Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
The Lord of Hats
Aug 22, 2010

Hello, yes! Is being very good day for posting, no?

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

They have other studies and their annual safety stats include pedestrian deaths. It's just that in a study about seatbelt efficacy, you are by definition not including pedestrians because they have no seatbelts.

Well, now that we've identified the problem, it's just a matter of getting an executive mandate that all future pedestrians being produced have seatbelts installed.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy

Eric Cantonese posted:

How much of that is due to Americans buying more SUVs? It's not like European cars are much lighter if you compare models like-for-like.

Some models are different even if they're called the same (Passat, Accord for example used to be completely different cars). But mostly we just buy different things. This is the top selling vehicle in France and the US:



The Lord of Hats posted:

Well, now that we've identified the problem, it's just a matter of getting an executive mandate that all future pedestrians being produced have seatbelts installed.

Just have everyone wear airbags

Kagrenak
Sep 8, 2010

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

They have other studies and their annual safety stats include pedestrian deaths. It's just that in a study about seatbelt efficacy, you are by definition not including pedestrians because they have no seatbelts.

They produce other studies but I think OP is pointing towards the fact that their overall safety rating composite is entirely about the risks to you as an occupant of that car. At least the euro NCAP ratings factor in other road users to an extent.

Anno
May 10, 2017

I'm going to drown! For no reason at all!

I’m in the process of buying a 2024 Civic, and just out of curiosity the other day I compared it size wise to a 1994 Civic and Accord. In those 30 years the Civic basically increased in size enough to go from the 1994 Civic to the 1994 Accord, and I’m sure the Accord has done the same in turn. Most newer cars are just big now even if you want a “compact”.

FistEnergy
Nov 3, 2000

DAY CREW: WORKING HARD

Fun Shoe

Hieronymous Alloy posted:

Republican voters don't even perceive of politics in terms of policy at all. It's team allegiances, emotional loyalty, and totemic causes

You're absolutely correct, but this is also the Democrats as well. It's a frustrating, neverending team sport.

Leon Trotsky 2012
Aug 27, 2009

YOU CAN TRUST ME!*


*Israeli Government-affiliated poster
A jury in Michigan, for the first time in American history, held the parent of a minor mass shooter criminally liable for her son's mass shooting.

She was convicted on 4 counts of involuntary manslaughter.

Since it is hard to keep track of all the mass shootings over the last few years, this was a school shooting where the mother was found to:

- Have given her son the gun.

- Texted her son to do a better job hiding bullets after he was caught with them in school and got in trouble.

- Let her son keep the semi-automatic handgun she bought him unlocked in his room.

- Covered for her son when he was caught multiple times making threats to shoot up the school and writing out his plans in notebooks.

- Let her son bring the gun to school, but told him not to take it out or get caught with it.

She says that she never believed that her son was capable of mass murder, so all of her actions were done within that context and she wasn't responsible for his actions.

The prosecution alleged that her level of negligence was so high that it qualified for involuntary manslaughter and the jury agreed.

https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/1754938615430308115

quote:

Jennifer Crumbley, mother of Ethan Crumbley, found guilty of involuntary manslaughter in son’s school shooting

PONTIAC, Mich. — Jennifer Crumbley, the Michigan woman charged in connection with her son’s deadly school shooting rampage in 2021, was convicted Tuesday of involuntary manslaughter in the unprecedented case.

The unanimous verdict came on the second day of jury deliberations in a landmark trial that turned on an unusual question: Can the parent of a child who commits a mass shooting also be held criminally responsible?

Crumbley, 45, was charged with four counts of involuntary manslaughter — one for each of the victims in the attack at Oxford High School in November 2021. Her son, Ethan, pleaded guilty as an adult to murder, terrorism and other crimes, and was sentenced in December to life in prison without parole.

Now, she faces up to 15 years in prison per count and remains held on bond. She will be sentenced on April 9.

The trial, which opened Jan. 25 in an Oakland County courtroom, hit at themes of good parenting and gun safety, and has come at a consequential moment in the U.S. when a drumbeat of school shootings have roiled communities like Uvalde, Texas; Nashville; and Perry, Iowa.

In an effort to determine to what extent a parent should be held accountable for the actions of their child, jurors in Oakland County examined more than 400 pieces of evidence, including text messages and photos from Crumbley's cellphone, and dramatic video of the shooting spree, which left many in the courtroom visibly shaken.

