I’ll be happy to, if I see I’ve made an error.
Right now, it’s you who appear to be wrong. You appear to believe that the invocation of the word “murder” somehow triggers some new process under the law somewhere.
Why don’t you lay out, specifically, a miscarriage scenario that under present Georgia law would be treated acceptably, and under this new law be treated unacceptably?
In other words, SPECIFICALLY, what would this law change?
You’re certainly the expert in Georgia law. I’ve asked you to show me where in Georgia code it is written that there are some murders they will not prosecute. You pointed to code that had nothing to do with that.
You’ve asserted that the law changes nothing. Then you acknowledge perhaps that there would have to be investigations of miscarriages, but this is only slightly intrusive. Now you’re being evasive about the difference between intentional fetal death and murder.
Say a woman punches herself in the stomach in order to cause a miscarriage. How is this presently treated under Georgia law? How would it be treated under the proposed law? Are the two the same, or different?
Still like to know how it’s meaningful to require reporting of fetal death without requiring the reporting of the existence of a fetus in the first place.
And when is it fetal death??? Doesn’t a doctor have to make that determination anyway?
I’ve had three miscarriages this year. 
But only the first actually reached fetus status (past 8 weeks with a heatbeat), and required a D&C. With the second, I had a positive pregnancy test, but then got a heavy period about five days late. IANAD, but I do not think it was a fetus at that point. Then I had a blighted ovum, which I passed (about the size of a golf ball), but was in no way shape or form anything other than a mass of clotted blood and gunk. That was decidedly not a fetus.
So which of those would I have to report? Honestly?
As a lawyer, I am well aware that VA has its own ridiculous laws on the books. In fact, in traffic court it is a bit of a game amongst the defense attorneys and prosecutors to see who can amend a speeding ticket to the most ridiculous code section. But this GA law really is a huge mound of legally pointless horseshit… that has the potential to be a huge mound of politically pointless horseshit.
Any and all of them. According to the proposed law: “(1) A fetus is a person for all purposes under the laws of this state from the moment of conception;”
As long as a doctor wasn’t there, it would have been the responsibility of the state to investigate and determine whether it was an act of murder.
My apologies.
So far as I’m aware, there is no Georgia law saying some murders won’t be prosecuted.
Good. An actual scenario.
Here is the current law of Georgia:
In Johnson v. State, there is discussion of this principle:
In Hill v. State, 664 SE 2d 781, (Ga: App. 2008), Alexis Hill was charged with “concealing the death of another person by hindering the discovery of whether her infant child was unlawfully killed.”
You asked:
Under current Georgia law, it seems to me that the answer would hinge on whether the fetus was viable (age-wise) prior to the act.
Under the new Georgia law, it would be punishable regardless of the viability.
But there are no new investigation requirements – the new and old law frameworks don’t change the investigation requirement.
How so, when the investigation law clearly says, “After birth but before seven years of age if the death is unexpected or unexplained?”
What other law would change that? What part of the new law would impose a new investigation requirement?
You seem to think that there’s some law somewhere that says, “If it’s murder, then we have to investigate.”
Where is that law?
Bricker,
I tend to agree with you that there are more egregious things to single this bill out for than as posited by the OP and many . The criminalization of abortion, for starters, as well as the declaration of fetal personhood (which actually has much more far-ranging effects than the criminalization of abortion.) Not to mention their ludicrous interpretation of Constitutional law re: Roe v. Wade - reasoning that, if posted here, would most likely prompt a substantial response from you as to why the legal reasoning was intellectually bankrupt. And you are correct that there is currently a requirement for fetal death reports in the status quo. And there is nothing that textually requires increased investigation of miscarriages in the bill.
However, if in some magical fairyland, this law was passed and survived constitutional muster, do you honestly believe that in a Georgia where abortion is no longer legal and fetal personhood is an enshrined right, that there would not be an increased focus on investigating reported miscarriages by the zealous anti-abortion government? After all, the only way to hide an illegal abortion under this regime would be to report it as a miscarriage.
