Replies

"That's one of the weaknesses of law - WHO cares about killing babies? After all - that was only a "Later Term Abortion"."

Look, whether or not the kids were killed is not the issue; the issue is what was the intent of the killer? People who kill through recklessness or negligence are not charged with first degree murder, which requires intent to kill, they are charged with manslaughter. It is not a weakness in the law; we have decided that negligent or reckless killings do not merit the same punishment as an intentional killing. This concept is not new; it has been recognized at common law for almost one thousand years.

Aha! Henrietta is a LAWYER! :>)

Sounds like a DEFENSE LAWYER at that!

There was a story - I think it was part of Heinlein's "Lazarus" series - where Lazarus and his "daughters/sisters/female self" arrived at a planet where they had succeeded in ridding the planet of the lawyer vermin! (I won't detail how but I think it was called "Shakespear's Planet") The planet had become peaceful and very polite since that time.

True Justice was practiced - if you ran over someone because you were drunk (or other negligent act) - guess what!? Your punishment was that you were tied to the road while either the person you hit, or his closest survivor got to run over you with a car. Other punishments could be, by victims choice only, monetary compensation or slavery.

That made you reallll careful.

a true accident - no negligence - no punishment.

So in the case of this "woman" (signifies erroneously being human), her just punishment, as stated previously here, would be for her to be locked up in a car on a hot day and let her roast until dead.

NOW I remember how they got rid of the lawyers! If you were a lawyer and decided to try to get this female free, and you lost, your get to share in the punishment.

That also had the effect of no more frivolous law suits! Loser paid everything including what he was suing for!

After all - as per the whinney/wimpy left wing radicals - it's only fair! right!?