• mrcleanup@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    There’s a difference between permissiveness and liability. Let’s say a ten year old gets ahold of a gun and kills a parent. Are we not still going to hold them criminally liable? We also wouldn’t not charge an adult for the same crime just because they were old enough to legally own a gun.

    Spoiler alert that actually happened… https://www.wpr.org/justice/charged-homicide-shooting-death-his-mother-10-year-old-being-tried-adult-some-legal-experts-say

    My point is that while we reasonably think permission and liability should somehow be linked, they aren’t actually.

    • jimbolauski@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      Your murder analogy is a bit of a straw man, just about everyone is held responsible for their actions in a legal capacity even minors. On top of that you once again didn’t answer my question.

      Liable adults are deemed to be competent, they are liable for all their actions criminally and civilly.

      How can a person be deemed competent enough to be liable for all their actions but not competent enough to use tobacco, alcohol, own a firearm?