We Canadians shake our heads in disbelief, too

J

JBR

Well-known Member
Location
Southern Canada mtn. valley, tad west of Rockies
We see in the news that, in America, parents have lately been held legally responsible for not precluding kids access to pistols or even assault rifles. Occasionally, a parent has even provided the weapon and ammunition. Their distraught, foolhardy kids sometimes then go somewhere and kill and injure a group of people

Seems like irresponsibility? It does to me. Are there reasonable bounds to permissiveness?

Today’s news. I learned about a case in my province involving a teenager in court with a conviction and the sentence announced today. A 16-year-old learner-license driver was arrested last July for driving with passengers (not licensed to do so) at excessive speed, then attempting to evade the pursuant highway patrol, exiting the freeway and ignoring a stop stop sign — at speeds up to 180km/hr (112 mph). The driver was in his step mother’s car. He’s been presented with a $1800 fine and a 12-month driving ban.

From what I’ve gathered, step-mum will not bear any of the legal brunt, but she’s reportedly reaped the costs related to the kid slamming her BMW into a parked heavy-duty truck at the abrupt end of the joyride. I don’t know if that s simply a steep increase in her auto insurance rate.

The police are, of course, recommending that parents have serious “talks” counseling their kids about responsibility.

I realize it was a quirky mental leap on my part to immediately think back to something that happened maybe 20 yeas ago, an incident that still strikes me as even more devastating to a parent. An Ontario couple stupidly endangered their daughter. The dad was a noted professional drag-strip racing figure, and the daughter shared her desire to one day be a racing driver. Somewhere along the way, the parents allowed her, at 17, to drive a jet-engine dragster. On a drag strip, in a solo (non-competitive) test run, she drove it to a speed of around 300 mph, and after she’d released the drag-chute to slow toward a cruising speed, a wind caught the vehicle and tossed it against a retaining wall. And that ended her life.

Well, at least the girl didn’t kill anyone else.:rolleyes::cautious:
 
I don't consider the drag racing incident bad parenting myself. Since the father was a professional drag racer I would guess he had enough knowledge to determine if it was safe enough for his daughter to attempt it. She may have already shown herself to be a competent driver in other situations. That one sounds like just bad luck to me.

My wife's father was a race car driver and taught her to drive well on tracks riding with her to make sure she could handle the car correctly. An opportunity to run his car around a professional race track at full speed presented itself and she took it and was able to go around the track without incident hitting 160 mph back in the 1970's.
 
JBR said:
We see in the news that, in America, parents have lately been held legally responsible for not precluding kids access to pistols or even assault rifles. Occasionally, a parent has even provided the weapon and ammunition. Their distraught, foolhardy kids sometimes then go somewhere and kill and injure a group of people

Seems like irresponsibility? It does to me. Are there reasonable bounds to permissiveness?

Today’s news. I learned about a case in my province involving a teenager in court with a conviction and the sentence announced today. A 16-year-old learner-license driver was arrested last July for driving with passengers (not licensed to do so) at excessive speed, then attempting to evade the pursuant highway patrol, exiting the freeway and ignoring a stop stop sign — at speeds up to 180km/hr (112 mph). The driver was in his step mother’s car. He’s been presented with a $1800 fine and a 12-month driving ban.

From what I’ve gathered, step-mum will not bear any of the legal brunt, but she’s reportedly reaped the costs related to the kid slamming her BMW into a parked heavy-duty truck at the abrupt end of the joyride. I don’t know if that s simply a steep increase in her auto insurance rate.

The police are, of course, recommending that parents have serious “talks” counseling their kids about responsibility.

I realize it was a quirky mental leap on my part to immediately think back to something that happened maybe 20 yeas ago, an incident that still strikes me as even more devastating to a parent. An Ontario couple stupidly endangered their daughter. The dad was a noted professional drag-strip racing figure, and the daughter shared her desire to one day be a racing driver. Somewhere along the way, the parents allowed her, at 17, to drive a jet-engine dragster. On a drag strip, in a solo (non-competitive) test run, she drove it to a speed of around 300 mph, and after she’d released the drag-chute to slow toward a cruising speed, a wind caught the vehicle and tossed it against a retaining wall. And that ended her life.

