I don't know what to think of this. Fair enough, the Dad is accountable for something serious, but 'manslaughter.'? That's shocking/weird.

"For the sins of your fathers you, though guiltless, must suffer."


I guess it can work both ways.

Ummm...wow.

This is where imo the law simply fails.

That's a little shocking, but I suppose if that's the norm for German law, then he should've known better, and locked up his pistol. It's why gun control exists.

15 dead persons isn't exactly a "**** happens" kind of situation.

This article doesn't tell us enough info. It's possible that the dad left the guns and weapons pretty much unsecured (which may or may not be a problem), or maybe he had them locked up, and his son, who's basically an adult by almost any definition of the word, figured out how to get them anyway.

I always thought the point of locking up your weapons was in case you have little kids around who might play with them because they don't know better. If your kid is 17, he's old enough to be responsible.

I agree with Wade, a 17 year old isn't a kid that doesn't know better. From what little information is here, I don't see what the father did wrong. I don't see how you can negligently store your weapons and guns that would lead to this kind of killing spree.

The weapon used was not kept in a secure safe/locker. Which is a problem under German law and why the father is facing the charges for his negligence.

The purpose of locking up your weapons is so that they dont get into the wrong hands. Be that a young kid who does not know better, or a kid that should know better, or a kid who knows better but has evil intent on their mind, it does not make much difference really, the gun was accessible when it should not of been.

It shouldn't even be his fault, but they had to get technical and find justice for those 15....so they had to do something and they put the finger on the father.

I think it's a little ridiculous to be honest for him to be charged with manslaughter because his son randomly exploded and went off the deep end. Yes, he should be in trouble for failing to secure his gun around someone who was not qualified to handle one, but I don't see why the manslaughter charges.

Should the government be hit with the same charges since they failed to effectively prevent deaths from hurricane Katrina? If everyone in this world was held responsible for deaths they could have prevented, half of the world's surface would be covered in prisons.

I think perhaps that's a little extreme. Being a partial cause of, and failing to prevent death are not necessarily on the same level.

This would be true, except that there are varying degrees of fault to be considered. I think the reasoning behind his conviction is that without that particular weapon, there's the possibility that the slayings may not have occurred. You could argue that the boy may just have found another weapon to use, but the point is that no matter how slim the possibility is, in the eyes of the Law that is where the fault originated.