I am just curious on your alls opinion on the father being charged with murder? Isn’t what he did AT WORST accessory or something? I guess they will say he clearly knew and provided the gun intending the murders occur. I guess I am just curious why he’s charged with murder when the 14 year old is the one who committed murder. Is there actual precedent for this or are they warping the law the fit their agenda? What is next, you loan out a car to someone and they run a crowd over now your a murderer? LOL!
Edit: my main concern in all of this is just the dangerous legal precedent. Who decided the gun was bought for the kid, why did the FBI not do anything, etc
It appears that AFTER they were visited by the FBI regarding the boys online threats, the father bought the boy an AR. No details on if it was locked away, but the fact that the kid used it suggests it was not. The father should have known his kid was wacko as normal kids don’t get visits from law enforcement regarding online threats...
I agree but what if the dad bought the AR for himself and had it secured? A kid could easily get it. The difference is the dad may have committed ZERO crimes (I think the dad is stupid mind you. But not automatically a murderer) too bad the FBI did absolutely nothing if it was an illegal act committed by the kid. And if they didn’t do anything, clearly the threats were not deemed authentic or illegal no?
It could not have been secured if the boy had access to it unless there is a hole cut in dad’s safe. A trigger lock or some other sissy cable lock toy is NOT secured.