zlacker

> It’s almost always a deeply frustrated parent or caregiver who is desperate, trying to assert control over a screaming infant,

That sounds like malicious abuse to me.

> and does not understand that this could kill them, or at least thinks they will not.

It would still be manslaughter at least, if not murder. And if shaking the baby was itself felonious abuse, then an accidental death resulting from that is probably felony murder in states with such statutes.

>>mcpack+(OP)
And… what exactly is achieved by this sort of justice system? Congrats, you killed some undereducated, desperate parents who fucked up and lost their child.

>>jncfhn+n3
> And… what exactly is achieved by this sort of justice system?

It suppresses the rate of vigilante justice. If the courts can generally do a better job than the vigilantes themselves, then society comes out ahead.

If we were to live in a society where parents can abuse their children to death and receive nothing more than a scolding from the state to be more careful in the future, then we'd have a lot more people killing each other in retribution. And once that starts in earnest, it often forms unending blood feuds. At the very least, imprisonment for manslaughter is warranted. For the state to mete out no punishment at all would be an abdication of their duty to deliver justice so that others don't have to seek it themselves.

>>mcpack+Y8
If blood feuds become that much of an intractable issue, why not target those regions for fentanyl-powered self-mollification?

That's obviously a galaxy brain argument, but what's to stop someone from going Tim McVeigh over a routine miscarriage of justice?

>>BeFlat+Ka
What?

>>mcpack+Y8
I don't quite follow. If a child dies due to abuse by a single parent, who is it who you suppose would become a vigilante? The child is unlikely to have had any adult friends or relations that would want retribution so much that they kill the late child's parent.

If this was manslaughter/murder of an unrelated adult, then I could see that there could conceivably be some friends or relations inspired to vigilantism, but this thread has mainly been about manslaughter of children by parents due to incompetence.

>>mcpack+Y8
There are few enough death squads of vigilantes waiting for their chance to murder parents who accidentally killed their children that we can disregard this as a meaningful threat.

SBS deaths are largely vastly different from intentionally abusive parents. These are accidental harms.

Also sorry but… what? You seem to be proposing that if the law doesn’t support a very specific standard of Justice that vigilantes are the logical consequence. This argument is not supported by anything and could be applied to any level of Justice.

>>mcpack+qw
When it's the government committing the unpunished crimes, what else do you think will happen?