What did the school do wrong? Given the circumstances, no one would have been able to stop the carnage. I question the motive here. Why not sue the mother of the perpetrator for providing unfettered access to the guns. Most likely because there’s no pot of gold to go after there. Hey, banks with all their sophisticated security still get held up. Sadly, it is an imperfect world. It’s a tragic loss but trying to blame the school for the actions of a lone wolf? Sanity needs to prevail.
The Governor and legislators of CT punished gun owners and several gun manufacturers that have since left Connecticut. Gun owner’s rights were restricted by new Connecticut laws, which appear to violate the US Constitution, but no challenges have been filed, to my knowledge.
IIRC, some lawsuits were filed against the mother of the murderer, for not securing her guns. But she was killed when the guns were taken.
Now, parents, who cannot bring back their lost children, are trying to punish the school and town for not doing enough to prevent the tragedy. I cannot be sure if the town could have prevented the killer from roaming free, to take guns from his mother. It seems the mental health professionals who didn’t see the signs, or do enough after they did see troubling behavior, are the only ones who can share some blame.
Punitive damages are usually assessed based on the theory of preventing similar negligence or misbehavior in the future, both by the party being sued, and by other parties who may be in similar situations. But it seems the only sensible actions to prevent future tragedies are ‘preventative’ regarding similarly mentally ill persons, rather than ‘punitive’ of past negligent parties.
With my above stated uncertainty as to effective prevention aside, it is clear to me that politicians in Connecticut have done the WRONG thing, again.
Aah, because his mother is dead – she’s the first one he killed, allegedly in getting access to her gun safe, by the way. The shooter’s father is still alive and apparently pretty affluent, but had no close connections to his son or exwife beyond paying large alimony.
A heroin dealer can be charged with murder when a junkie od’s, but we shield gun manufacturers who sell battlefield weapons to civilian sick puppies. Heroin dealers need a strong lobby like the NRA, but it’s not easy to find organized folks with such low morals…
What did the school do wrong? Given the circumstances, no one would have been able to stop the carnage. I question the motive here. Why not sue the mother of the perpetrator for providing unfettered access to the guns. Most likely because there’s no pot of gold to go after there. Hey, banks with all their sophisticated security still get held up. Sadly, it is an imperfect world. It’s a tragic loss but trying to blame the school for the actions of a lone wolf? Sanity needs to prevail.
The Governor and legislators of CT punished gun owners and several gun manufacturers that have since left Connecticut. Gun owner’s rights were restricted by new Connecticut laws, which appear to violate the US Constitution, but no challenges have been filed, to my knowledge.
IIRC, some lawsuits were filed against the mother of the murderer, for not securing her guns. But she was killed when the guns were taken.
Now, parents, who cannot bring back their lost children, are trying to punish the school and town for not doing enough to prevent the tragedy. I cannot be sure if the town could have prevented the killer from roaming free, to take guns from his mother. It seems the mental health professionals who didn’t see the signs, or do enough after they did see troubling behavior, are the only ones who can share some blame.
Punitive damages are usually assessed based on the theory of preventing similar negligence or misbehavior in the future, both by the party being sued, and by other parties who may be in similar situations. But it seems the only sensible actions to prevent future tragedies are ‘preventative’ regarding similarly mentally ill persons, rather than ‘punitive’ of past negligent parties.
With my above stated uncertainty as to effective prevention aside, it is clear to me that politicians in Connecticut have done the WRONG thing, again.
Aah, because his mother is dead – she’s the first one he killed, allegedly in getting access to her gun safe, by the way. The shooter’s father is still alive and apparently pretty affluent, but had no close connections to his son or exwife beyond paying large alimony.
A heroin dealer can be charged with murder when a junkie od’s, but we shield gun manufacturers who sell battlefield weapons to civilian sick puppies. Heroin dealers need a strong lobby like the NRA, but it’s not easy to find organized folks with such low morals…