Caroline Roche
//Should Ethan Crumbley’s parents be held accountable for their son’s crime?//
Hana St. Juliana. Tate Myre. Madisyn Baldwin. Justin Shilling. These are the names of the four young adults murdered by Ethan Crumbley on November 30th in the Oxford School shooting. Although these four experienced the worst consequence of Crumbley’s violence, the devastating impact is not limited to them, as many students at the event will suffer long-lasting traumatic effects. Unfortunately, in America, where there have been nearly one hundred school shootings since 2018, society is becoming increasingly numb to the gravity of such events. This inability to recognize the magnitude of a school shooting interferes with the urgency necessary for change. A crucial first step towards eliminating school shootings is to nip threatening behavior and murderous intentions in the bud. Those at risk of perpetrating a school shooting must be monitored; this starts within the home, in this case, the Crumbley’s home.
The Oxford shooting fatalities could have been avoided if the shooter’s parents had exercised more control. James and Jennifer Crumbley, the parents of Ethan, were well-aware of their son’s mental issues and violent thoughts. According to the Detroit Free Press, the prosecution—trying the parents—noted that the parents knew Crumbley was more depressed than usual; his family dog had recently died and his only friend had moved away. In addition, Crumbley displayed numerous other warning signs: abusing animals, keeping a dead bird’s head in a jar, and leaving it in the school bathroom. However, rather than seeking help for their son, Crumbley’s parents purchased him a gun for Christmas. This was an incredibly irresponsible decision–one that would cost many lives.
Just one day before the shooting, bystanders spotted Crumbley researching ammunition in class: “he was fascinated with guns … he had been researching ammunition while at a school, and he was seen watching violent videos of shootings that morning.” According to the prosecution, when the school contacted his parents about this, his mother texted him, writing: “Lol. I’m not mad at you. You have to learn not to get caught.” Crumbley’s mother was aware of this alarming behavior, yet she laughed it off, undermining the intensity of the issue. The Crumbleys should have become more alert and cautious when they witnessed Ethan exhibiting questionable behavior, knowing that he had access to a weapon.
On the morning of the shooting, Crumbley drew graphic images and looked up disturbing videos of school shootings. Furthermore, the school discovered a note he wrote with the words, “the thoughts won’t stop. Help me,” along with sketches of guns and a person bleeding out. Promptly after discovering this note, the school met with Crumbley and his parents, telling them to find their son counseling within 48 hours. Instead, they refused to take him out of school. Just moments later, he allegedly returned to class with a backpack carrying the murder weapon, killing four innocent classmates. Providing access to a gun to someone who elicits serious concern from the school, a history of disturbing actions, alarming drawings, and fascination with past school shootings, is extremely irresponsible and merits legal consequences. Oxford High School also should have forced Crumbley to go home regardless of what the parents said. Schools must have more intense protocols in place for the threat of violent behavior; they must always err on the side of caution.
In America, it is our second amendment right to bear arms. Although no one should be able to erase that right from the Constitution—as that would be unfair to responsible owners—lawmakers must impose stricter gun laws and background checks to ensure that those who have access to a gun remain in the right mental state and pose a limited threat to their community. Guns should be used for protection and self-defense, not as a tool to murder innocent people. In addition, as owners of guns, parents must be liable for the consequences of what their gun is used for if their children are a potential threat to society. As in the case of the Crumbleys, when there is any inclination that a child has thoughts about gun violence and exhibits threatening behavior, parents must ensure that their child does not have access to a weapon. If there were more repercussions for the abuse of the right to bear arms, gun owners would likely act more responsibly, leading to fewer deaths of innocents.
Citizens pay their respects for the lives lost in the Oxford school shooting
Students evacuating the high school after the shooting
