Jump to content

Mikey4

Burnt Ends
  • Posts

    1380
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

2271 Surly 10%

About Mikey4

Recent Profile Visitors

2708 profile views
  1. Or, how about we don't call a woman a cunt on any board. Jesus Christ.
  2. As a white male, I'm fine with this. When AI becomes sentient in 5 years and sets out to destroy humanity, I will be happy it thinks I don't exist.
  3. Lol, someone solves the deepest riddles of physics, and chooses Surlyhorns.com as the place to announce his findings, and you want to run him out of town. Smh.
  4. Finished Green Mile. I liked it, though it took way too long to get into the story. Started Salems Lot over the weekend. Enjoying it so far.
  5. They're an utter embarrassment to the state is what they are.
  6. It depends on the kind of bar. The kind with alcohol should be off limits to minors. But kids should have access to crowbars for gang brawls and the like.
  7. I'm fine with that. 100% agree. The bar should be very high. But there should be a bar.
  8. The parent has a constitutional right to own a gun. If the law makes a parent strictly liable when a child uses the parent's gun in a crime, then by definition the parent is liable even if the parent is without fault. In other words, the parent is liable even though the only relevant parental conduct is owning the gun -- the very thing that the Second Amendment protects.
  9. Yeah, that's exactly it. I'm uncomfortable making a categorical rule rather than evaluating each case on its facts...even though I know that evaluating each case on its facts would lead to liability in virtually every case. Your approach is more practical and efficient, while mine leaves room for parents to escape liability in exceptional cases 🤷‍♂️
  10. Yeah, if you read upthread, nobody is defending these dipshit parents, but people have differing views about why they should be criminally liable, and that's where the thread has gone.
  11. Agreed, that's negligence though, not strict liability.
  12. Gun violence is certainly a big problem. I guess I would understand a pragmatic policy that treats gun crimes differently due to the societal harms they cause. I disagree with it, as I think it would be used to punish parents for doing nothing more than exercising a constitutional right, but I see where you're coming from.
  13. But even under 9, you're not really proposing strict liability. I think you're saying that the act of giving a gun to the child would be negligence, and I'm basically fine with that proposal.
  14. Holy shit dude, read the thread. Yes, these parents are cooked. I've never defended them. I'm responding to claims that a parent should ALWAYS be criminally liable for a child's crimes if the child uses the parent's gun in the crime.
×
×
  • Create New...