The prosecution called more than 20 witnesses, including law enforcement and school staff, while the defense brought in just one: the defendant.

To prove its case, the prosecution attempted to portray Crumbley as a neglectful mother, who cared more about her hobbies and carrying on an extramarital affair than spending time with her son. Then, when she and her husband gifted their son a semi-automatic handgun in the days before the shooting, prosecutors pointed out that neither of them properly stored it.

On the same day as the shooting, when the Crumbleys were earlier summoned to the school because of a disturbing drawing of a gun made by their son, the parents didn't tell school officials he had access to a weapon or take him home.

But her defense lawyer, Shannon Smith, suggested it was James Crumbley who was specifically in charge of storing the weapon, and that the school knew Ethan was having trouble paying attention in classes but didn't fully inform Jennifer Crumbley.

Smith had asked the jury during her closing argument to acquit her client, "not just for Jennifer Crumbley, but for every mother who's out there doing the best they can, who could easily be in her shoes."

James Crumbley, 47, is expected to stand trial next month on the same involuntary manslaughter charges.

Jennifer Crumbley took the stand in her own defense. She testified that her son was generally worried about his future after high school and was "depressed," but that his mental health never alarmed her enough that she felt he needed to see a professional.

She acknowledged that she could have taken him home on the day of the shooting, but also didn't believe he was capable of committing such violence. More than two years after the shooting, she told the jury she "wouldn't have" done anything differently.

"I don't think I’m a failure as a parent," she said.

Selina Guevara reported from Pontiac and Erik Ortiz from New York.

This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/jennifer-crumbley-trial-verdict-rcna136937

Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 19:57 on Feb 6, 2024

zoux
Apr 28, 2006

The craziest thing about that, among many, many crazy things, is that both parents were called into the school on the day of the shooting about their son's school shooter behavior and they didn't care.

Kagrenak
Sep 8, 2010

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

A jury in Michigan, for the first time in American history, held the parent of a minor mass shooter criminally liable for her son's mass shooting.

She was convicted on 4 counts of involuntary manslaughter.

Since it is hard to keep track of all the mass shootings over the last few years, this was a school shooting where the mother was found to:

- Have given her son the gun.

- Texted her son to do a better job hiding bullets after he was caught with them in school and got in trouble.

- Let her son keep the semi-automatic handgun she bought him unlocked in his room.

- Covered for her son when he was caught multiple times making threats to shoot up the school and writing out his plans in notebooks.

- Let her son bring the gun to school, but told him not to take it out or get caught with it.

She says that she never believed that her son was capable of mass murder, so all of her actions were done within that context and she wasn't responsible for his actions.

The prosecution alleged that her level of negligence was so high that it qualified for involuntary manslaughter and the jury agreed.

https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/1754938615430308115

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/jennifer-crumbley-trial-verdict-rcna136937

"How could I have known except for all these neon red flags thrown up."

This list of steps she took is nearly comical with how perfectly crafted it is to push this into negligence. I'd say this is a pretty unlikely thing to repeat just because most parents aren't so heinously stupid in the lead up like this.

God the pull quote is loving crazy too. Just no self reflection at all in this woman.

Skex
Feb 22, 2012

The great thing about the thousands of slaughtered Palestinian children is that they can't pull away when you fondle them or sniff their hair.

That's a Biden success story.

FistEnergy posted:

You're absolutely correct, but this is also the Democrats as well. It's a frustrating, neverending team sport.

Bullshit, this is not a loving both sides thing and pretending that it is is pure right-wing rhetoric.

Nonsense
Jan 26, 2007

With Jennifer Crumbley tried and solidly convicted, it is time to prosecute gang support networks in their totality.

Leon Trotsky 2012
Aug 27, 2009

YOU CAN TRUST ME!*


*Israeli Government-affiliated poster

FistEnergy posted:

You're absolutely correct, but this is also the Democrats as well. It's a frustrating, neverending team sport.

Skex posted:

Bullshit, this is not a loving both sides thing and pretending that it is is pure right-wing rhetoric.

FistEnergy is correct that a large chunk of Democrats absolutely view politics as a team sport rather than about the specifics of public policy because most people don't know many specifics about public policy and take their cues from leaders they trust. This is extremely clear from public polling and human behavior in general.

I think he is wrong in comparing the current situation.

The Republicans getting most of their border demands attached to a broader spending bill, having nearly every elected official turn around and oppose their own bill because Trump wanted to keep the issue alive for the election, and 3/4 of Republican voters approving despite spending years saying that border security was of cataclysmic importance is actually unprecedented.