Well, at least the girl didn’t kill anyone else.:rolleyes::cautious:
Click to expand...
As long as such teens only kill themselves and don't harm other people, I don't have any problems with such incidents.

The same here. I often read of fatal accidents of 18 or 19 year old teenagers with cars that have about 500 PS.
Why do parents give or even buy such cars for their kids who just had learned to drive? I got a old VW Beetle.
 
Maybe it's adhd. I had a carriage bike. My kids would ask if they could bike on it. They were around 8 or 10. Sure. You're in a street in a quiet neighborhood, in front of a friend's house and they bike 10 meter very cautious. Yippee! This is fun! The friend from my son, his mom was there too outside, just watching and she should have known. Can I try it too? Sure! He rides off like an imbecile and hits a parked car from a neighbour.

Once I took em out. We have kids firework around New Year. Not dangerous, tiny stuff for kids, but you have to watch out and supervise of course. That was always a lot of fun. We'd do it in a special fire place in the park where people barbecued or made a fire. So I wanted to do that when that boy with adhd came over to play. We were just walking and zjoot the bag was on fire. Whooa. I took it off him. Hmm. Maybe not such a great idea after all.
 
JBR said:
in America, parents have lately been held legally responsible for not precluding kids access to pistols or even assault rifles
Click to expand...
Yes, and for auto accidents:

"A parent or guardian may be liable when their teen driver causes a car accident, depending on state law and the circumstances behind the crash."

NOLO
 
I saw the 1 minute video these kids made. Can’t find it now. The passengers were telling him to not kill them; they were getting scared.

Often when I read of a fatal accident for a carload of young folks, I wonder if they wanted the driver to slow down.
 
asp3 said:
I don't consider the drag racing incident bad parenting myself. Since the father was a professional drag racer I would guess he had enough knowledge to determine if it was safe enough for his daughter to attempt it. She may have already shown herself to be a competent driver in other situations. That one sounds like just bad luck to me.
Click to expand...
Oh yes, bad luck to be sure. You share an interesting opinion.

I feel a parent has a responsibility to try to safeguard their kids at least until the age of legal majority. I don't feel kids should be raised by their smart phones .Among people I know whom I'd consider to be responsible parents, their concerns for their kids' growing degree of sound judgment often extends beyond that legally defined age.

I have one daughter, we've had a great relationship. And when she wants, I continue to discuss things with her regarding her own welfare and anything she wants to talk about concerning relations with other people. But that's just my way. She was completely self responsible by time she was 20 and, happily, displayed little need to lean on dad at all.
 
We had a especially sad event here several years ago.

A woman had bought her young son a high-power "muscle car". He was driving it at a highly-dangerous speed down a road and hit another car, killing both of that car's passengers.

The sad twist? His mother and aunt were in the car he hit.

The Spousal Equivalent made the mistake of buying both of his sons muscle car's when they turned 16. Yep, both wrecked them...luckily nobody got hurt.

Big mistake to give high-powered cars to new drivers. Those cars are made to go fast and that's EXACTLY what they'll do, especially boys.
 
I saw how my sons rode their 4 wheelers on our property, you better believe we had many discussions
on safety before they were old enough for a license. They had rifles too ---- after they completed the
Gun Safety class and were taken out with Dad, so it's not all parents. We had to hunt for food for awhile,
so it was a necessity for them to learn. If we lived in the city, there would not have been firearms.

One son did get his car in a ditch one winter night at a place he was not supposed to be at.
Guess who paid his fee for getting his car out - it sure wasn't me or Dad. Best lesson - make them pay
for their own stupid mistakes.
 
JBR said:
From what I’ve gathered, step-mum will not bear any of the legal brunt, but she’s reportedly reaped the costs related to the kid slamming her BMW into a parked heavy-duty truck at the abrupt end of the joyride. I don’t know if that s simply a steep increase in her auto insurance rate.
Click to expand...


If she let him drive the car illegally - eg knowing he had a passengers which he wasnt allowed to have then she should bear some legal responsibility

but if she let him drive the car thinking he was judt driving it within the law or if he took the keys without her permission - I dont think she is legally liable for that.
 
