Parents arrested for allowing teen to possess loaded weapon

[Michigan Slim]

After working in a juvenile detention center, I will say that I think most of the parents I saw needed to serve more time than the kids. Scum of the earth, day after day.

 

[manifest destiny]

Whose firearms? The parents claimed that the firearms were their son's, not theirs.

I read it as the guns belonging to the mother, Allen (last name). The child was only referenced as '16yo male'. The father was Baker, jr. The article lacked some details, such is typical of modern journalism.

 

[Denny347]

FTA, the parents told police that all of the firearms belonged to their 16-year-old son, who was, per the article, a prohibited possessor. So, this incident doesn't even fall under "can, but shouldn't".

(Side note: what law could possibly prevent this from occurring?)

They were the mom's..."Allen" is her. The juvi is not named in the report since he is a minor. Allen admitted to being the parent, the guns belonged to Allen.

 

[chipbennett]

I read it as the guns belonging to the mother, Allen (last name). The child was only referenced as '16yo male'. The father was Baker, jr. The article lacked some details, such is typical of modern journalism.

FTA (last paragraph): "Baker Sr. and Allen admitted to being the parents of the teen who was on the porch with the loaded rifle. The told police all the weapons belonged to Allen."

I read that as Allen, the teen, rather than Allen, the mother. I could have misread that, though?

 

[chipbennett]

They were the mom's..."Allen" is her. The juvi is not named in the report since he is a minor. Allen admitted to being the parent, the guns belonged to Allen.

Okay, that makes sense.

 

[MindfulMan]

"Lo-Jack Family"

Love it, Sarge !

 

[KellyinAvon]

Love it, Sarge !

We had Lo-Jack Grandma in my neighborhood a few years back. At no point was the entire family Lo-Jacked

 

[bwframe]

He'll be fine... he's got a gun.

Hopefully the fine young man will miss his target next time, like he did the last time?

A group of us who train and study for self defense were discussing this sort of a mess yesterday.

What if you find yourself near a gunfight? Do you take out the threat? How do you know the shot you have is actually a threat or another good guy? What if the threat is a kid?

Yout or not, shouldn't the kid be behind bars of some sort?

 

[manifest destiny]

Do you take out the threat? How do you know the shot you have is actually a threat or another good guy?

This one popped up for me with that Joker guy out in Colorado a few years back; the one at the movie theater. Deafening noise, panic, chaos, dark environment... I get my wits, identify the evil shooter, draw, aim.... and then a guy two rows back gets up, sees me holding and pointing a gun, he draws, aims...
I can imagine that more times than not the evil doer will be obvious. But in those occasions it's not, tough choices, and they have to be made nearly instantly.

 

[Jont22]

I see no issue here either. Well, parenting issues but not with the arrests.

 

[bwframe]

...I can imagine that more times than not the evil doer will be obvious...

I think that's a problem all of us evision in the scenarios in our heads. Bad guy assaulting us in some fashion. The situation in our minds arises as a direct threat to ourselves.

The issue is that more and more these days the bad guy is shooting at someone else. Often the someone else may be a bad guy too? Or worse yet, the roles are reversed?

You can be totally on your game and situationally aware, when something crops up that has nothing to do with you directly. Crossfire, close enough to gunfire, other innocents in the collateral area?

 

[Leadeye]

I guess times have changed, I thought armed robbery was a serious crime that got you jail rather than home detention.

 

[DadSmith]

If this teen can get away from bad influences, and around decent people there is a chance he might turn his life around.

It's sad that so many children are brought up in broken/busted homes.

 

[Trapper Jim]

All parents need to be held responsible for their offspring. Period.

 

[Old Dog]

Maybe I missed it? What become of the boy, on house arrest, while the "parents" are in jail?

That information just does not fit the narrative, so it was "left" out.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

That information just does not fit the narrative, so it was "left" out.

What 'narrative' does it not fit?

Juvenile records are much more tightly controlled than adult records. I, as a sworn law enforcement officer, need a *search warrant* to see juvenile booking photos these days, despite the fact they are taken in a gov't facility, stored in gov't databases, and are taken for law enforcement purposes.

Adult booking photos are public record. See why the information on the juvenile's status may not be as readily available?

 

[Old Dog]

What 'narrative' does it not fit?

Juvenile records are much more tightly controlled than adult records. I, as a sworn law enforcement officer, need a *search warrant* to see juvenile booking photos these days, despite the fact they are taken in a gov't facility, stored in gov't databases, and are taken for law enforcement purposes.

Adult booking photos are public record. See why the information on the juvenile's status may not be as readily available?

I did not intend to reference the juvenile record info, but rather what happened to the juvenile after the incident such as an arrest, return to detention, released to family member etc., to complete the story a bit.

The left is often over focused and pushing on punishing the parents of anyone under 21 with a firearm, thus telling us anything beyond how criminal the parents were does not support their agenda (narrative) at this time, and leaves the story somewhat hanging in the air.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I did not intend to reference the juvenile record info, but rather what happened to the juvenile after the incident such as an arrest, return to detention, released to family member etc., to complete the story a bit.

If they are arrested or not is part of the juvenile record. Information that was readily available on juvenile offenders just a few years ago is clamped down much more tightly now. I'm not saying if they do or don't have that info. I'm saying it's very plausible that they don't, however.

The left is often over focused and pushing on punishing the parents of anyone under 21 with a firearm, thus telling us anything beyond how criminal the parents were does not support their agenda (narrative) at this time, and leaves the story somewhat hanging in the air.

I think the fact the juvenile was a criminal is pretty apparent in the article. I'm not sure where you're getting the narrative angle, what other news stories are out there like this?

 

[sp1shooter]

I had several guns by 16, somehow I still haven't done an armed robbery.

 

[manifest destiny]

If they are arrested or not is part of the juvenile record. Information that was readily available on juvenile offenders just a few years ago is clamped down much more tightly now. I'm not saying if they do or don't have that info. I'm saying it's very plausible that they don't, however.

I, as a sworn law enforcement officer, need a *search warrant* to see juvenile booking photos these days, despite the fact they are taken in a gov't facility, stored in gov't databases, and are taken for law enforcement purposes.

Just my own curiosity here... Why is that? Why the tightening of the juvi records, specifically within law enforcement? I have speculations, but I'll skip typing them out.