T Nation

Determine This Mans Sentence (Baby Killer)

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/08/15/shaken.baby/index.html

Discuss

You know what gets me? All the comments about how there should be more information on not to shake babies, and that the dad probably didn’t know what would happen.

What happened to common sense? We don’t need more information, we need less idiots, and that includes the people who seem to think more pamphlets and mandatory classes are some how going to change things.

[quote]Squiggles wrote:
You know what gets me? All the comments about how there should be more information on not to shake babies, and that the dad probably didn’t know what would happen.

What happened to common sense? We don’t need more information, we need less idiots, and that includes the people who seem to think more pamphlets and mandatory classes are some how going to change things. [/quote]

Agreed.

Obviously the father shaking the baby is wrong. No question about that. One thing in the article that stuck out in my mind was the fact that the baby had previously broken ribs that were undetected by medical exams. I wonder if Brittle bone disease (osteogenesis imperfecta) had anything to do with it.

[quote]Squiggles wrote:
You know what gets me? All the comments about how there should be more information on not to shake babies, and that the dad probably didn’t know what would happen.

What happened to common sense? We don’t need more information, we need less idiots, and that includes the people who seem to think more pamphlets and mandatory classes are some how going to change things. [/quote]

Exactly, it’s common sense. When I read about stuff like this, it confirms for me that not everyone should be allowed to have kids. Some people might hate this, but I really think people need to have to prove they are capable somehow before they are allowed to reproduce. Whether it be some kind of formal licensing process, or testing process, or whatever.

This guy should burn for what he did though. It looks like he had been abusing the baby the whole time based on his other, older injuries.

[quote]Doug Adams wrote:
Obviously the father shaking the baby is wrong. No question about that. One thing in the article that stuck out in my mind was the fact that the baby had previously broken ribs that were undetected by medical exams. I wonder if Brittle bone disease (osteogenesis imperfecta) had anything to do with it.

[/quote]

It’s possible, but I’d be more willing to bet that the baby has been abused before.

[quote]AssOnGrass wrote:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/08/15/shaken.baby/index.html

Discuss[/quote]

I don’t really see what there is to discuss. It seems like a pretty clear cut case of 2nd degree murder. He should receive the maximum penalty in his state.

[quote]tedro wrote:
AssOnGrass wrote:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/08/15/shaken.baby/index.html

Discuss

I don’t really see what there is to discuss. It seems like a pretty clear cut case of 2nd degree murder. He should receive the maximum penalty in his state. [/quote]

I wasn’t turning it into a philosophical debate. Wanted to bust on this tool box who did this.

Just wanted to hear what people would sentence him to had they been the judge and there was no such thing as cruel and unusual punishment.

For example setting his balls on fire then throwing him into a pit of gasoline.

[quote]AssOnGrass wrote:
tedro wrote:
AssOnGrass wrote:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/08/15/shaken.baby/index.html

Discuss

I don’t really see what there is to discuss. It seems like a pretty clear cut case of 2nd degree murder. He should receive the maximum penalty in his state.

I wasn’t turning it into a philosophical debate. Wanted to bust on this tool box who did this.

Just wanted to hear what people would sentence him to had they been the judge and there was no such thing as cruel and unusual punishment.

For example setting his balls on fire then throwing him into a pit of gasoline.[/quote]

Gotcha. I like to save my most creative punishments for the sex predators. I think life should suffice in this case.

[quote]AngryVader wrote:
When I read about stuff like this, it confirms for me that not everyone should be allowed to have kids.

Some people might hate this, but I really think people need to have to prove they are capable somehow before they are allowed to reproduce. Whether it be some kind of formal licensing process, or testing process, or whatever.[/quote]

I completely disagree. On what basis can you decide if a person is eligible to parent? And who is permitted to decide what factors should be judged? There are too many variables.
Your train of thought is like banning guns because some times people are murdered (in a civilian situation).

You do not make a rule because of an exception.

And i doubt the person was like this prior to having the child. Stress and other factors can completely change a person. A test or license is meaningless.

