Matt Jones

Oh, good times.

Well, I think that so I think the key fact here is the FBI got a tip that

that this kid might shoot up a school.

And they came to the house, and they interviewed the dad and the kid.

The FBI ended up determining that it wasn't an actionable threat.

But the parent knew about it, and after the FBI came, went and bought his kid an AR-15 anyway.

So that, I think, is the key fact.

So just theoretically...

Do you think a parent should be charged for essentially negligent homicide?

They're charging him with second-degree murder.

I think that's going to be a harder one for them to succeed.

But I think the negligent homicide charges will be the real charge.

Do you think they should be charged, not just because their kids do it, but if they know their kid is potentially a threat and then they buy the weapon that they do it?

And apparently he didn't have it locked up, all these other facts.

So what is the act that you think the father did that makes him criminally liable?

Is it buying the gun?

Well, first of all, I would argue 15-year-olds don't need guns.

I might be in the minority on that, but I'm okay with that position.

I mean, we don't let 15-year-olds buy nudie magazines.

Do we need them to buy automatic weapon magazines?