Jump to content

Mikey4

Burnt Ends
  • Posts

    1380
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Mikey4

  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.
  15. Yeah, we're basically saying the same thing. I might quibble over whether the act of giving a child a firearm is always categorically negligence (if that's what you're saying), but it would certainly be negligence in the vast majority of cases. (Say the family has a ranch and the 17-year-old, Eagle Scout son helps with the sheep, including using the 22 to shoot wild dogs that try to get through the fence. I'm not sure giving him access to that gun with those facts would be negligence, but I see the arguments both ways.)
  16. Why wouldn't that same logic -- secure your shit, do a better job parenting, pay attention to your kid -- make parents strictly liable for every crime a kid commits? Your kid steals the car, road rages, and hits someone? "Do a better job securing your car, do a better job parenting/paying attention to your kid."
  17. That's a distinction, but it's not a very principled one. A gun is not inherently more dangerous than those items, and guns have lots of uses other than killing people. I suspect that some very high percentage (99%+) of gun uses do NOT involve killing people but are instead focused on sport or hunting. A similar percentage of gun owners never use a gun to kill. I'm not sure why we would make parents strictly liable for a child's crime when the child uses a gun, but not when a child uses some other weapon.
  18. I was responding to a post that reads: My basic point is that a parent should not be strictly liable for a child's crimes. At a minimum, parental liability should require proof that the parent failed to use ordinary or reasonable care. So giving a gun to a mentally disturbed kid who then uses it to murder someone? That's grounds for criminal liability of the parent. Just having a sharp knife in the kitchen? Nah, nothing out of the ordinary there. Everyone seems to agree on those points. Here's where I see disagreement: What about owning a gun that is unloaded and locked, but unbeknownst to you, your child -- with no warning signs -- walks to the hardware store, buys a bolt cutter, finds the gun, breaks the lock, finds the ammo, and kills someone? I don't see how that's a basis for parental liability. The parent stored the gun unloaded and locked and had no reason to suspect the child would do those things.
  19. I allow my kids access to all sorts of dangerous instruments. I leave my car keys lying around. We have a drawer full of sharp knives. They know where to find matches and lighter fluid. The chainsaw is in the shed. Don't get me started on poisonous household chemicals. Should parents be responsible any time a child uses the parent's property to murder someone? Or is there something special about guns?
  20. The issue should be whether the parents/dad was negligent, not whether he bought the kid a gun. I have purchased guns for my minor children. The guns are unloaded, cable locked, and in my sole custody unless we are going to the range, in which case they remain locked until we get in a lane and I hand out keys. That's responsible gun ownership. But buying a gun and handing it over to a kid, especially one with mental health problems, is negligence. There's a difference.
  21. I can understand how a drunk on Rainey could wander into the brush to pee and fall in the water. Not saying that's what was happening, but it's one logical explanation. But the Utah guy in the video says they were at bars on 6th. That's at least a 6 block hike to the water, maybe longer (if he went east/west as well). How and why does an out of town guy get from 6th to town lake and fall in?
  22. I gotta admit, I was skeptical from the description, but that app is pretty fucking cool. I immediately saw a bunch of stuff I want to read from all over the web. It's like it pulls the most interesting stuff and puts it all in one place.
×
×
  • Create New...