A young man did a terrible, terrible thing: he shook a baby to death. Justice worked, and he got 20 years in prison.
Sadly, the fact that a young man shows poor impulse control and shakes a baby to death is a common story. Usually, headlines read, “Man gets 20 years for shaking baby” or “Teen gets 20 years for shaking baby” or “Boyfriend gets 20 years for shaking baby.” The headline never reads “Plumber gets 20 years for shaking baby” or “Unemployed man gets 20 years for shaking baby” or “Banker gets 20 years for shaking baby.”
Why then, I wonder, do we get this AP headline: “Marine gets 20 years in prison in shaken baby case.” The story relates that the baby shaking occurred in Marine housing, so the man’s Marine status is relevant to the story, but why is it headline material?
Is this a “dog bites man” thing, that sees that AP absolutely shaken with surprise that the Marines it so much admires might have a bad apple, or is something else at work here? Is there a subliminal desire to remind Americans that troops are trained killing machines? I certainly hear that often enough from liberals/Progressives/Leftists. Is this simply good editorial sense, because Marine headlines catch our eyes?
What do you think?