It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
understood....I would also spend lots of time evaluating everything I had, or had not, taught that child.
Originally posted by Sharingan
reply to post by tanda7
As he should... As much as i love my kids, if he were mine, id never look at him the same way
Originally posted by generik
well if the boy can not be charged why have the parents been charged? you know those people who are responsible for him. those parents who LET him play a game that was RATED MATURE 17+, without apparent parental guiding. not to mention that the parents let an 8 year old have access to a gun. while they were not there.
at the very LEAST the parents should be facing gun charges over a LOADED GUN being accessible to an 8 year old. and it would follow that they should ALSO be charged with something like manslaughter over the killing. due to the gun being accessible to the child, as well as letting him play violent games rated for someone over TWICE HIS AGE.
personally i feel the kid should be facing some charges as well, but since the law apparently does not allow for it, then he should be remanded into a proper mental care facility.
Originally posted by DeadSeraph
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
They are absolutely still responsible. If your 8 year old doesn't understand that pointing a gun at someones head and pulling the trigger is wrong, you have failed as a parent.
Originally posted by thesmokingman
Title pretty much sums it up. An eight year old boy intentionally (as concluded by police) shot and killed his elderly caregiver in the back of the head. At first, police believed it was an accident, however they later determined that the boy had done it intentionally right after playing the video game Grand theft auto. So I guess my question to you ATS, why would the police not charge him? Was it because of his age? Shouldnt they at least charge him with something, anything?
In my opinion, this is a tragic incident indeed, but should this boys age and the fact that he was subjected to a violent video game give him an excuse for doing this? I mean, there must be some kind of punishment right? Tell me I am being to hard on the lil guy, and I am crazy please! Oh wait, here is the official reason why:
However, authorities say they are unable to charge the boy with a crime because of a Louisiana law that protects children from criminal responsibility.
Excuse me?!? Does this mean children under the age of 18 are immune to criminal charges, and are free to kill at will in Louisiana? I may be overreacting but I have NEVER heard of this type of criminal immunity before!!!