Texas woman given traffic ticket says unborn child counts as second passenger

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: Mantiss2021

originally posted by: Gothmog
a reply to: Mantiss2021

claiming an unborn fetus as a dependent

A dependent has to have a birth certificate issued in their name .

Which would presume, therefore, that from a legal standpoint, life, as determined by dependence upon another for its existence, does not begin until birth. As certified by the issuance of a Birth Certificate.

Which, of course, legally undercuts the argument that life begins at conception; which is the core argument against abortion.

Valid observation. The administration doesn't typically issue conception certificates.

From 2007

Texas Man Receives A Life Sentence for the Murder of his Unborn Twins: When Feticide is a Capital Crime

supreme.findlaw.com... ml

a reply to: Jason79

FYI, if you create a hypertext link with the arrow and box icon next to the cloud, it works better than plain copy pasting.

You have to give her a clap for a "good effort".

In the UK, a fetus has no legal rights, but that does not mean a fetus is nothing in law. In fact, a fetus is considered to be part of the mother, as a unique organism.

It's an area of law which is constantly evolving through precedent, as is the case with other countries with similar common law arrangements.

Not wishing to get embroiled in the divisive and polarised US abortion "problems", but in the UK a fetus - if viable - is considered human. Thus, a woman stabbed which kills a viable fetus may equate to murder of an unborn person.

a reply to: TzarChasm

Thank you, link still looks malformed when viewed in the forum but seems to be working now.

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Xcalibur254

Brandy Bottone of Plano, Texas, tried to fight a ticket for driving with only one passenger in an HOV lane – which requires at least two people in the car – by arguing that her unborn baby should count as her second passenger.

Good try...

HOV lane is for at least two drivers or bus, not just one other person unless you are suggesting her unborn had a drivers license. Its purpose is to create ridesharing, not a lane for mom and her kids.

So the 12 year old riding with you doesn't qualify as person #2?

What if your child is 22 years old and can't get a driver's license? (Disabled)

It would depend on the exact wording of the law. For example, in some places it would need to be someone over the age of 18, regardless of whether they were able to drive or not.

a reply to: Mantiss2021
No , it does not .
Please learn a little of the US before posting .
A birth certificate (certificate of live birth) only proves citizenship.
Nothing more , nothing less .
Up until birth , the baby inherits the parent's (parents') citizenship .
Example : Barack Obama .

originally posted by: vonclod

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Xcalibur254

Brandy Bottone of Plano, Texas, tried to fight a ticket for driving with only one passenger in an HOV lane – which requires at least two people in the car – by arguing that her unborn baby should count as her second passenger.

Good try...

HOV lane is for at least two drivers or bus, not just one other person unless you are suggesting her unborn had a drivers license. Its purpose is to create ridesharing, not a lane for mom and her kids.

HOV here has nothing to with the other person having a licence, it's simply for having another occupant in the vehicle.

I saw that in Seattle. What's "HOV" stand for? Everyone was afraid of that lane.

originally posted by: AaarghZombies

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Xcalibur254

Brandy Bottone of Plano, Texas, tried to fight a ticket for driving with only one passenger in an HOV lane – which requires at least two people in the car – by arguing that her unborn baby should count as her second passenger.

Good try...

HOV lane is for at least two drivers or bus, not just one other person unless you are suggesting her unborn had a drivers license. Its purpose is to create ridesharing, not a lane for mom and her kids.

So the 12 year old riding with you doesn't qualify as person #2?

What if your child is 22 years old and can't get a driver's license? (Disabled)

It would depend on the exact wording of the law. For example, in some places it would need to be someone over the age of 18, regardless of whether they were able to drive or not.

I guess if you're not riding with an adult who has a valid driver's license, play it safe and stay out of that special lane.

originally posted by: AaarghZombies

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Xcalibur254

Brandy Bottone of Plano, Texas, tried to fight a ticket for driving with only one passenger in an HOV lane – which requires at least two people in the car – by arguing that her unborn baby should count as her second passenger.

Good try...

HOV lane is for at least two drivers or bus, not just one other person unless you are suggesting her unborn had a drivers license. Its purpose is to create ridesharing, not a lane for mom and her kids.

So the 12 year old riding with you doesn't qualify as person #2?

What if your child is 22 years old and can't get a driver's license? (Disabled)

It would depend on the exact wording of the law. For example, in some places it would need to be someone over the age of 18, regardless of whether they were able to drive or not.

WHAT places, precisely?

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Yeah, I get it. Because a baby in utero doesn't occupy a second seat in a car, murdering it is a perfectly sensible, moral and legal option.

Maybe that's how we should legally and ethically define where life actually begins. That lump of tissue is not a human until it can occupy a seat in an automobile.