It would be like if after they spent 2 years negotiating Obamacare, then Obama announced that he wanted to keep healthcare as an issue for the next election, hundreds of elected Democrats all swapped and voted down the Obamacare bill, and registered Democrats went from 90% in support to 80% opposed to government subsidized healthcare in 72 hours.

It is pretty much unprecedented for every elected official and nearly every voter in a national political party to swap positions on an issue that they have rated their #1 most important issue for years in less than 3 days because one person said to.

Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 20:18 on Feb 6, 2024

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

A jury in Michigan, for the first time in American history, held the parent of a minor mass shooter criminally liable for her son's mass shooting.

She was convicted on 4 counts of involuntary manslaughter.
...
Is this the first time the parents have been prosecuted?

I read the Columbine book a while ago and it didn't seem like the parents could've been reasonably expected to see the massacre coming. Unless they like searched everything and found the tapes and diaries. I wonder if this is more common rather than the clearly negligent assholes like here.

Leon Trotsky 2012
Aug 27, 2009

YOU CAN TRUST ME!*


*Israeli Government-affiliated poster

mobby_6kl posted:

Is this the first time the parents have been prosecuted?

I read the Columbine book a while ago and it didn't seem like the parents could've been reasonably expected to see the massacre coming. Unless they like searched everything and found the tapes and diaries. I wonder if this is more common rather than the clearly negligent assholes like here.

It's not the first time parents have ever been prosecuted, but it is extremely rare. I can only remember one case from a few years ago when a women was found guilty and put on probation because she didn't take her mentally ill son's guns away after he was convicted of a crime and went on to shoot up his school (nobody died).

There's probably a couple others in history, but it is extremely rare to be prosecuted and they have never successfully done it until today.

Kagrenak
Sep 8, 2010

mobby_6kl posted:

Is this the first time the parents have been prosecuted?

I read the Columbine book a while ago and it didn't seem like the parents could've been reasonably expected to see the massacre coming. Unless they like searched everything and found the tapes and diaries. I wonder if this is more common rather than the clearly negligent assholes like here.

Here's an article from when they were charged. It seems like one parent once was prosecuted for child neglect and one or two others might've gotten hit with illegal guns charges but that's not directly related to the shooting per se. This seems to be the first prosecution of a homicide crime against parents of a shooter for sure.

E: the one I'm talking about is the one Leon mentioned

Leon Trotsky 2012
Aug 27, 2009

YOU CAN TRUST ME!*


*Israeli Government-affiliated poster

Kagrenak posted:

Here's an article from when they were charged. It seems like one parent once was prosecuted for child neglect and one or two others might've gotten hit with illegal guns charges but that's not directly related to the shooting per se. This seems to be the first prosecution of a homicide crime against parents of a shooter for sure.

E: the one I'm talking about is the one Leon mentioned

Thank you for the article. That was the case I was thinking of.

I had it slightly off, though.

He threatened to shoot up his school, but wasn't actually convicted of a crime before he later shot up the school.

Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 20:30 on Feb 6, 2024

The Glumslinger
Sep 24, 2008

Coach Nagy, you want me to throw to WHAT side of the field?


Hair Elf

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

FistEnergy is correct that a large chunk of Democrats absolutely view politics as a team sport rather than about the specifics of public policy because most people don't know many specifics about public policy and take their cues from leaders they trust. This is extremely clear from public polling and human behavior in general.

I think he is wrong in comparing the current situation.

The Republicans getting most of their border demands attached to a broader spending bill, having nearly every elected official turn around and oppose their own bill because Trump wanted to keep the issue alive for the election, and 3/4 of Republican voters approving despite spending years saying that border security was of cataclysmic importance is actually unprecedented.

It would be like if after they spent 2 years negotiating Obamacare, then Obama announced that he wanted to keep healthcare as an issue for the next election, hundreds of elected Democrats all swapped and voted down the Obamacare bill, and registered Democrats went from 90% in support to 80% opposed to government subsidized healthcare in 72 hours.

It is pretty much unprecedented for every elected official and nearly every voter in a national political party to swap positions on an issue that they have rated their #1 most important issue for years in less than 3 days because one person said to.