I’m sure this guy is suffering enough already knowing he killed his own kid.

[quote]blazindave wrote:
AngryVader wrote:
When I read about stuff like this, it confirms for me that not everyone should be allowed to have kids.

Some people might hate this, but I really think people need to have to prove they are capable somehow before they are allowed to reproduce. Whether it be some kind of formal licensing process, or testing process, or whatever.

I completely disagree. On what basis can you decide if a person is eligible to parent? And who is permitted to decide what factors should be judged? There are too many variables.
Your train of thought is like banning guns because some times people are murdered (in a civilian situation).

You do not make a rule because of an exception.

And i doubt the person was like this prior to having the child. Stress and other factors can completely change a person. A test or license is meaningless.

I’m sure this guy is suffering enough already knowing he killed his own kid.[/quote]

It’s not an exception. There are millions of people out there completely unfit to bring children into the world and we have no way to stop them. The world has too many people as it is.

You doubt the person was like that before the child? Did you miss the part in the article about how they were both recovering alcoholics? They both clearly had issues long before they brought a child into the world.

Who cares if the guy is suffering. He killed an infant. He should burn.

[quote]blazindave wrote:
I completely disagree. On what basis can you decide if a person is eligible to parent? And who is permitted to decide what factors should be judged? There are too many variables.

Your train of thought is like banning guns because some times people are murdered (in a civilian situation).
[/quote]

Many of those incapable of safely operating a firearm, and many of the mentally unstable are banned from owning guns. Convicted felons are also frequently banned.

This is different than a ban on guns, this is a ban on the incompetent owning guns.

So, these types of gun bans are very similar to the regulations that AngryVader proposes, but this is not the connection you make. Your comparison is weak at best.

[quote]AngryVader wrote:
blazindave wrote:
AngryVader wrote:
When I read about stuff like this, it confirms for me that not everyone should be allowed to have kids.

Some people might hate this, but I really think people need to have to prove they are capable somehow before they are allowed to reproduce. Whether it be some kind of formal licensing process, or testing process, or whatever.

I completely disagree. On what basis can you decide if a person is eligible to parent? And who is permitted to decide what factors should be judged? There are too many variables.
Your train of thought is like banning guns because some times people are murdered (in a civilian situation).

You do not make a rule because of an exception.

And i doubt the person was like this prior to having the child. Stress and other factors can completely change a person. A test or license is meaningless.

I’m sure this guy is suffering enough already knowing he killed his own kid.

It’s not an exception. There are millions of people out there completely unfit to bring children into the world and we have no way to stop them. The world has too many people as it is.

You doubt the person was like that before the child? Did you miss the part in the article about how they were both recovering alcoholics? They both clearly had issues long before they brought a child into the world.

Who cares if the guy is suffering. He killed an infant. He should burn.[/quote]
What does an alcoholic have anything to do with child abuse? And where is the correlation between alcoholic and child abuser?
The article doesn’t mention anything about the father being drunk while he performed those acts against the baby. I’m sure if he was drunk, the article would have made a point to mention it.

“The newlyweds also became frequent caretakers to 1-year-old Corrine, a daughter Craig had with another woman. Family members said the couple’s only source of conflict was Craig’s interactions with Corrine’s mother.”
Seems like they could take care of a child just fine.

Also, what criteria would one have to pass to be eligible to parent a child?
Isn’t refusing someone the right to bear and parent their own biological child(ren) an infringment on human rights? You’re going to try to “legalize” and license one of the most basic (survival) acts a human (or animal in general) possesses?

Your “breeding and parenting license” sounds like something worthy of Hitler and straight out of the 1984 book.

edit: I know a couple who are in their late 40s. Both the mother and the child are …“slow” and everything is fine with them.

[quote]blazindave wrote:
AngryVader wrote:
blazindave wrote:
AngryVader wrote:
When I read about stuff like this, it confirms for me that not everyone should be allowed to have kids.