IrishEyes said:
I saw how my sons rode their 4 wheelers on our property, you better believe we had many discussions
on safety before they were old enough for a license. They had rifles too ---- after they completed the
Gun Safety class and were taken out with Dad, so it's not all parents. We had to hunt for food for awhile,
so it was a necessity for them to learn. If we lived in the city, there would not have been firearms.
Click to expand...
Makes sense.

IrishEyes said:
One son did get his car in a ditch one winter night at a place he was not supposed to be at.
Guess who paid his fee for getting his car out - it sure wasn't me or Dad. Best lesson - make them pay
for their own stupid mistakes.
Click to expand...
A good life lesson.
 
In Pennsylvania, there is no law that parents must lock up their guns. However, parents cannot allow children under 18 to knowingly leave the home with a gun, unless a parent or other adult in charge is with them.

I am glad this law wasn’t always in effect. When I was a teenager, a friend and me would take our .22 rifles and shoot pigeons and groundhogs. A farmer in the area would pay us $1 for every groundhog we would kill on his property. There was an old grain mill not far from where we lived and on a Sunday now and then, my buddy and I would get the key from the owner and go into the mill and shoot rats and pigeons. He would give each of us 50 cents per pigeon and rat.

On a good day, we would kill 10-12 rats and maybe 6 pigeons. Rats never stop breeding and multiplying.
 
I was on campus for the worst school shooting in US history. The shooter counted on two things; that everyone in that building was obeying the law and that there was no one in the building that was allowed to have a gun (aka the police). Once he determined the latter by checking every room, he chained the doors shut.
 
911 said:
In Pennsylvania, there is no law that parents must lock up their guns. However, parents cannot allow children under 18 to knowingly leave the home with a gun, unless a parent or other adult in charge is with them.

I am glad this law wasn’t always in effect. When I was a teenager, a friend and me would take our .22 rifles and shoot pigeons and groundhogs. A farmer in the area would pay us $1 for every groundhog we would kill on his property. There was an old grain mill not far from where we lived and on a Sunday now and then, my buddy and I would get the key from the owner and go into the mill and shoot rats and pigeons. He would give each of us 50 cents per pigeon and rat.

On a good day, we would kill 10-12 rats and maybe 6 pigeons. Rats never stop breeding and multiplying.
Click to expand...
i think what i'm curious about the most is how some kids are responsible enough to use a gun but how the majority are not. how is it you and your friend used it for it's given purpose and didn't partake in unsafe activities that might have gotten someone shot?

it's just like these farm kids i see. not old enough to drive but some of them drive a grain truck into town and they behave. another kid might decide to go joyride and have an accident and get someone killed. i don't understand that.
 
Restored said:
I was on campus for the worst school shooting in US history. The shooter counted on two things; that everyone in that building was obeying the law and that there was no one in the building that was allowed to have a gun (aka the police). Once he determined the latter by checking every room, he chained the doors shut.
Click to expand...
Location ? Year ?
 
jimintoronto said:
Location ? Year ?
Click to expand...
He must be talking about the Virginia Tech shooting.

The Virginia Tech shooting is the deadliest school shooting in U.S. history. On April 16, 2007, a 23-year-old student, Seung-Hui Cho, killed 32 people and injured 23 others in two separate attacks on the campus in Blacksburg, Virginia, before committing suicide.

Seung-Hui Cho purchased both of his handguns legally from licensed dealers in Virginia. Despite a prior court ruling regarding his mental health, he passed the required background checks due to a reporting loophole between state and federal systems.

The Reporting Loophole
Cho was able to pass background checks because his mental health history was never entered into the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).
  • Mental Health Ruling: In 2005, a Virginia special justice declared Cho "mentally ill and in need of hospitalization" and an "imminent danger to self". However, the judge ordered outpatient treatment rather than involuntary commitment to a hospital.
  • Data Gap: At the time, Virginia law only required the state to report individuals to the background check database if they were involuntarily committed. Because Cho was an outpatient, his record was never submitted, even though federal law technically prohibited anyone "adjudicated as a mental defective" from buying a gun.
 
gruntlabor said:
I understand that I can be held libel for damages resulting from a break-in and theft of my firearm.
Click to expand...
I have a firearm in my home for my personal protection. It's either have it here, or be without a dependable defense in the event of dire unforeseen circumstances when there may not be time to summon police - so it's a matter of which chance I want to take. My decision is to have it, which I am legally allowed to do. It is well hidden from intruders, but in the unlikely event it is stolen, I would promptly report it to "local law enforcement and the ATF" [*] to absolve me of any association with illegal use (as in a crime).

