Quote:
Originally Posted by Antitrust32
not according to this law or the law of the land. I think its quite easy to see, even if the wording might be a small bit confusing. They are clearly protecting a pregnant woman or her relative from prosecution if they kill someone who is attacking her womb illegally.
|
?? The wording isn't confusing at all - it says right there, the husband can kill someone trying to harm his wifes baby.
It doesn't limit in any way who that person could be.
The point is indeed that the intended consequences of a law are not presumed to be the only possible consequences, dependent upon the wording.
In other words, you write a law to do one thing, but there is very frequently unintended (or indeed intended) consequences that are permitted by the wording.
Again - why is this change being added to the current law? Hum?
03-29-2011, 01:51 PM
Threaded Mode