Sorry if I missed it, but what is the MI law about minors owning handguns?
I thought it pretty well established that students had reduced expectations of privacy on school grounds, such as warrants searches of lockers and even vehicles in parking lots.
Doesn’t seem to me to be an unwarranted (heh) stretch to consider there to have been sufficient cause for the school to search the backpack.
I just checked the student handbook of a nearby school district. They have very clear policy regarding search and seizure, and which does allow, given specific situations, an expedited search of belongings outside the presence of the student. Including the student’s car.
That’s not the same as outside their knowledge.
The parents should have opened the back pack as a demonstration of good faith.
Well, obviously, schools cannot expect all parents to demonstrate good faith - or to exercise good judgment.
While - as a general matter - parents ought not be held liable for their minor children’s acts - if a child that age is legally prohibited from owing the firearm, yet the parents allowed him to possess it or did not prevent his accessing it, IMO, it is pretty much a no-brainer that there ought to be some liability.
Will be interesting, as facts emerge, to hear more of the back story. Seems odd that the first incident of any concern was seeing him search ammo on his phone and a drawing this week…
I assume his preoccupation with video game gore was normal to all around him.
I don’t think that’s anything close to standard. In the 2015-2016 school year, 10.6% of high schools reported using random metal detector checks and 5.9% reported using daily metal detector checks. I suppose a few more than that might have one and use it so infrequently that they don’t report it, but that’s no less than 83% of high schools (and probably more) saying that they don’t use any kind of metal detector.
Absolutely correct.
Where are you getting that he was preoccupied with video game gore?
How do you distinguish between emotionally disturbed and a sincere interest in video gaming?
This isn’t about me.
You ensure that the kid does not have access to a firearm, then take as much time as necessary to give guidance and support.
From everything I’ve read, I think this is probably where I stand on this. Maybe a 90/10 mix, with the parents getting the lion’s share, but the school coming in for a share as well. Seems like all the warning signs were there, and if even some of the students knew or suspected something was going on the school should have as well. But the parents…well, IMHO and FWIW they should get the book thrown at them for doing something this stupid wrt giving a gun to a child who obviously had some serious mental issues and was giving off such signals.
This misses @Lord_Feldon’s point entirely. Everyone thinks the answer to your question is “one,” but
The point Feldon was making is that children appear to be safer from shootings at school than when they are not at school. This doesn’t mean something shouldn’t be done to make them safer still, but it does mean that if your goal is fewer children being shot, onerous, legally dubious and incredibly expensive security measures in a place where they are already safer than they are in many other places isn’t a logical place to start or to expend limited resources - that indeed they’d be safer if you just kept them at school longer.
This situation is analogous to examining car safety, observing that some people die despite being properly wearing their seat belts, and concluding that automobile safety is best addressed by having people wear five-point harnesses and crash helmets. That probably WOULD save a few lives but it’s not really a logical place to start; seat belt deficiencies aren’t remotely close to being the first, second, third or even tenth places to further reduce car crash fatalities.
Humans suck at mentally balancing risks, and the thing about school shootings is that they’re extremely graphic and emotionally horrifying in a way the drip-drip-drip of more common homicides and gun accidents are not. Unintentional shootings alone in 2021 have killed more than a hundred children so far just counting kids shot by other kids. Throwing in intentional homicide and kids accidentally shot by adults, well, Jesus. One or more kids are shot to death in the USA more days than not. Very, very few of them are in schools.
Well…I would rather it not be a “security-centric/punitive approach” but sometimes it has to be. As you noted, the parents in this case armed an angsty kid. Sometimes really bad decisions have legal consequences. This seems to be one and I am not sure parents like this will ever grasp their role as parents and the obligations that attach to that.
Yet, I think back to a friend I had who was one of six children. Five of the six kids were reasonably normal kids. One was a disaster area. The parents certainly seemed to treat all their kids the same(ish) but one went off the rails. Kids are independent people and, even with good guidance, can do stupid things. If that one kid went nuts at school and harmed people should I hold those parents responsible? I’d be less likely to want to.
And yeah, I see the inconsistency above. I’m not even sure I have a point here beyond noting this is not an easy problem. The only obvious solution is restricting access to guns.
I think the difference is that people feel like they can do everyone “right” and still have their kid shot in school. When we hear about kids getting shot in their home or in a “rough neighborhood”, we may think it’s bad, but not relevant to us.
Basically, people care a lot more about the 40 kids that could have been theirs than the 2300 that probably wouldn’t have been.
What media outlet is putting this spin on the story?
Preoccupation according to who?
Are you suggesting video games were the problem?
From the letter from the school superintendent outlining what happened:
The student was immediately removed from the classroom and brought to the guidance counselor’s office where he claimed the drawing was part of a video game he was designing andinformed counselors that he planned to pursue video game design as a career.
But I can’t find anything supporting a narrative that this was anything more than an improvised excuse, that it was a genuine established ambition that was known and supported by the parents.