It in fact is extremely precedented, didn't this happen in 2013 with the gang of 8 immigration deal that Boehner refused to bring up for a vote in the house people there was enough bipartisan support to pass it and Republicans didn't want to give Obama a win (and take away a big argument about Obama's crisis) before a midterm election

Leon Trotsky 2012
Aug 27, 2009

YOU CAN TRUST ME!*


*Israeli Government-affiliated poster

The Glumslinger posted:

It in fact is extremely precedented, didn't this happen in 2013 with the gang of 8 immigration deal that Boehner refused to bring up for a vote in the house people there was enough bipartisan support to pass it and Republicans didn't want to give Obama a win (and take away a big argument about Obama's crisis) before a midterm election

The Gang of 8 bill was failing because a chunk of Republicans (and Democrats) opposed it from the start. The fact that there was bipartisan support to pass it was the problem.

The equivalent would be if every member of the Gang of 8 denounced their own ideas and then voted it down because Mitt Romney called on them to do it and then 3/4 of Republican voters across the country who had been saying immigration was their #1 issue for two years changed their mind to say, "Nah, it can wait another year. It's good that the policies I supported aren't being passed now."

bird food bathtub
Aug 9, 2003

College Slice
I don't think we're at the breaking dawn of a new day where parents of school shooters are convicted on the regular, because most people when their child texts them saying they're hearing voices and that the demon in the kitchen is throwing bowls around would probably not text back saying "suck it up" and then continue to let them have an unsecured gun and ammunition in their bedroom.

koolkal
Oct 21, 2008

this thread maybe doesnt have room for 2 green xbox one avs

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

FistEnergy is correct that a large chunk of Democrats absolutely view politics as a team sport rather than about the specifics of public policy because most people don't know many specifics about public policy and take their cues from leaders they trust. This is extremely clear from public polling and human behavior in general.

I think he is wrong in comparing the current situation.

The Republicans getting most of their border demands attached to a broader spending bill, having nearly every elected official turn around and oppose their own bill because Trump wanted to keep the issue alive for the election, and 3/4 of Republican voters approving despite spending years saying that border security was of cataclysmic importance is actually unprecedented.

It would be like if after they spent 2 years negotiating Obamacare, then Obama announced that he wanted to keep healthcare as an issue for the next election, hundreds of elected Democrats all swapped and voted down the Obamacare bill, and registered Democrats went from 90% in support to 80% opposed to government subsidized healthcare in 72 hours.

It is pretty much unprecedented for every elected official and nearly every voter in a national political party to swap positions on an issue that they have rated their #1 most important issue for years in less than 3 days because one person said to.

But they haven't shifted on the issue. They simply prefer to win the election as a higher priority.

Leon Trotsky 2012
Aug 27, 2009

YOU CAN TRUST ME!*


*Israeli Government-affiliated poster

bird food bathtub posted:

I don't think we're at the breaking dawn of a new day where parents of school shooters are convicted on the regular, because most people when their child texts them saying they're hearing voices and that the demon in the kitchen is throwing bowls around would probably not text back saying "suck it up" and then continue to let them have an unsecured gun and ammunition in their bedroom.

I agree that it is almost never going to really happen again, but it is still pretty striking.

Despite her (and her husband's) repeated and wild negligence, she is probably correct that basically no mother assumes that their kid is going to become a mass murderer and acts with that information in mind. It is extremely rare to hold parents criminally responsible for almost anything their minor child does, let alone multiple manslaughter charges that can carry a prison sentence of up to 15 years.

Angry_Ed
Mar 30, 2010




Grimey Drawer

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

I agree that it is almost never going to really happen again, but it is still pretty striking.

Despite her (and her husband's) repeated and wild negligence, she is probably correct that basically no mother assumes that their kid is going to become a mass murderer and acts with that information in mind. It is extremely rare to hold parents criminally responsible for almost anything their minor child does, let alone multiple manslaughter charges that can carry a prison sentence of up to 15 years.

There's a big loving difference between "assuming one's kid becomes a school shooter" and "repeatedly ignores all red flags to the point of giving him a gun and advice to hide the bullets better".

If mental healthcare wasn't stigmatized in this country this kid might have been able to get some help before he ended up shooting people, but we're not going to know that because his parents failed him.

And until the majority of parents aren't weighted down by Reagan-era demonization of mental health and mental illness, there is only a matter of time before this happens again.

Triskelli
Sep 27, 2011

I AM A SKELETON
WITH VERY HIGH
STANDARDS


Frankly hoping that more rulings like this come down, I'm only half-joking when I say the shooter and the last person to own a shooter's weapon should be charged with the same crime.

