Fifth Avenue Forum

shad is having an especially bad week.

Yes Troy, because life begins when the cell divides.
Secondly, shaf is smarter than his post. The matter at hand isn't who shot her, it's the State that doesn't recognize the five month fetus as a citizen but is blaming it's host for its death.

The first part about why this was deemed self-defense would be interesting though. Additionally, it reads as though the fight took place in front of a Dollar General and they found the victim at a different Dollar Genera before the EMTs took her to the hospital, leading to the idea that her actions were negligent on their own right.

It’s an objectively unfair law that ONLY impacts women. You don’t need to dig too deep to understand why this is being presented that way. It makes no difference at all what gender the other party involved was.

How is it an unfair law?

“The investigation showed that the only true victim in this was the unborn baby,” Reid told AL.com. “It was the mother of the child who initiated and continued the fight which resulted in the death of her own unborn baby.”

“When a 5-month pregnant woman initiates a fight and attacks another person, I believe some responsibility lies with her as to any injury to her unborn child,” he said. “That child is dependent on its mother to try to keep it from harm, and she shouldn’t seek out unnecessary physical altercations.”

Getting shot is not a reasonable response to a punch/kick/whatever. Stop it.

The shooter was initially charged with manslaughter, so this is not a case of the police making a determination of self-defense. A grand jury failed to return an indictment, and charges were dropped. So under AL law, the baby is indeed the only listed victim in the incident.

The first part about why this was deemed self-defense would be interesting though. Additionally, it reads as though the fight took place in front of a Dollar General and they found the victim at a different Dollar Genera before the EMTs took her to the hospital, leading to the idea that her actions were negligent on their own right.

This is interesting to me. Looking at a map, it's roughly a mile or so from the Dollar General to Fairfield, where the pregnant lady was shot, to Fairfield where she was picked up outside a convenience store. I would like to know more about time lapsed between the incident and when EMT's arrived at the scene, and when she was ultimately picked up. And why were they even there? Were they on the way to the hospital and decided to make a pit stop? I'm not sure what's what with this, but this does strike me as potentially very odd behavior to have a shooting victim in the car and decide to pull off for a soda.

Perhaps she got into a fight because she knew it would eliminate the fetus (I mean, c'mon... this is America. You get in a fight, you're gonna get shot)... ever think about that? LOCK HER UP. NEXT!

“The investigation showed that the only true victim in this was the unborn baby,” Reid told AL.com. “It was the mother of the child who initiated and continued the fight which resulted in the death of her own unborn baby.”

“When a 5-month pregnant woman initiates a fight and attacks another person, I believe some responsibility lies with her as to any injury to her unborn child,” he said. “That child is dependent on its mother to try to keep it from harm, and she shouldn’t seek out unnecessary physical altercations.”

Getting shot is not a reasonable response to a punch/kick/whatever. Stop it.

The shooter was initially charged with manslaughter, so this is not a case of the police making a determination of self-defense. A grand jury failed to return an indictment, and charges were dropped. So under AL law, the baby is indeed the only listed victim in the incident.

Not a baby. But ok.

“The investigation showed that the only true victim in this was the unborn baby,” Reid told AL.com. “It was the mother of the child who initiated and continued the fight which resulted in the death of her own unborn baby.”

“When a 5-month pregnant woman initiates a fight and attacks another person, I believe some responsibility lies with her as to any injury to her unborn child,” he said. “That child is dependent on its mother to try to keep it from harm, and she shouldn’t seek out unnecessary physical altercations.”

Getting shot is not a reasonable response to a punch/kick/whatever. Stop it.

The shooter was initially charged with manslaughter, so this is not a case of the police making a determination of self-defense. A grand jury failed to return an indictment, and charges were dropped. So under AL law, the baby is indeed the only listed victim in the incident.

Not a baby. But ok.

Potential baby since it could have been viable outside the womb.

“The investigation showed that the only true victim in this was the unborn baby,” Reid told AL.com. “It was the mother of the child who initiated and continued the fight which resulted in the death of her own unborn baby.”

“When a 5-month pregnant woman initiates a fight and attacks another person, I believe some responsibility lies with her as to any injury to her unborn child,” he said. “That child is dependent on its mother to try to keep it from harm, and she shouldn’t seek out unnecessary physical altercations.”

Getting shot is not a reasonable response to a punch/kick/whatever. Stop it.

The shooter was initially charged with manslaughter, so this is not a case of the police making a determination of self-defense. A grand jury failed to return an indictment, and charges were dropped. So under AL law, the baby is indeed the only listed victim in the incident.

Not a baby. But ok.

I don't disagree with you, but that's not how the AL law works.

Alabama probably shouldn't be allowed to write it's own laws.

The Supreme Court continues to defy Trump. Outrageous.

The Supreme Court continues to defy Trump. Outrageous.

So all that ridiculous outrage at the Supreme Court picks by liberals on this board and elsewhere was unfounded?

Gorsuch and Kavanaugh are acting on-brand. Roberts is proving to be the latter day Kennedy in many instances.

Gorsuch and Kavanaugh are acting on-brand. Roberts is proving to be the latter day Kennedy in many instances.

Many?

Potential baby since it could have been viable outside the womb.

'Potential' should not be grounds for a manslaughter charge.

Gorsuch and Kavanaugh are acting on-brand. Roberts is proving to be the latter day Kennedy in many instances.

Many?

I would say 'more than twice' is many in this instance.

Also, seems like this ruling just delays the administration. They just need to not make up a false explanation, they just need to say "we want to add it".

Also, seems like this ruling just delays the administration. They just need to not make up a false explanation, they just need to say "we want to add it".

Not sure there is time to get this through another round of court challenges unless they "fast track" it.

Gorsuch and Kavanaugh are acting on-brand. Roberts is proving to be the latter day Kennedy in many instances.

Many?

I would say 'more than twice' is many in this instance.

I can only think of two times. Here and Obmamcare. What was the other?

Potential baby since it could have been viable outside the womb.

'Potential' should not be grounds for a manslaughter charge.

This fetus could someday POTENTIALLY have advanced cognition and could POTENTIALLY have the capacity to suffer. We must protect it at all costs, now that its tail disappeared and it looks cute.

The Supreme Court continues to defy Trump. Outrageous.

So all that ridiculous outrage at the Supreme Court picks by liberals on this board and elsewhere was unfounded?

One step forward; One step back.

Gorsuch and Kavanaugh are acting on-brand. Roberts is proving to be the latter day Kennedy in many instances.

Many?

I would say 'more than twice' is many in this instance.

I can only think of two times. Here and Obmamcare. What was the other?

Whatever they come up with as another reason will be crap because that woman handed over her dead father's files where he advised them to do this to cut down on the participation of non-whites in the census.

Whatever they come up with as another reason will be crap because that woman handed over her dead father's files where he advised them to do this to cut down on the participation of non-whites in the census.

I don't think they care if it's a crap reason, and I don't think they care if adding the question will depress response. Roberts is simply saying you can't present a provable lie as the agency's reason.

Potential baby since it could have been viable outside the womb.

'Potential' should not be grounds for a manslaughter charge.

This fetus could someday POTENTIALLY have advanced cognition and could POTENTIALLY have the capacity to suffer. We must protect it at all costs, now that its tail disappeared and it looks cute.

It would have a fairly good chance at being viable. So using the word “potential” is more just to illustrate the fetus hadn’t been born yet. If she had went into early labor then the baby at that period of gestation has a coin flip chance of surviving. That isn’t terrible odds.