3 ms·

Negligent homicide,? Maybe make a new law

nradov 4y ago
The way that negligent homicide is defined it would be impossible to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a particular person's fatal cancer was directly caused by talc. A strong probability isn't sufficient for a criminal conviction. Some new law would likely be needed. How could such a law be written in a manner that satisfies the vagueness doctrine?
- themitigating 4y ago
  Laws don't need to be perfect and many are vague for whatever reason but that's why there's trials. This is a serious problem if you want to wait until a perfect law is written it won't be solved. Also, can you provide a some other solution?
  - nradov 4y ago
    You're really missing the point. Criminal laws must satisfy the vagueness doctrine or else all convictions will be thrown out on appeal. There are literally centuries of case law in this. So your comment makes no sense and displays a lack of understanding about the basics of the criminal justice system.
    - themitigating 4y ago
      I did miss the point. I thought "vagueness doctrine" was just a term invented here because it kinda sounds like it. You know, a catch all to deter people who want to make rules or regulations. Considering laws exist for many types of actions it should be possible to make one in which knowingly producing and distributing any product for any price that you know to cause harm, and that harm is not made of aware of to the public in an obvious way, should be held liable for any damages that occur from the use of that product as indicated by the instructions This includes people that approve of the actions and/or responsible for the subordinates involved in the production/approval of said products, in the company/subsidiary/any related entity, as long as that person was provided with the information or access to information that would allow them to ascertain the risk with a reasonable amount of accuracy. However, it shan't be required to show that person actually consumed or understood that information if it was expected that they do so. The punishment must be but can not be limited to monetary fines which can not be purged through bankruptcy. <something about jail here> etc etc.

The way that negligent homicide is defined it would be impossible to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a particular person's fatal cancer was directly caused by talc. A strong probability isn't sufficient for a criminal conviction. Some new law would likely be needed. How could such a law be written in a manner that satisfies the vagueness doctrine?

themitigating 4y ago
Laws don't need to be perfect and many are vague for whatever reason but that's why there's trials. This is a serious problem if you want to wait until a perfect law is written it won't be solved. Also, can you provide a some other solution?
- nradov 4y ago
  You're really missing the point. Criminal laws must satisfy the vagueness doctrine or else all convictions will be thrown out on appeal. There are literally centuries of case law in this. So your comment makes no sense and displays a lack of understanding about the basics of the criminal justice system.
  - themitigating 4y ago
    I did miss the point. I thought "vagueness doctrine" was just a term invented here because it kinda sounds like it. You know, a catch all to deter people who want to make rules or regulations. Considering laws exist for many types of actions it should be possible to make one in which knowingly producing and distributing any product for any price that you know to cause harm, and that harm is not made of aware of to the public in an obvious way, should be held liable for any damages that occur from the use of that product as indicated by the instructions This includes people that approve of the actions and/or responsible for the subordinates involved in the production/approval of said products, in the company/subsidiary/any related entity, as long as that person was provided with the information or access to information that would allow them to ascertain the risk with a reasonable amount of accuracy. However, it shan't be required to show that person actually consumed or understood that information if it was expected that they do so. The punishment must be but can not be limited to monetary fines which can not be purged through bankruptcy. <something about jail here> etc etc.