I posed this question to AI: "In Texas, can I be held liable if someone breaks into my home, steals my firearm,and commits a crime?" Below is the answer I got, and it will have to work for me.

*
firearm.jpg
 
Correct. Blacksburg is so small, everyone knew someone involved and to this day, the gunman's name is never spoken. I once did a Google search on my name and I am quoted in an article about the shooting which was a firing offense because I was an employee. Luckily, it was from a paper in Colorado.
 
MACKTEXAS said:
I have a firearm in my home for my personal protection. It's either have it here, or be without a dependable defense in the event of dire unforeseen circumstances when there may not be time to summon police - so it's a matter of which chance I want to take. My decision is to have it, which I am legally allowed to do. It is well hidden from intruders, but in the unlikely event it is stolen, I would promptly report it to "local law enforcement and the ATF" [*] to absolve me of any association with illegal use (as in a crime).

I posed this question to AI: "In Texas, can I be held liable if someone breaks into my home, steals my firearm,and commits a crime?" Below is the answer I got, and it will have to work for me.

*
View attachment 492644
Click to expand...
Yeah, I don't lock my handgun up when I leave the house, which I guess I should. Maybe I'll get one of those little gun safes.
 
Macktexas I think same would apply everywhere - if you legally owned a legal gun and kept it stored as per legal requirements, you would not be liable if somebody somehow stole it anyway and you had reported it as soon as possible.
 
MarciKS said:
i think what i'm curious about the most is how some kids are responsible enough to use a gun but how the majority are not. how is it you and your friend used it for it's given purpose and didn't partake in unsafe activities that might have gotten someone shot?

it's just like these farm kids i see. not old enough to drive but some of them drive a grain truck into town and they behave. another kid might decide to go joyride and have an accident and get someone killed. i don't understand that.
Click to expand...
It’s called using common sense. When I worked on the farm, everyone drove the tractors.

I was called to a residence on a hot July afternoon at 1p.m. The 911 operator said there was a shooting at such and such address. I asked who was shot and where was the shooter now. The operator told me a 14 y/o male shot himself and the caller thought he was dead. When I arrived at the house, I saw a young male lying on the floor with a .357 revolver lying beside him. There were 2 other boys in the house. Ten minutes later, another Trooper arrived at the scene.

I asked the boys what happened. The one boy said the kid brought out to the living room his dad’s .357 and shot himself in the head. I told all 3 of them that they needed a better story than that for me to believe them. After changing stories a few times, the one boy said they were playing Russian Roulette and the gun went off. He was the very first boy to use the gun.

We tested their hands for GSR and the boy lying on the floor was the only boy with residue on his hands. I called for the coroner and an Investigator. The Investigator took over the case and I know the father was charged with 2 or 3 counts dealing with his son’s death. It was a tragic situation.
 
911 said:
It’s called using common sense. When I worked on the farm, everyone drove the tractors.

I was called to a residence on a hot July afternoon at 1p.m. The 911 operator said there was a shooting at such and such address. I asked who was shot and where was the shooter now. The operator told me a 14 y/o male shot himself and the caller thought he was dead. When I arrived at the house, I saw a young male lying on the floor with a .357 revolver lying beside him. There were 2 other boys in the house. Ten minutes later, another Trooper arrived at the scene.

I asked the boys what happened. The one boy said the kid brought out to the living room his dad’s .357 and shot himself in the head. I told all 3 of them that they needed a better story than that for me to believe them. After changing stories a few times, the one boy said they were playing Russian Roulette and the gun went off. He was the very first boy to use the gun.

We tested their hands for GSR and the boy lying on the floor was the only boy with residue on his hands. I called for the coroner and an Investigator. The Investigator took over the case and I know the father was charged with 2 or 3 counts dealing with his son’s death. It was a tragic situation.
Click to expand...
Good call on using the GSR evidence to prove who actually fired the weapon. Some times the basic facts are the ones that bring a solution to a case. JIMB>
 
  • Like
Reactions: 911
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top