Some people might hate this, but I really think people need to have to prove they are capable somehow before they are allowed to reproduce. Whether it be some kind of formal licensing process, or testing process, or whatever.

I completely disagree. On what basis can you decide if a person is eligible to parent? And who is permitted to decide what factors should be judged? There are too many variables.
Your train of thought is like banning guns because some times people are murdered (in a civilian situation).

You do not make a rule because of an exception.

And i doubt the person was like this prior to having the child. Stress and other factors can completely change a person. A test or license is meaningless.

I’m sure this guy is suffering enough already knowing he killed his own kid.

It’s not an exception. There are millions of people out there completely unfit to bring children into the world and we have no way to stop them. The world has too many people as it is.

You doubt the person was like that before the child? Did you miss the part in the article about how they were both recovering alcoholics? They both clearly had issues long before they brought a child into the world.

Who cares if the guy is suffering. He killed an infant. He should burn.

What does an alcoholic have anything to do with child abuse? And where is the correlation between alcoholic and child abuser?
The article doesn’t mention anything about the father being drunk while he performed those acts against the baby. I’m sure if he was drunk, the article would have made a point to mention it.

“The newlyweds also became frequent caretakers to 1-year-old Corrine, a daughter Craig had with another woman. Family members said the couple’s only source of conflict was Craig’s interactions with Corrine’s mother.”
Seems like they could take care of a child just fine.

Also, what criteria would one have to pass to be eligible to parent a child?
Isn’t refusing someone the right to bear and parent their own biological child(ren) an infringment on human rights? You’re going to try to “legalize” and license one of the most basic (survival) acts a human (or animal in general) possesses?

Your “breeding and parenting license” sounds like something worthy of Hitler and straight out of the 1984 book.

[/quote]

Yep. I’m a Hitler wannabe. Thanks for keeping the argument rational.

Edit: I did have a laugh at this part of your response:

Are you serious? You really don’t know what being an alcoholic has to do with child abuse? You don’t think there’s any correlation between the two?

[quote]blazindave wrote:
Also, what criteria would one have to pass to be eligible to parent a child?
Isn’t refusing someone the right to bear and parent their own biological child(ren) an infringment on human rights? You’re going to try to “legalize” and license one of the most basic (survival) acts a human (or animal in general) possesses?
[/quote]

Reproduction has nothing to do with the survival of the individual partaking in the event.

Regulating reproduction would very likely increase the likelihood of survival of our species. Not to mention the quality of life of all.

[quote]AngryVader wrote:
blazindave wrote:
AngryVader wrote:
blazindave wrote:
AngryVader wrote:
When I read about stuff like this, it confirms for me that not everyone should be allowed to have kids.

Some people might hate this, but I really think people need to have to prove they are capable somehow before they are allowed to reproduce. Whether it be some kind of formal licensing process, or testing process, or whatever.

I completely disagree. On what basis can you decide if a person is eligible to parent? And who is permitted to decide what factors should be judged? There are too many variables.
Your train of thought is like banning guns because some times people are murdered (in a civilian situation).

You do not make a rule because of an exception.

And i doubt the person was like this prior to having the child. Stress and other factors can completely change a person. A test or license is meaningless.

I’m sure this guy is suffering enough already knowing he killed his own kid.

It’s not an exception. There are millions of people out there completely unfit to bring children into the world and we have no way to stop them. The world has too many people as it is.

You doubt the person was like that before the child? Did you miss the part in the article about how they were both recovering alcoholics? They both clearly had issues long before they brought a child into the world.

Who cares if the guy is suffering. He killed an infant. He should burn.

What does an alcoholic have anything to do with child abuse? And where is the correlation between alcoholic and child abuser?
The article doesn’t mention anything about the father being drunk while he performed those acts against the baby. I’m sure if he was drunk, the article would have made a point to mention it.

“The newlyweds also became frequent caretakers to 1-year-old Corrine, a daughter Craig had with another woman. Family members said the couple’s only source of conflict was Craig’s interactions with Corrine’s mother.”
Seems like they could take care of a child just fine.

