOT of parents in prison when their minor child gets involved with gang activity. I understand your sentiment but the idea doesn’t have enough nuance to be practical.

          • acceptable_pumpkin@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            9 months ago

            That is a good point, but it should still be on the parents to secure the guns. If you own a gun, it’s on you to also buy whatever you need to keep that gun locked up and safe.

            • Buelldozer@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              So I’m curious, what are you charging the parents with in this case or this one or this one.

              You gonna send that second kids mom to jail because her Son stole a gun and killed his father? Do you envision her prison sentence happening during or after she heals up from her own gunshot wounds?

              I’m not trying to be jerk here, I’m trying to expose the need for nuance in these kinds of discussion. Not everything is as simple as “Lock 'em Up!”.

              • acceptable_pumpkin@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                9 months ago

                I looked through each of your examples and, unless I missed something, none of those cases involved a minor getting the parents insecure gun. First one was a theft from a gun store, the second doesn’t state any details on where the gun came from, and the last one was a gun stolen from police.

                My comments re: parents being responsible is for cases that the parents’ gun is taken by the minor and used in a crime, not any gun crime committed by a minor.

                Again, if I missed something, please let me know.

      • Buelldozer@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Why did you gender that?

        In answer to your question I’ll say “It would depend on the circumstances.” A weapon retrieved from a nightstand, or a mothers purse, and used by a small child to kill themselves is a very different situation than a teen who accesses a gun safe without permission.

        • laverabe@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Honestly pepper spray and bear spray are 100x more effective than a gun in most situations. The intent is usually to disable not to kill, and pepper spray eliminates a need to have any serious hesitation. That 0.5 second hesitation about whether to take a life with a gun could mean life or death in a defense scenario.

        • PoliticalAgitator@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          9 months ago

          Why did you gender that?

          Why did it upset you?

          A weapon retrieved from a nightstand, or a mothers purse, and used by a small child to kill themselves is a very different situation than a teen who accesses a gun safe without permission.

          Both are a failure to prevent a child from accessing a firearm.

          • Buelldozer@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            Why did it upset you?

            Because it’s unnecessary.

            This and this are both failures; gendering the failing parent simply isn’t required.

            Both are a failure to prevent a child from accessing a firearm.

            Yes but they are only similar in the broadest sense; a child grabbing a loaded gun out of Mom’s Purse or Dad’s Nightstand are very different scenarios from a teen who destructively opens a gun safe or steals the key to it.

            Safe storage for firearms is desirable but requiring the prosecution of those who made a good faith effort and failed is not.

            • PoliticalAgitator@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              Because it’s unnecessary.

              Damn well wait until you find out how many gun deaths are unnecessary.

              Safe storage for firearms is desirable but requiring the prosecution of those who made a good faith effort and failed is not.

              Then that prosecution can determine if a good faith effort was made or if the parents were negligent with the storage of their firearms, rather than the usual pro-gun stance of “every solution must be 100% effective (except ours) while never even mildly inconveniencing us and if you try and make it actually happen we’ll kill you”.