Good question. Can someone be simultaneously a minor making the parents culpable and also an adult who faces adult sentencing and prison time?
Meanwhile another comment pointed me toward this story that is getting very little attention:
The details are a bit vague but this 13 year old was somehow making guns, maybe using 80% lowers, and then selling them as complete firearms. One of his customers, Yusef Jabryil Mcarthur El, decided he wanted a gun but didn't want to pay so he grabbed the gun and took off running. The 13 year old of course started blazing away but instead of shooting Yusef, he shot and killed his 14 year old sister Kyra Scott. Oops.
|Kyra Scott and Yusef El|
The media is trying to play up the fact that he was making these "ghost guns", again presumably using incomplete or "80% lowers" that don't require a background check or FFL to purchase. What no one seems to be asking:
How was a 13 year old getting the lowers? Did his mom not notice that he was drilling out these lowers and that random people were coming to his house to purchase firearms? Was he using a credit card to order them online and if so was it her credit card and did she not notice packages coming to the house?
These details are missing from every story I saw. Also missing, word of an indictment for the mother for manslaughter in the shooting death of her daughter. If she was letting her 13 year old son operate an illegal firearms manufacturing facility and illicit gun store out of her house, isn't she at least as culpable as the parents of a boy who used a legally purchased firearm to carry out a school shooting?
The story is tragic, not least because it was happening right in their home, but that doesn't change the fact that the story also seems a little odd because of the questions not being asked. We can ask why the parents of Ethan Crumbley purchased a handgun and left it unsecured within reach of their clearly mentally ill 15 year old son but apparently no one wants to ask why the mother of Kyra Scott can permit her 13 year old son to manufacture and sell handguns to random thugs but somehow isn't being charged with any sort of crime. If parents are liable for what happens in their home, shouldn't that apply across the board evenly and if so it seems that the mother of Kyra Scott is more culpable than Jennifer and James Crumbley, their son at least used a firearm that was purchased legally unlike the "ghost gun" that Krya's brother shot her with.
Different states to be sure but while the Left is cheering the prosecution of Jennifer and James Crumbley in Michigan, it seems oddly quiet when it comes to the mother of Kyra Scott in Georgia.
I wonder if the races involved have something to do with that?