Leon Trotsky 2012
Aug 27, 2009

YOU CAN TRUST ME!*


*Israeli Government-affiliated poster

Angry_Ed posted:

There's a big loving difference between "assuming one's kid becomes a school shooter" and "repeatedly ignores all red flags to the point of giving him a gun and advice to hide the bullets better".

If mental healthcare wasn't stigmatized in this country this kid might have been able to get some help before he ended up shooting people, but we're not going to know that because his parents failed him.

Right. I agree with the decision. I am just saying that it was literally unprecedented for a reason and it wasn't totally clear from the start that this would be the outcome. Her attorney's argument that we almost never hold parents (criminally) accountable for the violence of their children in other situations isn't incorrect.

FLIPADELPHIA
Apr 27, 2007

Heavy Shit
Grimey Drawer

Angry_Ed posted:

And yet somehow the citizens of the US and their goldfish memory think Trump/Republicans are better on the economy.

It's not that they think this, it's that they are liars who don't give a poo poo about what's true. Polling Americans on issues like this is pointless because at least half the country are 0% trustworthy pieces of poo poo.

Leon Trotsky 2012
Aug 27, 2009

YOU CAN TRUST ME!*


*Israeli Government-affiliated poster
Pennsylvania's Governor is calling on the state to legalize marijuana.

The new Democratic House will start drafting a bill, but they only have a 1-vote majority.

The Republicans have a 6-vote majority in the state Senate. It's not clear how many Republicans would be willing to support legalization (or if there are any specifics re: taxes or regulations that disagreements between pro-legalization Democrats or Republicans could end up killing any potential bill), so it isn't a sure thing.

If Pennsylvania does legalize it, that would make it the 25th state and recreational marijuana would then be legal in half the states.

https://twitter.com/GovernorShapiro/status/1754935387816935752

Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 21:00 on Feb 6, 2024

Leon Trotsky 2012
Aug 27, 2009

YOU CAN TRUST ME!*


*Israeli Government-affiliated poster
They delayed the supplemental bill for 4 months because Republicans demanded that border security provisions be attached to it or they wouldn't bring it up for a vote.

Now, they are demanding they bring the supplemental bill up for a vote without the border security provisions they demanded 4 months ago.

One of the provisions in the bill was an increase in LIHEAP funding for the 2023 winter, so I wonder if that is still in there.

https://twitter.com/StevenTDennis/status/1754954690087780530

koolkal
Oct 21, 2008

this thread maybe doesnt have room for 2 green xbox one avs
It's amusing that this is the 2nd Dem president in a row where Republicans have saved the country from a lovely bill.

zoux
Apr 28, 2006

The border deal was real real bad but the outcome of the very same politicians who have been demanding a solution to the border crisis turning around and killing it for electoral advantage is such a good outcome for the Democratic Party. Pretty risky to put that out there given it could've been passed, but I guess you never bet against GOP intransigence.

It seems almost too conspiratorial to say this was an intentional tactic, I don't think it was, I think the Dems are just scared of immigration since Americans (oh and every other nation in the world) are so insanely reactionary about it. But if it was the plan, it was quite a coup. I mean you got the head of the CBP union on Fox saying the GOP is lying about what's in the bill, you got Fox anchors directly contradicting Nancy Mace on the provisions of the bill.

https://twitter.com/highbrow_nobrow/status/1754610585923101070

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1754866298457059572

Doocey is pushing back! Doocey!!!

Furthermore, Plan B is now to pass a clean foreign aid package - which is what the Dems wanted in the first place

zoux fucked around with this message at 21:25 on Feb 6, 2024

Leon Trotsky 2012
Aug 27, 2009

YOU CAN TRUST ME!*


*Israeli Government-affiliated poster

koolkal posted:

It's amusing that this is the 2nd Dem president in a row where Republicans have saved the country from a lovely bill.

It's bonkers that Republicans have basically had some of the major policy goals they have been pursuing for decades handed to them on a silver platter, but lost everything because they were bundled with a few things Democrats wanted.

And even more bonkers that it happened again 10 years later.

If you are someone who prefers Republican public policy, then it must be infuriating that they refuse to take the win.

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

They delayed the supplemental bill for 4 months because Republicans demanded that border security provisions be attached to it or they wouldn't bring it up for a vote.

Now, they are demanding they bring the supplemental bill up for a vote without the border security provisions they demanded 4 months ago.