Your argument is less than silly. This woman's goofy attempt at getting out of a ticket does not nullify the pro-life stance and does not put the state is Texas in a legal or moral conundrum. The story is good for a few guffaws and nothing more.

originally posted by: dandandat2

I don't know the laws in other states; but in NY the other person does not need to be a driver; they just need to be a person.



I was stopped all the time by LOE when my kids were babies and in car seats. I drove a little yellow two door sports car at the time and you could not easily see into the back seat; and the yellow color attracted attention. The LOE would swagger up to my car thinking they caught themselves another punck kid but as they passed the back seat window they would finally see my babies and their whole demeanor would change from coyboy to humble society protecter. The exchange would end with them apologizing to me and then safely helping me back into traffic.

I agree and later stated HOV laws are different in each state. I think if she goes to court and proves she is pregnant then she will beat the ticket. This is all kind of new for everyone, right? Maybe the cop is a far left liberal that thinks life starts at birth, who knows.

originally posted by: LogicalGraphitti
a reply to: Xcalibur254
This probably wasn't the first time someone tried this. In this case, I'm guessing it was just someone taking the opportunity to make a political statement.

Since I'm male, I'll go with "voices in my head" as qualifying me to drive in the HOV lane. It's a frikin' party in the car!

I know, right? I mean, with that logic, I will identify as multiple people because of all the voices in my head. And they are mean. And they argue all the time. So I will tell the cop who stops me in the HOV lane that there are multiple passengers in my vehicle. But since they are all in my head, they cannot be seen. I'm sure that will totally go over with the law, haha!

a reply to: paraphi

Plenty of US states have the same position legally here as well, even some blue ones ... up until the barbaric kill it anytime, even until all but the head is out laws in places like New York. One facet of those laws was to explicitly rewrite the sections of those laws that did give legal protections even to the unborn who were wanted because such things offered personhood and human rights to unborn infants and New York was savvy to realize their inconsistency.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Lol.

This country runs on legal shenanigans.

This is expected. The spirit of law will yield to rigid interpretation and ironic definance. Everyone seems to be doing the flaming sword transgression thing nowadays anyway.

a reply to: Xtrozero

Good try...

HOV lane is for at least two drivers or bus, not just one other person unless you are suggesting her unborn had a drivers license. Its purpose is to create ridesharing, not a lane for mom and her kids.

I am not so sure about that...

comedydefensivedriving.com...

The H.O.V. lane is for “High Occupancy Vehicles” and in Texas that means two or more passengers or one if you ride a motorcycle. The driver, of course, counts as the first passenger and the second passenger can be a child in a booster seat or car seat. Which, in my opinion, is the safest lane to be in, when cars are weaving in and out of traffic. So, if you don’t have a child, you may want to ask for one for Christmas this year so you can enjoy the convenience of riding in the H.O.V. lane. In California, a pregnant woman in her second trimester can ride in the H.O.V. lane

You know it's all a mess when California allows a woman to drive to the abortion clinic in the 2nd trimester in the HOV lane to kill it.

Have fun with that one.

originally posted by: Degradation33

It doesnt count if you have to lie. Especially a statement so easily discredited.


In California we allow a woman to drive to the abortion clinic 5 months pregnant in the HOV lane and then kill it.

Have fun...

Maybe you should read my follow-up posts before you call someone a liar. I already been corrected, and moved on number of posts ago.

a reply to: Xtrozero

I did. And then changed it. I tend to ignore everything after the first few posts and then respond. and that's why I changed it. Sorry to not note the edit.

That said i like the grey area on all sides this highlights.

originally posted by: Degradation33

That said i like the grey area on all sides this highlights.

There is always grey areas, or areas people want to poke at these days. People also seem to look for something extreme too in doing the poking.

Personally, I'm for ANYTHING that will shut down being charged with victimless crimes and the theft that goes with it.

originally posted by: Xtrozero
a reply to: Xcalibur254

HOV lane is for at least two drivers or bus, not just one other person unless you are suggesting her unborn had a drivers license. Its purpose is to create ridesharing, not a lane for mom and her kids.

Wrong - at least in Georgia. I drive in the HOV all the time with my kids.

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: vonclod

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Xcalibur254

Brandy Bottone of Plano, Texas, tried to fight a ticket for driving with only one passenger in an HOV lane – which requires at least two people in the car – by arguing that her unborn baby should count as her second passenger.

Good try...

HOV lane is for at least two drivers or bus, not just one other person unless you are suggesting her unborn had a drivers license. Its purpose is to create ridesharing, not a lane for mom and her kids.

HOV here has nothing to with the other person having a licence, it's simply for having another occupant in the vehicle.

I saw that in Seattle. What's "HOV" stand for? Everyone was afraid of that lane.

High Occupancy Vehicle.

Here, all you need is more than the driver, also single rider motorcycles..big fine if you use the HOV and by your lonesome.