Parent bought guns for suicidal teen who went on to become high school mass shooter

My dad gave me a .22 rifle when I was 10 and a shotgun when I was 12.

 

I know it's done all the time. My dad bought me a shotgun and a rifle, but he didn't let me keep it. I just got to use it for hunting and such. But the question was "what did they do wrong". So I posed the question of legally buying and giving a minor a firearm.

 

Rex, when a drunk driver wrecks and kills others, do you call for outlawing cars?

 

I don't know what the law says in his state or Louisiana but the real question, whether the gifts were legal to give or not, is how negligent are the parents for allowing unfettered access to firearms to a mentally depressed teenager who had express suicidal thoughts. Even if they didn't violate the law by giving their son guns their actions are criminally negligent.

 

Which of the people in my post do you equate to the drunk driver?

That question aside, let's take a further look at your analogy.

In the case of automobiles, we willfully sacrifice thousands of lives in crashes for the utility of transportation. I say "willfully" because given current technology and infrastructure those deaths are inevitable.

Likewise, in the case of ubiquitous gun ownership we willfully sacrifice thousands of lives to gun crimes for the utility of self-defense, hunting, sport, etc. Once again, those deaths are inevitable.

So, the only TRUE question in the gun control debate is whether the utility gained is worth the lives lost. Our society and economy would crash without widespread automobile use.... can the same be said without widespread gun ownership? In my view, other countries have satisfactorily answered that question.

 

That sentence contains an inherent contradiction and therefore makes no sense.

 

Go back to school and try to learn to comprehend what you read.

 

You're too dumb to realize the mistake you made, obviously.

If they violated no law then they can't be criminally negligent. Your sentence is incoherent. It makes no sense.

 

Sigh.... They might or might not have violated the law by the initial purchase and subsequent giving of the guns but by allowing their son whom the then knew to be suicidally depressed they are liable to be held in violation of a law governing their later actions. Both criminal and civil. They are certainly open to lawsuits by the victims. Capeche?

 

Eh... we have to travel though we don't have to shoot shit. But I see what you are saying. I would equate it more to a tool not an automobile which I guess is technically a tool. But, guns kill more people every day than weed has ever killed in the history of the world so..... there's my stupid comparison, and it's easier to get a gun than some pot. Odd part, smoke a lil pot you ain't shooting shit. Nah man I'm just gonna mellow on the couch and play some video games, you can go shoot guns.