One of the provisions in the bill was an increase in LIHEAP funding for the 2023 winter, so I wonder if that is still in there.

https://twitter.com/StevenTDennis/status/1754954690087780530
Schumer looks like he's enjoying the situation.

Just incredible that they managed to tie themselves into this knot.

Hieronymous Alloy
Jan 30, 2009


Why! Why!! Why must you refuse to accept that Dr. Hieronymous Alloy's Genetically Enhanced Cream Corn Is Superior to the Leading Brand on the Market!?!




Morbid Hound

FLIPADELPHIA posted:

It's not that they think this, it's that they are liars who don't give a poo poo about what's true. Polling Americans on issues like this is pointless because at least half the country are 0% trustworthy pieces of poo poo.

They aren't even liars. They're living an emotional truth that has no necessary congruence with actual fact. Republicans are good for the economy like immigration is bad for the economy: two precepts that have been repeatedly disproved again and again for decades but that nevertheless feel true to republican voters.

They believe this stuff they way they believe Jesus loves capitalism. It has nothing to do with truth or falsehood. Completely orthogonal. Non intersecting.

The Lord of Hats
Aug 22, 2010

Hello, yes! Is being very good day for posting, no?

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

It's bonkers that Republicans have basically had some of the major policy goals they have been pursuing for decades handed to them on a silver platter, but lost everything because they were bundled with a few things Democrats wanted.

And even more bonkers that it happened again 10 years later.

If you are someone who prefers Republican public policy, then it must be infuriating that they refuse to take the win.

No, no, this isn't the same thing.

They're rejecting the thing they wanted and asking to pass only the additional things the Democrats wanted instead, without the things they wanted.

It's even more bonkers than you're saying.

Dapper_Swindler
Feb 14, 2012

Im glad my instant dislike in you has been validated again and again.

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

A jury in Michigan, for the first time in American history, held the parent of a minor mass shooter criminally liable for her son's mass shooting.

She was convicted on 4 counts of involuntary manslaughter.

Since it is hard to keep track of all the mass shootings over the last few years, this was a school shooting where the mother was found to:

- Have given her son the gun.

- Texted her son to do a better job hiding bullets after he was caught with them in school and got in trouble.

- Let her son keep the semi-automatic handgun she bought him unlocked in his room.

- Covered for her son when he was caught multiple times making threats to shoot up the school and writing out his plans in notebooks.

- Let her son bring the gun to school, but told him not to take it out or get caught with it.

She says that she never believed that her son was capable of mass murder, so all of her actions were done within that context and she wasn't responsible for his actions.

The prosecution alleged that her level of negligence was so high that it qualified for involuntary manslaughter and the jury agreed.

https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/1754938615430308115

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/jennifer-crumbley-trial-verdict-rcna136937

they also took all their kids money out of his account when they ran from the cops because "well guess he wont need it", I dont know much about the dad but the mom seems like she was too busy with her own personal drama like carrying on an affair with a fire fighter then actually seeing what was wrong with her kid. sadly their are cases where the parents do clearly give a gently caress and try to get the help for the kid but the system fails or they fall between the cracks. the big one i remember being like that was the fedex shooting a couple years ago, which people only remember if at all, because the shooter was a brony

zoux posted:

The border deal was real real bad but the outcome of the very same politicians who have been demanding a solution to the border crisis turning around and killing it for electoral advantage is such a good outcome for the Democratic Party. Pretty risky to put that out there given it could've been passed, but I guess you never bet against GOP intransigence.

It seems almost too conspiratorial to say this was an intentional tactic, I don't think it was, I think the Dems are just scared of immigration since Americans (oh and every other nation in the world) are so insanely reactionary about it. But if it was the plan, it was quite a coup. I mean you got the head of the CBP union on Fox saying the GOP is lying about what's in the bill, you got Fox anchors directly contradicting Nancy Mace on the provisions of the bill.

https://twitter.com/highbrow_nobrow/status/1754610585923101070

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1754866298457059572

Doocey is pushing back! Doocey!!!

Furthermore, Plan B is now to pass a clean foreign aid package - which is what the Dems wanted in the first place

Yeah, i think the bill sucked but it could have been way way way worse and i am glad the GOP is too insane to play the game now.
anyway, i think plan b gets passed and either narroly passes or dies in the house.

