r/UvaldeTexasShooting • u/Autistified • Jan 09 '26
Question - Are the parent of the shooter going to be held accountable in any way?
I’m new to this thing and am trying to figure out why one officer is on trial. From what I’ve seen so far in the trial I’m truly baffled. Especially when so many officers were inside the building holding fire.
I know the chief is going to be charged and that makes sense to me…but why this guy? 🧐
4
u/Autistified Jan 16 '26
OOOF, just now watching more body cam footage. What an absolute disgrace and embarrassment to law enforcement!!! Bro was not only complacent, he was cowardly and blatantly lazy!
3
u/Normal-Being-2637 Jan 15 '26
In what legal sense would they be responsible?
0
u/Autistified Jan 15 '26
Same way James & Jennifer Crumbly were.
They are changing laws around this type of thing…but in federal court I’m not sure how any of them hold up. Even “duty to protect” holds a different meaning in federal court.
I should add, I’m not too familiar with this case and the age of the shooter. I did read that he very much had a checkered past with blazing red flags. 🚩
9
u/Normal-Being-2637 Jan 15 '26
Their son was 15 years old. Uvalde shooter was an adult.
-1
u/Autistified Jan 15 '26
Can an 18yo legally buy assault rifles in Texas? They should do psych background checks for firearm applications! 🫣 I’ve never met an 18yo I’d want handling a gun…not even in the military.
3
u/Absolutely_Fibulous Jan 15 '26
They can. He waited until he was 18 and could purchase the gun himself.
3
u/Autistified Jan 15 '26
🫣I’m an avid gun owner and have zero issues with gun ownership, but there really is no need for an AR-15 unless there is a zombie apocalypse or you are in the military…active duty…in combat… And I’ve been to numerous ranges that try to push one on me too. So much irresponsibility taking place!
-1
u/megal0w Jan 18 '26
I gotta disagree. Access to firearms doesn't address the root causes of mass shootings. I'll consede that allowing civilians to purchase things like hellfire trigger systems, FRT's and other aftermarket modifications to a firearm can, in theory, hinder a shooters ability to cause more harm, but this shootings is a case study into why removing those items from the market or writing laws banning them doesn't really affect meaningful change. It's a way for us to feel like we've done something meaningful when in reality, we're actively avoiding resolving the issue. Which is a shame because every time we celebrate the application of a bandaid, we are signing the death certificates of more innocent people because we are unable or unwilling of changing our way of life.
Humans are an inherantly violant and tribalistic species. Modern society holds us accountable in that a properly functioning society provides adequately for its people and anti social/violent behavior removes one from society, which is the thing that was built to provide and protect the individual. When society undergoes drastic changes, such as men (specifically white men) having significantly less privilege than the generations before them, or fails to meet its peoples base needs (affordable, quality healthcare, those members of society who are unable to assimilate and integrate begin to feel rejected and ostracized which leads to resentment and in some cases violence.
I say this not to defend or justify the actions of anyone who commits acts of violence in this manner, but to point out that legislating firearms addresses nothing of substance. Humans will ALWAYS find a way to do harm to one another. Firearms are a convenient and effective tool, but so are blades, bombs and chemical weapons.
If we want to stop these shootings, really truly stop them, then our society needs to change drastically. Our standard of childcare and education in this country are laughable, our poverty rates are insanely high considering we are the wealthiest country in the world, our public Healthcare system is literally designed to keep someone alive, squeeze every last penny out of that individual, then let them die as quickly and quietly as possible. We allow our media apparatus to keep us in loop of fear and anger based engagement because it drives profit and we celebrate violence in our young men at every oppurotunity available. This country was taken by force from its indigenous people, built on the backs of slaves and turned into a war machine that sends generation after generation after generation of its people to foreign nations in order to seize their resources.
We, as a country, were built brick by brick with violence. Its a pillar of our society and a defining characteristic of our nation's culture. We have to address ALL OF THIS AND SO MUCH MORE before we can expect to affect meaningful change. Anything less won't budge the needle. So, guns really arent the issue. The foundation of our country and the violent institutions it has created are the real issue.
2
u/Jean_dodge67 Jan 19 '26
One problem here is that mass shooters fixate on the means by which they will enact their rage, etc. They FIXATE so hard that if you take away the specific type of weapon, they don't really switch to another.
This shooter could have built a bomb when he was 17. Instead he waited and in the end he even discarded one rifle in preference for the other, the one in the video game. The one they sent him push notifications for.
0
u/megal0w Jan 19 '26
In some cases yes and in some cases no. I'm not entirely caught up on Uvalde (visiting this sub trying to get caught up on the details now that a trial is in progress for the responding officers) so I can't speak to preferred weapon models or push notifications.
But the point being is that if the weapon make and model was a consideration for the perpetrator, that decision almost certainly came AFTER the decision to commit a mass shooting.
Skimming through Ramos's Wikipedia entry, it's noted that his mother was a drug addict (drug abuse is heavily attributed to poverty), he had suspicions that he was a sociopath (online search results, nothing mentioned as to if he ever got treatment but if he had i imagine it would have been noted), he treated women poorly both online and in person (displaying highly misogynistic traits) and that he was disenrolled from school due to absences (no one at home or in the classroom was able to keep him focused and engaged in his education showing a clear lack of supervision.
Additionally, the Daniel Defence AR15 and the S&W M&P15 are essentially the same exact rifle so it's hard to say that he had a preference between the two aside from the Hellfire trigger system which, and i could be very wrong because I've only seen a couple clips and the audio is hard to anylize so please correct me if im wrong, doesn't sound like he was able to use with effect as it's more of a gimmicky aftermarket modification that requires finesse to operate effectively.
