Will Charging Parents for Children's Gun Violence Make An Impact?
Oct 20, 2023, 09:00 PM
Share
Subscribe
How responsible are parents for the actions of their children? A recent discussion on the podcast "Hidden Killers" delved deep into this question, pondering over the implications of the increasing number of child shooters in America and the growing trend of prosecuting parents for their child’s crimes.
Tony Brueski, the host of the podcast, highlighted a recent high-profile case in Michigan. James and Jennifer Crumbley were charged and are now set to stand trial for their alleged role in an incident involving their son. Their child had acquired a firearm, a gift from the parents, which he later used in a tragic school shooting.
“I’m kind of surprised that it’s taken all these years for this to really kind of get into the spotlight or someone to make this attempt," said Brueski. He then asked about the potential implications and changes these precedents might set in future accountability.
Eric Faddis, former Felony Prosecutor and attorney, pointed out the growing desperation in society and amongst prosecutors to find solutions for the rise in school shootings. He said, "Society and prosecutors and everybody are trying to look for solutions to try and prevent this... we still have this problem."
Faddis cautioned about the potential missteps: "Sometimes the best intentions zealots get into... sticky situations and take measures that aren't beneficial for the rest of society." The key question remains: where does one draw the line in holding parents accountable?
A significant point raised in the discussion was about the parents’ knowledge and their complicity. Brueski said, "We're talking about parents who knew their child had mental health problems but then still willingly went out and got him an automatic weapon."
On the emerging trend of prosecuting parents, Faddis emphasized the necessity of finding a "material involvement and some sort of causal link." He noted that while these terms might be ambiguous, they serve as a guide to determine responsibility and potential prosecution.
The discussion also touched on the disparity in charges brought against parents. For instance, while the Crumbleys face serious charges, another case saw a mother charged with only a second-degree misdemeanor after her 11-year-old child accessed a firearm from her car, subsequently firing it at a football field.
Brueski remarked on the inconsistency: "That's not even hand administration of justice... perhaps it is on our legislatures to respond."
The conversation then veered toward the real impact of such legal actions. Would penalizing parents change their behavior, especially in homes where firearms are present? Faddis was skeptical about the law's proactive effect, saying, "The law is pretty reactive and it's not necessarily effective at deterring future behavior."
The broader societal issue is complex, with no one-size-fits-all solution. However, as Faddis concluded, it might be time for a comprehensive legislative solution that involves changes in the law, additional resources, education, and possibly a mental health component.
The conversation between Brueski and Faddis sheds light on the intricate web of parental responsibility, the role of the legal system, and the broader societal implications of children’s actions. As we grapple with these challenging issues, one question looms large: Can holding parents legally responsible serve as a deterrent, or does the solution require a deeper societal introspection?
Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj
Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com
The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK’s Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com
Tony Brueski, the host of the podcast, highlighted a recent high-profile case in Michigan. James and Jennifer Crumbley were charged and are now set to stand trial for their alleged role in an incident involving their son. Their child had acquired a firearm, a gift from the parents, which he later used in a tragic school shooting.
“I’m kind of surprised that it’s taken all these years for this to really kind of get into the spotlight or someone to make this attempt," said Brueski. He then asked about the potential implications and changes these precedents might set in future accountability.
Eric Faddis, former Felony Prosecutor and attorney, pointed out the growing desperation in society and amongst prosecutors to find solutions for the rise in school shootings. He said, "Society and prosecutors and everybody are trying to look for solutions to try and prevent this... we still have this problem."
Faddis cautioned about the potential missteps: "Sometimes the best intentions zealots get into... sticky situations and take measures that aren't beneficial for the rest of society." The key question remains: where does one draw the line in holding parents accountable?
A significant point raised in the discussion was about the parents’ knowledge and their complicity. Brueski said, "We're talking about parents who knew their child had mental health problems but then still willingly went out and got him an automatic weapon."
On the emerging trend of prosecuting parents, Faddis emphasized the necessity of finding a "material involvement and some sort of causal link." He noted that while these terms might be ambiguous, they serve as a guide to determine responsibility and potential prosecution.
The discussion also touched on the disparity in charges brought against parents. For instance, while the Crumbleys face serious charges, another case saw a mother charged with only a second-degree misdemeanor after her 11-year-old child accessed a firearm from her car, subsequently firing it at a football field.
Brueski remarked on the inconsistency: "That's not even hand administration of justice... perhaps it is on our legislatures to respond."
The conversation then veered toward the real impact of such legal actions. Would penalizing parents change their behavior, especially in homes where firearms are present? Faddis was skeptical about the law's proactive effect, saying, "The law is pretty reactive and it's not necessarily effective at deterring future behavior."
The broader societal issue is complex, with no one-size-fits-all solution. However, as Faddis concluded, it might be time for a comprehensive legislative solution that involves changes in the law, additional resources, education, and possibly a mental health component.
The conversation between Brueski and Faddis sheds light on the intricate web of parental responsibility, the role of the legal system, and the broader societal implications of children’s actions. As we grapple with these challenging issues, one question looms large: Can holding parents legally responsible serve as a deterrent, or does the solution require a deeper societal introspection?
Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj
Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com
The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK’s Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com