PhazonLink
Jul 17, 2010

mobby_6kl posted:

...
Just have everyone wear airbags



that reminds me of some scifi ish concept drawing of what if humans evolved with cars, and yeah we would be flesh golems

Leon Trotsky 2012
Aug 27, 2009

YOU CAN TRUST ME!*


*Israeli Government-affiliated poster

The Lord of Hats posted:

No, no, this isn't the same thing.

They're rejecting the thing they wanted and asking to pass only the additional things the Democrats wanted instead, without the things they wanted.

It's even more bonkers than you're saying.

I don't know if they are planning on including everything that was in the original supplemental bill from October, but there was flood relief for New York/Florida and some other things that Republicans supported as well.

But, yes, they are now pretty much demanding that they pass a bill that Democrats originally wanted to pass and will only vote for it if they remove the parts they originally demanded be added.

Leon Trotsky 2012
Aug 27, 2009

YOU CAN TRUST ME!*


*Israeli Government-affiliated poster
This is what was in the original October version of the supplemental bill:

quote:

- Humanitarian and military aid for Ukraine.
- Humanitarian aid for both Gaza and Israel and military aid for Israel.
- Money for more immigration judges to process asylum requests faster.
- Disaster relief aid and flood insurance reimbursements for Hawaii, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and New York.
- Approval of sales of U.S. planes to Taiwan.
- Funding for additional inspection technology on the Mexico and Canadian borders to more quickly process vehicles passing through.
- More money for FEMA to fill disaster relief coffers so they aren't required to pass new funding for relief and allow FEMA to act more quickly to disburse money.
- Money to implement a permanent pay reform for national park firefighters that stops them from having their salary cut by 40% if congress doesn't vote to approve every year.
- Money for schools, highways, and rural areas to repair and modify their buildings to be more resistant to natural disasters.
- Additional funding for LIHEAP to provide free and subsidized heating oil this winter.
- Extending the 2021 stimulus bill's provision that subsidized up to $8,000 in child care costs that is set to expire at the end of the year.
- Money to extend a program to provide free internet to low income Americans.
- Reforms and money to encourage the development of enriched uranium and nuclear power to replace sources that previously came from Russia and encourage green energy.
- Money for grants to expand rehab and opioid treatment centers.
- Permanently expand the budget of the "Food for Peace" program that provides international food aid.

It's not clear from their public statements whether they are including all of that or just the foreign aid packages. Some of it, like LIHEAP funding for winter, doesn't make much sense now if it won't be available until April.

zoux
Apr 28, 2006

Dapper_Swindler posted:

Yeah, i think the bill sucked but it could have been way way way worse and i am glad the GOP is too insane to play the game now.
anyway, i think plan b gets passed and either narroly passes or dies in the house.

I will say I have zero faith in the American electorate to acknowledge what's going on and punish the GOP for their obvious bad faith dealing. I imagine by April Fox will be full-throated "Bad bill! Good kill!"

Dapper_Swindler
Feb 14, 2012

Im glad my instant dislike in you has been validated again and again.

zoux posted:

I will say I have zero faith in the American electorate to acknowledge what's going on and punish the GOP for their obvious bad faith dealing. I imagine by April Fox will be full-throated "Bad bill! Good kill!"

i mean the chuds won't obviously, but moderates who arnt fox types will probably get annoyed about it, to them its less "oh they have no dignity sir" and more "i thought this was a crisis and you were gonna pass something, why do you assholes do you jobs" type anger/annoyance.

FistEnergy
Nov 3, 2000

DAY CREW: WORKING HARD

Fun Shoe

koolkal posted:

It's amusing that this is the 2nd Dem president in a row where Republicans have saved the country from a lovely bill.

Right. I completely agree. It's surreal.

https://x.com/PhilipWegmann/status/1754933040491483364?s=20

What part of this is supposed to convince me to support the Democrats? The part where they stump and whip for a right-wing bill full of border hysteria/racism and billions more for an Israeli regime dedicated to genocide and oppression? Or the part where they get outsmarted and outmaneuvered by the GOP yet again?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Killer robot
Sep 6, 2010

I was having the most wonderful dream. I think you were in it!
Pillbug

zoux posted:

I will say I have zero faith in the American electorate to acknowledge what's going on and punish the GOP for their obvious bad faith dealing. I imagine by April Fox will be full-throated "Bad bill! Good kill!"

During the general this season I fully expect to see some of the both-sidesers I know talk about how Democrats wrote a border bill so draconian Republicans saved us from it.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply