In the article you referenced, if I am remembering correctly, the mom said her son was sad so they bought him a gun to cheer him up. The parents armed their son with an instrument of death. And whether they thought it through or not, he could have taken the gun to kill himself or others. Either way, they let him loose.
Each case should be looked at separately, but I think in this case, the parents should have been liable, and were, for the son’s actions.

I agree with @chyna, each case should be looked at separately.

I’d just make it illegal for kids to own guns, which would make the parents liable in many circumstances. This case absolutely opens up the legal possibility that many acts of parental negligence will be held criminally liable, but maybe it should? This case at least creates a high hurdle of negligence for prosecution.

Absolutely yes, along with the store that sold the gun and the manufacturer.

The whole point of a firearm is to kill people. Any civilian /no LEO involved in someone using a firearm for its intended purpose should be prosecuted.

As a general rule? No. People are responsible for their own actions.

If the parent exhibited extreme negligence essentially created the circumstances that allowed the shooting to happen, which was entirely foreseeable, then absolutely hold them accountable.

I agree with @gorillapaws. I’m not sure in this case of the state requirements, but here everyone is required to take a course, Hunters Education, with safety, gun care, proper handling and ethics. All free at our conservation offices for all ages.

We had guns unlocked my entire life (and alcohol) and it never crossed my mind to touch them, let alone cause harm, with them. I think in this MI case it was a just verdict.

Not with just those two facts.

If the gun was just lying around then yes.