Also, what criteria would one have to pass to be eligible to parent a child?
Isn’t refusing someone the right to bear and parent their own biological child(ren) an infringment on human rights? You’re going to try to “legalize” and license one of the most basic (survival) acts a human (or animal in general) possesses?

Your “breeding and parenting license” sounds like something worthy of Hitler and straight out of the 1984 book.

Yep. I’m a Hitler wannabe. Thanks for keeping the argument rational.
[/quote]

Are you admitting defeat? :stuck_out_tongue: Joking.
Didn’t say you were a Hitler wanna be but think about what you’re saying. You are the one proposing an irrational course of action.
You want the government or some organization to decide who is permitted to have and parent children.

Right. Let’s give the government more power.
That’s straight out of 1984.

[quote]AngryVader wrote:
blazindave wrote:
AngryVader wrote:
blazindave wrote:
AngryVader wrote:
When I read about stuff like this, it confirms for me that not everyone should be allowed to have kids.

Some people might hate this, but I really think people need to have to prove they are capable somehow before they are allowed to reproduce. Whether it be some kind of formal licensing process, or testing process, or whatever.

I completely disagree. On what basis can you decide if a person is eligible to parent? And who is permitted to decide what factors should be judged? There are too many variables.
Your train of thought is like banning guns because some times people are murdered (in a civilian situation).

You do not make a rule because of an exception.

And i doubt the person was like this prior to having the child. Stress and other factors can completely change a person. A test or license is meaningless.

I’m sure this guy is suffering enough already knowing he killed his own kid.

It’s not an exception. There are millions of people out there completely unfit to bring children into the world and we have no way to stop them. The world has too many people as it is.

You doubt the person was like that before the child? Did you miss the part in the article about how they were both recovering alcoholics? They both clearly had issues long before they brought a child into the world.

Who cares if the guy is suffering. He killed an infant. He should burn.

What does an alcoholic have anything to do with child abuse? And where is the correlation between alcoholic and child abuser?

The article doesn’t mention anything about the father being drunk while he performed those acts against the baby. I’m sure if he was drunk, the article would have made a point to mention it.

“The newlyweds also became frequent caretakers to 1-year-old Corrine, a daughter Craig had with another woman. Family members said the couple’s only source of conflict was Craig’s interactions with Corrine’s mother.”
Seems like they could take care of a child just fine.

Also, what criteria would one have to pass to be eligible to parent a child?
Isn’t refusing someone the right to bear and parent their own biological child(ren) an infringment on human rights? You’re going to try to “legalize” and license one of the most basic (survival) acts a human (or animal in general) possesses?

Your “breeding and parenting license” sounds like something worthy of Hitler and straight out of the 1984 book.

Yep. I’m a Hitler wannabe. Thanks for keeping the argument rational.

Edit: I did have a laugh at this part of your response:

"What does an alcoholic have anything to do with child abuse? And where is the correlation between alcoholic and child abuser? "

Are you serious? You really don’t know what being an alcoholic has to do with child abuse? You don’t think there’s any correlation between the two?

[/quote]

You can be a child abuser without being an alcoholic. Sure, there could be some form of correlation, but that can be true for anything.
I’m just saying that JUST because the guy was an alcoholic, doesn’t mean he shouldn’t be permitted to parent children.

Now we know he isn’t capable, but that’s not the point.

I do not agree with mentally retarded people having children and parenting them, but it’s just that your licensing comment struck me as off.
Sorry :stuck_out_tongue:

[quote]tedro wrote:
blazindave wrote:
Also, what criteria would one have to pass to be eligible to parent a child?
Isn’t refusing someone the right to bear and parent their own biological child(ren) an infringment on human rights? You’re going to try to “legalize” and license one of the most basic (survival) acts a human (or animal in general) possesses?

Reproduction has nothing to do with the survival of the individual partaking in the event.
[/quote]

It does and it doesn’t. Your survival is in the genes. Regardless of whether humanity continues or not, you would want your blood/gene line to continue onwards, because it ensures YOUR survival, in a sense.

