[mhking]

"Hold muh beer 'n watch this!" PING....

If you want on or off this list, please let me know!

[lilylangtree]

Why didn't this idiot pull over at the tollbooth and feed her baby? Not only is she endangering herself and the baby but also the other drivers. She didn't have a drivers license too? Sheesh!

[TamiPie]

Donkers is bonkers.

[Blood of Tyrants]

I knew it! I knew it! I knew it! When I heard it the first time, I KNEW that she would play the victimized breastfeeding mother.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/927397/posts#34

[Arpege92]

This lady is a moron supreme! Pull over at a rest stop or even the side of the road to feed the kid....you put your child's life in danger and not to mention the other drivers on the road!

[I still care]

Several years ago I was in a van with a mother of 7. (She was driving.) The baby started crying, and the mother asked her older daughter to hand the baby up, and began nursing her while she was driving.

I can't tell you how unsafe it looked. Any accident, and the baby would have been dead, sandwiched between mom and the steering wheel. And no matter how "easy" a mom says it is, it took quite a bit of fooling to get the baby into proper position. If people can get into accidents turning a dial on a radio, this was way out of line. She swerved in her lane several times trying to get clothes out of the way.

I told her she was nuts. She told me she does it all the time, no big deal.

A year later she ran over her daughter by accident in a driveway.

[11th Earl of Mar]

Driving while breastfeeding can really get your tit in a ringer.

[nuconvert]

I guess if she'd had an accident and the baby had gone through the windshield or been crushed to death, it would have been everyone's fault but her's.

[Consort]

[RgnadKzin]

The question is not: Is she crazy?
The question is: Should she be charged for doing something that is lawful?

What does the LAW say? or should we care?

1st, we take risks every day. Do we live our lives in fear or do we take reasonable risks? Whether or not you feel this is too great a risk is irrelevant. It is what she feels is a reasonable risk. At interstate speeds, it is unlikely that the child would have survived an accident even if the child were in a restraint.

2nd, do we govern our conduct based upon public opinion, or do we base our conduct on the written law?

Here is the Michigan law:
http://michiganlegislature.org/law/mileg.asp?page=getObject&objName=mcl-257-710d&userid=

257.710d Child restraint system required; exceptions; violation as civil infraction; points; abstract; exemption by rules; alternate means of protection.

(1) Except as provided in this section, or as otherwise provided by law, a rule promulgated pursuant to the administrative procedures act of 1969, 1969 PA 306, MCL 24.201 to 24.328, or federal regulation, each driver transporting a child less than 4 years of age in a motor vehicle shall properly secure that child in a child restraint system that meets the standards prescribed in 49 C.F.R. 571.213.

(2) This section does not apply to any child being nursed.

Pretty unequivocable isn't it?
If you are the driver and I am in your car and the child is not in restraint, who gets the ticket? The driver.
If she is the only adult in the car and she is nursing, she is exempt. The statute above does not say '... by a passenger'

But she's in Ohio, so she should follow Ohio law!!!

Here is the Ohio law:
http://onlinedocs.andersonpublishing.com/oh/lpExt.dll/PORC/16f81/17778/179c2?fn=document-frame.htm&f=templates&2.0

Subsection (F) says that the troopers must look to the law of the state where she maintains a residence:

(F) If a person who is not a resident of this state is charged with a violation of division (A) or (B) of this section and does not prove to the court, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the person's use or nonuse of a child restraint system was in accordance with the law of the state of which the person is a resident, the court shall impose the fine levied by division (H)(2) of section 4511.99 of the Revised Code.

Now, I see from some people here that this is supposed to be negligence. Most all of the states have a statute akin to this one:

Subsection (D) The failure of an operator of a motor vehicle to secure a child in a child restraint system as required by this section is not negligence imputable to the child, is not admissible as evidence in any civil action involving the rights of the child against any other person allegedly liable for injuries to the child, is not to be used as a basis for a criminal prosecution of the operator of the motor vehicle other than a prosecution for a violation of this section, and is not admissible as evidence in any criminal action involving the operator of the motor vehicle other than a prosecution for a violation of this section.

Charging her for negligence is therefore improper.

The fact of the matter is that the troopers have a duty to know the law. They failed in that duty and stopped her for something for which she could not be found guilty.

Then they impounder her car and put her in jail.

Then they added two new unfounded charges a month later when she would not cop a plea.

Finally, I know that this woman has been assaulted twice by the police. I know that she has been raped at gunpoint while she attended the US Naval Academy. She does not pull over until she gets to a safe place with witnesses.

Your failure to be informed of the facts and law in this situation does not make her a wacko.

[Koblenz]

Some things just shouldn't be done while driving, and Breat Feeding is one of them. Sex is another (remember that dumb movie that's on comedy central about once a week where Charlie Sheen had sex with Kristy Swanson during a police chase?). Reminds me of a funny story. My mom was driving a friend and me when I was about 14. Car ahead of us on the highway was swerving all over the place. We finally pass the car and look over, and there's a guy driving, and the girl in the passenger seat is all over him. My mom was pretty frustrated by then, and said, "Well of course he's swerving all over the place. She has her hands down his..." then realized that there were two 14 year old boys in the car, and thus finished her sentence by saying, "Socks!". For us 14 year olds, we thought that was about the funniest thing ever, as we knew what was going on...

[Dante3]

Scary that people with such low IQ can obtain a driver's license. This ugly woman should be kept off the street. Poor child to have such a mother.

[Under the Radar]

Destined-to-be-a-classic-thread Alert!

[Xenalyte]

You are NOT gonna believe this.

[scott7278]

"They claim that since the turnpike is an interstate, drivers can follow the laws of their home state."

Never heard that one before -- I guess that allows you to go the speed limit of your home state, too.

"Well, the sign said 55 but it's 70 back home, Officer!"

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

"I think there are lots of things we do when we put ourselves at risk,

Nobody gives a flying Freep about you, dear lady. It is the other drivers and passengers that are forced to pay the price for your stupidity that we are concerned about.

[Stultis]

[mhking]

This thread has the makings of an all-time FR classic. Please take the time to read the entire thread. The husband of the woman pictured in the article joins us just before post number 50.

The conversation is priceless!

[Ciexyz]

(sigh) I sense a new law will be on the books soon in all fifty states.

[KCmark]

Well, 500+ posts in, and I have to side with the couple. The law is in their favor. The other side has failed to persuade me to their side.

The Ohio law defers to Michigan. Michigan law clearly makes an exception for breast-feeding.

I loved it when she told him to look up the law and he charged her with, what was it, keeping an officer from doing his duty? Now keep in mind he was getting paid, she was missing an important appointment, and they ended up throwing her in jail (don’t question authority or you will pay for it). He had the duty to not jail a citizen unnecessarily. To see support of these militant actions is to say the least, disheartening. In my conservative world, the government doesn’t get to just keep making up charges until it gets you.

Some of you actually said it wasn’t the officer’s job to know the law. What sheep. We are expected to know it; they sure as hell are expected to know it. And the sarcasm when the husband actually DID know the law was unbelievable. “Well that is just terrible. How dare he? What a troublemaker. Let’s find a way to get him too!” ‘Conservative’ is harder and harder to define these days.