Michigan DA politicizing school shooting tragedy by charging parents

[Seran]

The laws on the books in regards to terrorism in Texas and Michigan are very similar, nowhere in either law does it state someone is guilty of terrorism if they fire a gun in a school.

Why can't you just admit the shooter in Texas deserves to be charged with terrorism like you immediately said the shooter in Michigan deserves to be treated as a terrorist?

It can't be because of their respective skin colors can it be? You're not a racist are you? That's a trick question by the way, you are an even bigger racist than time4fun.

Because your premise is false and I think your reasonings are about as insane as you are.

Also, you're categorically wrong about one shooter being charged with terrorism, while another did not. Texas doesn't have a terror specific law other than making non violent terroristic threats. Look at the Texas mass shooters Patrick Crusius who set out to kill as many Mexicans as possible and killed 23 alone, no terrorism charge: specifically as one doesn't exist in Texas.

Skin color is not a motive in either the Texas or Michigan shootings, nor in their subsequent charging decisions.

[Tgo01]

Because your premise is false and I think your reasonings are about as insane as you are.

Okay explain your reasoning for why the shooter in Michigan deserves to be treated as a terrorist yet the shooter in Texas doesn't.

You know other than the obvious which is the color of their skin and the political affiliation of their parents.

The floor is yours.

[Seran]

Oh, another big difference. The shooter in texas was released the next day and celebrated a party which was posted on social media. His victims were surely terrorized by the fact he was now out and free and able to finish what he started.

He was released on bail. Also, a party? Lol, the dude was shown in a video holding a child in a kitchen. Nobody in that video was partying. Which means you're an idiot.

[Seran]

Okay explain your reasoning for why the shooter in Michigan deserves to be treated as a terrorist yet the shooter in Texas doesn't.

You know other than the obvious which is the color of their skin and the political affiliation of their parents.

The floor is yours.

I reject your premise. Now go cry bitter white nationalist tears in the corner and lament why a kid who shot an injured four people, and another who shot and killed four people weren't charged exactly the same way. Maybe your sub 75 IQ can figure out the difference in severity and circumstances of the crimes.

[Tgo01]

I reject your premise.

So you're a complete racist who is perfectly okay with the justice system charging people with bogus crimes because of politics and no other reason?

I mean this was already completely obvious but it's good to see you admit it.

[Gelston]

I reject your premise. Now go cry bitter white nationalist tears in the corner and lament why a kid who shot an injured four people, and another who shot and killed four people weren't charged exactly the same way. Maybe your sub 75 IQ can figure out the difference in severity and circumstances of the crimes.

The intent was the same. Of course the one that didn't kill wouldn't get murder charges, but the terrorism charge is strange.

[Methais]

I'm not a district attorney, nor are you. But if you want to suggest to their respective counties than the laws of Texas or Michigan should be considered in states with unequal statutes, why I'm sure they'll promptly ignore your suggestions.

You don't have to be a lawyer to have an opinion. You had plenty of (shit) opinions in the other shooting thread, despite the fact that you're not a lawyer over there either.

You're weak.

[Seran]

The intent was the same. Of course the one that didn't kill wouldn't get murder charges, but the terrorism charge is strange.

And yet the DA has decided that it meets all three criteria for the charge in Michigan. The third is perhaps the most ambiguous and likely prone to being dismissed by the judge.

"An act that would be a violent felony under the laws of this state, whether or not committed in this state.

"An act that the person knows or has reason to know is dangerous to human life.

"An act that is intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population or influence or affect the conduct of government or a unit of government through intimidation or coercion."

[Gelston]

And yet the DA has decided that it meets all three criteria for the charge in Michigan. The third is perhaps the most ambiguous and likely prone to being dismissed by the judge.

Who was he trying to coerce? Did he create a manifesto? What was his message? Nah, he was just trying to kill people.

It'll get dismissed because it isn't terrorism unless he was trying to make a statement.

[Seran]

Who was he trying to coerce? Did he create a manifesto? What was his message? Nah, he was just trying to kill people.

It'll get dismissed because it isn't terrorism unless he was trying to make a statement.

And yet he not only posted on Instagram, but recorded a manifesto on his site joke and within a journal according to the county sheriff. Seems like they have intent to commit terrorism down. I think the defense will try to argue ambiguity in the law.

To note, if his statement about shooting in the school was known to the school before the shooting, then contributory negligence may be in order. Civil lawsuits would also be a slam dunk if true.

"Now I become death, destroyer of worlds, see you tomorrow Oxford"

Lt. Tim Willis of the Oakland County Sheriff's Office said at the arraignment that videos were recovered from Crumbley’s cellphone, including “a video made by him the night before the incident wherein he talked about shooting and killing students the next day at Oxford High School. Further, a journal was recovered from Ethan’s backpack also detailing his desire to shoot up a school to include murdering students.”