Why else would you be willing to sacrifice more for your own offspring than for someone else’s?

“Regulating reproduction would very likely increase the likelihood of survival of our species. Not to mention the quality of life of all”

Sounds like a cruel punishment for something they have no control over. Do you then agree with sterilizing the mentally (and physically) retarded?

I also disagree with the likelihood of survival for our species. Our society improves thanks to a mental fitness, not a physical one.

You can do this for the mentally retarded but that would be such a cut and dry case that it wouldn’t require a parenting license. There is no need to be physically superior (in whatever shape or form) since we don’t live in the jungle.

[quote]blazindave wrote:
AngryVader wrote:
blazindave wrote:
AngryVader wrote:
blazindave wrote:
AngryVader wrote:
When I read about stuff like this, it confirms for me that not everyone should be allowed to have kids.

Some people might hate this, but I really think people need to have to prove they are capable somehow before they are allowed to reproduce. Whether it be some kind of formal licensing process, or testing process, or whatever.

I completely disagree. On what basis can you decide if a person is eligible to parent? And who is permitted to decide what factors should be judged? There are too many variables.
Your train of thought is like banning guns because some times people are murdered (in a civilian situation).

You do not make a rule because of an exception.

And i doubt the person was like this prior to having the child. Stress and other factors can completely change a person. A test or license is meaningless.

I’m sure this guy is suffering enough already knowing he killed his own kid.

It’s not an exception. There are millions of people out there completely unfit to bring children into the world and we have no way to stop them. The world has too many people as it is.

You doubt the person was like that before the child? Did you miss the part in the article about how they were both recovering alcoholics? They both clearly had issues long before they brought a child into the world.

Who cares if the guy is suffering. He killed an infant. He should burn.
What does an alcoholic have anything to do with child abuse? And where is the correlation between alcoholic and child abuser?

The article doesn’t mention anything about the father being drunk while he performed those acts against the baby. I’m sure if he was drunk, the article would have made a point to mention it.

“The newlyweds also became frequent caretakers to 1-year-old Corrine, a daughter Craig had with another woman. Family members said the couple’s only source of conflict was Craig’s interactions with Corrine’s mother.”
Seems like they could take care of a child just fine.

Also, what criteria would one have to pass to be eligible to parent a child?

Isn’t refusing someone the right to bear and parent their own biological child(ren) an infringment on human rights? You’re going to try to “legalize” and license one of the most basic (survival) acts a human (or animal in general) possesses?

Your “breeding and parenting license” sounds like something worthy of Hitler and straight out of the 1984 book.

Yep. I’m a Hitler wannabe. Thanks for keeping the argument rational.

Edit: I did have a laugh at this part of your response:

"What does an alcoholic have anything to do with child abuse? And where is the correlation between alcoholic and child abuser? "

Are you serious? You really don’t know what being an alcoholic has to do with child abuse? You don’t think there’s any correlation between the two?

You can be a child abuser without being an alcoholic. Sure, there could be some form of correlation, but that can be true for anything.
I’m just saying that JUST because the guy was an alcoholic, doesn’t mean he shouldn’t be permitted to parent children.

Now we know he isn’t capable, but that’s not the point.

I do not agree with mentally retarded people having children and parenting them, but it’s just that your licensing comment struck me as off.
Sorry :stuck_out_tongue:
[/quote]

Fair enough. :slight_smile: And I do realize that what I’m suggesting is a slippery slope as far as who controls it and governmental power, etc. I’m sure someone smarter than me might have a better idea on how to do something like that.

There are studies out that do show a correlation between alcoholism and child abuse though. It more than just that common back story you hear in movies where the character says, “My Dad was a drinker and he come home some nights and beat the crap out of us.”

But anyway, lets move on.

I can’t help but be disturbed by the fact that if the guy instead just killed the wife, it wouldn’t of had much (if any) news coverage.