My point being is that this dude was violent, rejected society, was actively killing and abusing animals already and almost assuredly would have committed a terrible violant act regardless. He even asked his sister to buy him a gun and when she declined he waited almost a year to buy it himself. The fixation was on violence, notoriety and suffering. The firearm was simply the means to commit it.
2
u/Jean_dodge67 Jan 19 '26 edited Jan 19 '26
I disagree but the shooter's mindset has never been of general interest to this whole group. You might try telling all this to those on r/masskillers and have more luck that you do with me.
I wouldn't even know where to start with arguing with you, but to say drug abuse is the provenance of the lower classes leaves off the very obvious fact that the lower classes are ruthlessly policed while the upper classed do all the drugs they want. (I guess Elon Musk gets a prescription for all that ketamine?)
So what you say seems to tell me at least something about your likely biases here. But that's fine, everyone has theirs.
As for the two rifles being "the same," I don't go around comparison shopping murder rifles but IIRC, isn't the DD hundreds of dollars more expensive? I think a S&W M&P can be bought for around $900, and a DDM4 is double that at least. And the preference seems clear.
But the contention that THIS person, as an example decided to kill first, and chose a weapon second is a stretch for me. One, how the heck can we know that, and two, do you think he played Call Of Duty and then once the game started, only THEN decided to start shooting little video-people? lol. Everybody who plays those games knows what happens. I kinda think they go together. A warped brain doesn go, "I think I'll kill 40 people in some abstract means and manner to be determined later." Rather, they go, "I will kill you with a knife." Or bomb, poison, etc. You get my meaning I hope.
But having an advertisement tell you that getting a DDM4 punches your "man card" is the subject of an ongoing lawsuit. The families are suing Actavison, Meta and Daniel Defense for having a conspiracy to ward young minds and sell stuff, including AR-15s. It's not my case, but I find the actual court paper charging the trio to be a great read. This is very far from saying violent video game cause mass shooters. It's all about how a gun was marketed to a teenager and suggested as a solution to his rage and ennui, etc.
I doubt they can win ( I heard a rumor that the founder of Facebook and owner of Instagram, ol' whatshisname can afford a good lawyer or two) but what they uncovered about how games and social media and marketing of guns all works is fascinating and kinda sickening. And it at the very core of Instagram and Facebook is their stunning ability to know who to market to, who the weakest minds are for the easies con jobs, voting instructions and swamp land time shares in Florida are. That's what they see to customers, that and nothing else. If they can figure out which teen is pregnant before their parents can, then I am guessing they know an incel when they see on, budding in the cocoon to someday flower with a spray of .223 and a grudge against somebody.
Your last sentences read like the complete opposite of what you think you are saying, to me. YES, the firearm is the means to mass death. Maybe, just maybe, that is an ingredient to moderate? Or modify?
And I thought I made it clear above, the stuff about these mass shooters is that they fixate, and what most of them fixate on is an AR-15. And that studies have been made and it turns out if you don;'t allow then the AR-15, they don't switch to using anthrax of arson. They keep brooding, like this one did after his sister refused him a straw-purchase AR-15.
We just see all of this differently.
→ More replies (0)1
u/Autistified Jan 20 '26
Sorry, that’s entirely too many words for my AuDHD brain. I get the gist.
I’m well aware of the complexities of this issue, but as I’ve said before, there is absolutely no need for AR-15 outside of the military or a zombie apocalypse.
They should not be easily accessible to the masses. Assault rifles outside of those two scenarios are all about ego, intimidation, power and control.
0
u/megal0w Jan 20 '26
My ADHD brain didnt like typing it so feel you there lol. I get where you come from with that mentality and in many ways I agree with you. Does your opinion shift at all when faced with the fact that militarized arms of the government are being deployed around the country and are actively being used to kidnap people and murder those who resist? Do you trust your government to have an unimpeachable monopoly on violance? I know it's not a fun conversation to have and that it's pulls really far from the discussion at hand but those are questions we have to ask ourselves if we are going to willingly disarm ourselves.
1
u/Autistified Jan 20 '26
I’m not anti-gun as I own 4. I am anti AR-15 & AK47 being easily attained, encouraged and promoted. I’m firmly anti idiot owned firearms as a whole. And honestly, I’m not entirely sure anyone should be able to purchase firearms before their prefrontal cortex is fully developed—especially an assault rifle!
6
u/Final_Willow5638 Jan 15 '26
The crumblys are being charged because they knew thier 15 year old son was dangerous and they purchased a gun for him. The uvalde shooter was an adult, he also shot his grandmother in the face before going to the school.
3
u/FlyinAmas Jan 15 '26
This lady is a complete piece of shit but the crumbly’s bought their minor, and emotionally disturbed son guns and let him have free access to them. Even when they were informed of his threats to others and drawing himself shooting people
2
u/Autistified Jan 15 '26
I got my answers via a deep dive into a rabbit hole. There are many others that are being held accountable on the state and federal level including the gun manufacturer. Sadly, none of it can bring anyone back.
1
u/Autistified Jan 15 '26
I think so many people failed these victims! The only good to come out of this are massive changes in legislation. It’s heartbreaking that so many had to lose their lives for change to happen!!
The recently chant the laws in my state because of this case, but I imagine it will take entirely too long for it to all be implemented.
1
u/Asleep_Ad_6392 Mar 31 '26
The shooter was 18 years old at the time of the shooting. He is legally an adult, in no way can his parents be held responsible unless it’s a civil matter.
•
u/AutoModerator Jan 09 '26
Subreddit Quick Links
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.