[QUOTE=cholla;2664393]What I posted about was the decision not to hold the parents responsible for the actions of their minor child . When a child commits a crime it is parental negligence . That is what these parents are guilty of.[/QUOTE]
There are times when it is parental negligence and there are times when it is not. Young people have a lot of influences in their lives beyond their parents. I did bad things when I was young that had nothing to do with my parents. They were good parents who were involved in my life. The fact is they could not be with me 24/7 or control who I met and was influenced by. I was an honor student and was really good at playing the “fine young man” role. I fooled a lot of people from my parents, to teachers and some of my friends. I wasn’t an axe murderer but I did some things that could have landed me squarely in juvenile detention more than once.
[QUOTE=cholla;2664393]It is an excuse for parents not taking on the responsibility they have. No one forced them to become parents it was their decision. By making that decision they take responsibility for supervising their child until the law considers that child an adult . Or hiring someone to help them do that supervision. This is a 27/7 responsibility. Anything less is negligence .
Why should another person suffer damage from someone’s child either physical or monetary without compensation from the parent?[/QUOTE]
Some parents do not take as much responsibility as they should. There is no way a parent can keep watch over a teenager 24/7. It is impossible. When a person reaches their teenage years they know right from wrong and should be responsible for their actions unless the parents were an active accomplice or knew about an eminent act and stood by and did nothing to prevent it.
[QUOTE=cholla;2664393]They can most just don’t . If they hire adults or have others such as adult family then the child or children can be supervised 24/7 .[/QUOTE]
Now the extended family is also responsible?
[QUOTE=cholla;2664393]Now I want to take it down several notches from murder & up a couple from this internet crime.With this example:
Say the same 13 year old boy was your neighbor . His crime was vandalism . His act was to take a screwdriver & deeply scratch your car in every conceivable location . The parents had no knowledge of his intention of doing this .
Do you still hold the parents no responsible civilly?[/QUOTE]
Not necessarily. This is a good example of why we have insurance, police and a juvenile detention system.
[QUOTE=cholla;2664393]I do & I would want a court to decide the parents were negligent in their supervision of their child & therefore responsible to pay for the damage .[/QUOTE]
It is something that can be litigated in civil court. A different judge, in a different country, might rule differently.
[QUOTE=cholla;2664393]My opinion is based on US law & I don’t know much about Germany’s laws. I do remember reading about Germany taking children from parents that tried to homeschool . They considered this negligence. From that I know that a German court can hold a parent negligent.[/QUOTE]
Now you are talking about something different. If a parent is homeschooling then they are integrally involved in the process that is being litigated. For most acts of vandalism, illegal downloading etc., they are not.