calodo2003
Flaming Full Member
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
The glue gun of Freedumb!Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
It’ll be interesting to see if they choose to hear this before any of the Trump ballot lawsuits.SCOTUS will put paid to it.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I'm quite conflicted on this. A lot of people at the school and local authority level are likely able to escape responsibility by supporting the parents to take the fall. Her attorney was also horrendous.
The genesis of the tragedy was when the parents got the kid the gun (& poorly secured it). The rest is a bit superfluous imo.I'm quite conflicted on this. A lot of people at the school and local authority level are likely able to escape responsibility by supporting the parents to take the fall.
There was some gross negligence on the part of school admin and local law enforcement though when you really read into the case. The prosecutor made some deals with people to get to this point. I'm not disagreeing the parents bear a significant responsibility but allowing others who could have helped prevent his to dance off into the distance isn't the feel good result it may appear to be imho.The genesis of the tragedy was when the parents got the kid the gun. The rest is a bit superfluous imo.
She should receive the max penalty allowable by law.As much as I would like to get all the guns banned or heavily restricted, I think is not fair if she receive a harsh punishment. He was 15-16. Another thing would be the mother of the 6 years old. Leaving guns around to the point the 6 years old picks it up
But though a parent sure share responsibility on a 15-16 years old actions, shouldn't be that harsh IMO
We have different opinions, yesShe should receive the max penalty allowable by law.
Not if you provided them with the means to do it when they would otherwise have not been able to acquire said means themselves.Seems like a stretch to me to convict someone of involuntary manslaughter for the actions of another person, who themselves is culpable for the crime.
So if they bought him a car, were teaching him to drive, they took the keys away, but he stole them and he decided to run people over would they be criminally culpable?Not if you provided them with the means to do it when they would otherwise have not been able to acquire said means themselves.
No no, not the car analogy again.So if they bought him a car, were teaching him to drive, they took the keys away, but he stole them and he decided to run people over would they be criminally culpable?
I actually don't know what the gun laws are like in Michigan but in some states minors are allowed guns under adult supervision. From the bits I saw of the trial they were taking him to the gun range with it.No no, not the car analogy again.
Logic is a bit wonky. If it's his car he cannot steal it. But anyway car and gun comparisons are never as good as folks think they are.So if they bought him a car, were teaching him to drive, they took the keys away, but he stole them and he decided to run people over would they be criminally culpable?
Typically this means allowed to use (possess) guns under adult supervision when engaged in legal activities (i.e. hunting or target shooting).I actually don't know what the gun laws are like in Michigan but in some states minors are allowed guns under adult supervision. From the bits I saw of the trial they were taking him to the gun range with it.
I'm actually not a 2A person, but you have to live in the reality of that in the US
Prosecutors are far scummier than defence lawyers these days.I appreciate what he's saying, even if he is a scummy criminal defense attorney but firearms require a higher standard of care so in this instance the outcome is correct as firearms are inherently likely to cause serious harm or death when used. They bought him the gun and taught him how to use it. They have some culpability for what happened next.
Having been in court as both a juror and a witness I'm going to have to disagree, but being Canadian may skew that perspective.Prosecutors are far scummier than defence lawyers these days.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Works for me. SCOTUS has been making shit up to justify their agenda the last few years, might as well do some good with that mentality. It will be reversed in about 2 minutes mind you, but I'll take it.Hawaii court says 'spirit of Aloha' supersedes Constitution, Second Amandment
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ha...-supersedes-constitution-second-amendment.amp
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I think you need to explain yourself with that bizarre statement.Prosecutors are far scummier than defence lawyers these days.
I've watched a lot of US trials in the post COVID years, mainly in Wisconsin and Florida as they have been a lot more open with cameras in court and in my experience prosecutors have been more likely to bend or break rules or cover up etc.I think you need to explain yourself with that bizarre statement.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date