Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2019/06/27/alabama-woman-charged-with-man.html
…
6 Likes
Anyone who claims that receiving a gunshot wound isn’t enough for ‘true victim’ classification seems like a candidate to be not-victimized repeatedly until their comprehension improves.
58 Likes
It seems like the Alabamian police consider escalating a fight to gunfire to be a completely normal and rational thing to do.
What was that about an armed society again?
39 Likes
Now this is what Jesus would have wanted /s
22 Likes
Attempts like this to sneakily redefine personhood, and establish precedent for part of a woman’s body to be named as a separate entity are all steps along the way to the intended destination, which is murder investigations after every miscarriage.
51 Likes
The intense substrate of internalized racism that you need in order to accept the 'logic" of Lt. Reid’s framing of the situations is dense.
25 Likes
Alabama Logic: Don’t bring a baby to a gunfight, since once someone decides to pull the trigger, there’s no way in hell during that in-between time they can reverse that decision.
26 Likes
This is our future if the forced birthers get their way.
22 Likes
Gina should have added a “Talabama” tag to the article
18 Likes
Hmm. Why would they be going out of their way to blame and penalize the victim of a gunshot and a miscarriage, rather than finding some stand your ground rationale and offering sympathy for her loss?
It’s a mystery! /s
51 Likes
I will never set foot in Alabama. I can’t stomach the idea of being in a place so terrible. I’ve had jobs that require that kind of travel, but there is no way.
19 Likes
I guess the reasoning is that if she really cared about the life of her unborn child she would have provided it with a gun.
30 Likes
o_0 What the actual fuck, this reads like an Onion article. I mean it literally reads that way.
“Let’s not lose sight that the unborn baby is the victim here,’’ Reid said. “She had no choice in being brought unnecessarily into a fight where she was relying on her mother for protection.”
Now the article says, allegedly, she started the altercation. But I can’t imagine it culminated into something that required lethal force. If she hadn’t been pregnant, then what would have the charges been? What was the reason for the altercation, because the context of lashing out due to past abuse or even as a reaction to a verbal threat is way more understandable and makes this whole thing more tragic.
ETA - That last statement makes less sense if you RTFA. I misread that the argument was ABOUT the baby’s father, I thought it said WITH the baby’s father - Mea Culpa.
12 Likes
As long as the shooter was part of a well-regulated militia, no harm no foul.
5 Likes
The situation is horrible, the state’s reaction is horrible, so I don’t mean to make light, but how hard is it to get away from someone who’s five month’s pregnant?
7 Likes
Alabama is a Castle Doctrine state. You have to stand your ground, or it means you’re a loser.
18 Likes
Christ, what a ridiculous argument. If the woman drives to a store to buy food, and gets in an accident, they could charge her with the same thing, “she didn’t have to drive to the store.” Or if a tornado strikes her house “she didn’t get into the basement fast enough: guilty.” It will make it so women can’t go to jobs to feed their other kids, or keep the bank from taking the house, which endangers the fetus as well.
They really have removed “personhood” from the mother here. When you’re pregnant you stop being a human and immediately become a holy vessel that needs to be protected like a priceless piece of art.
46 Likes
jeez man, don’t give them ideas.
19 Likes
So, if a pregnant woman gets into an argument with her husband, and he shoots her, doesn’t kill her, but kills the fetus, then he can make the case that she started the argument, and she’ll be arrested for murder.
48 Likes
Perhaps more like a cargo shipping container, which can be scratched and banged up so long as the contents are undamaged?
33 Likes
