There were a series of signs leading up to the tragic killings at Oxford High School north of Detroit—as there usually are—that should have alerted trained, responsible people that the young shooter was a serious threat. The following from townhall.com.
Ethan Crumbley, 15, is charged with murdering four of his fellow students and wounding with intent to kill seven others. He has also been charged with terrorism.
Note the following signs:
[Crumbley] had displayed disciplinary problems for some time.
On the day of the shooting, he was summoned to the school office after misbehaving.
His parents were also called in, an indication that officials were taking this latest incident more seriously than previous ones.
Oakland prosecutor Karen McDonald told CNN there is a “strong possibility” Crumbley had the gun used in the killings in his backpack when he met with school officials and his parents.
Did no one think it unusual, if not suspicious, that Crumbley would bring the backpack with him, instead of leaving it in his locker or the classroom?
Why didn’t someone ask him to open the backpack and check its contents?
Crumbley’s parents, James and Jennifer Crumbley, have been charged with four counts each of homicide and involuntary manslaughter.
James Crumbley reportedly bought the gun Ethan is charged with using in the murders and gave it to his son. However, this is hard to believe.
In the state of Michigan, James Crumbley would have had to have undergone a Firearm Owners Safety Course before being allowed to purchase a firearm. Would he contradict the tools of that training?
But still allegations reported and questions to consider:
Why would a father do that and why was the weapon not properly secured so it could not be taken anywhere without parental notice, permission and supervision, especially to school?
Did Ethan ask his father to purchase the gun for him?
What reason did he give? Did James Crumbley ask him?
Why would a father give a gun to a son with a record of disciplinary problems?
If any of the above is remotely accurate, it would be troubling and would disqualify James Crumbley from legally possessing a firearm.
And whether any of it is accurate or not, legal possession for all legal firearm owners has again been wrongfully brought into question. The Second Amendment is again being attacked
In a search of Ethan Crumbley’s cellphone, police found detailed descriptions of his wish to kill classmates.
They say he also had a journal and in at least one social media post expressed elation that he had access to a handgun purchased by his father.
Did no one else—classmates, administrators or parents—see or know about any of this?
If they did, why was it not reported to authorities?
What happened at Oxford High School was terrible, and many possible preclusions were wrongfully violated at worst and ignored at best.
Why wasn’t Ethan Crumbley stopped? Available signs were missed, but were they ignored?
This MUST BE stopped. Danger signs must not be ignored.
Here we are again—Individual Rights versus the Common Good. Damned if we do and damned if we don’t.