In other words, were this law to pass, there are sufficient facts to infer that the Georgia State government would use existing law regarding required reporting in a substantially more intrusive way than it currently does.
So the concern about investigations of miscarriages is not entirely unwarranted. And maybe the focus on these articles is to persuade people who are pro-life (and may not otherwise be particularly dismayed about the criminalization of abortion) that a hard-line fetal personhood position would have consequences that they hadn’t considered, like increased scrutiny over reported miscarriages.
As part of a larger program of forcing social changes, aliens who need birth hosts impregnate vocal pro-choice male politicians with alien babies - because they’re clearly the best choice for the job, since they keep going on about the sanctity of the unborn and such. Of course, the ensuing outcry reveals their inherent hypocrisy - but they have to go through with it anyway, they are not allowed to abort, and childbirth is pretty traumatic too (IIRC, it’s off-page, but is hinted at being a surviveable Alien-style “birth”). Plus everyone knows who they are, so when they return to Earth, some of them commit suicide.
Tepper can be a bit axe-grindy.
It’s called hypocrisy. But you knew that, I was pointing it out to the ass hats who suport scum like this guy.
Perhaps its nothing more than smoke and mirrors? A legislative dog-whistle, something that actually accomplishes nothing at all but can be offered to one’s batshit constituents as proof of a commitment to The Cause?
No, it’s called you not knowing what small government principles are (as I explained upthread).
Do anarchists count as small government advocates? 
Absolutely. And if I didn’t make utterly clear my feelings on that last point, I think it’s absurd and disgraceful to draft a law that attempts to declare that the Supreme Court has no authority. While I do agree that their reasoning was less than sound in Roe v. Wade and Casey v. PP, that’s not my call to make – nor is it the Georgia legislature’s.
Well, that’s what I’m saying. So – good. Perhaps you and I could work our a schedule to explain this to any other posters that remain unconvinced?
It depends on how magical the fairyland is. To imagine that this…er… abortion, if you’ll pardon the grisly pun, could survive constitutional muster requires imagining a vastly different political landscape than we have today. In that Bizarro World, sure, I can imagine that some incredily fascist-minded individuals might gain enough power to start investigating miscarriages, but even then, a necessary predicate would be requiring the registration of pregnancies.
So … I’ll allow the mathematical possibility that some incredibly unlikely confluence of future evnts might gets us there… but it’s SO not the subject I’d focus a Pit thread on. I mean, let’s think about it: this is a bill that explicitly states that Georgia is not bound by Supreme Court rulings, that abortion is now a crime punishable by death, and the Pit thread about this bill asks us to be outraged because miscarriages will be investigated?
Yes, the concern IS entirely unwarranted, or to be more precise, the amount of concern that’s warranted is zero plus epsilon.
Yes… assuming that the constituents here are idiots. I’m ardently pro-life, and I’d be furious if I elected a pro-life state rep that wasted his time like this. If he seriously wanted to attack Roe v Wade, let him get a resolution passed funding a commission to contact the other forty-nine states and organize a Constitutional Convention. At least that has a tiny chance of going somewhere.
As long as you understand that your definition was so unspecific that (for example) Obama could define himself as “small-government” under it.
Sadly, when in my younger days I was a Catholic I attended many a Pro-Life yearly march in D.C., and between those memories and the stories of pure blinding idiocy my ardently pro-life dad tells me about the current ones, I wouldn’t be surprised to hear a great many of his constituents are drooling like Pavlov’s dogs over this. I’d be pleasantly surprised to find out more are like you or my dad.
Well, gee, Bricker has some higher authority on what is and what isn’t valid “concern.” What obviously isn’t a concern to him is the police-state brutality of forcing women who’ve been through a recent trauma and are in no way suspected of a crime to have strangers poring over their personal lives in search of wrongdoing. It doesn’t occur to you small government types that people have the right to go about their personal lives without government referees popping in uninvited whenever you’ve gone through something terrible.
Yes, but I’ve never actually met a real life anarchist either! Probably because they’re all either dead or dying in their lawless utopian wasteland 
I keep joking that I’m going to write a YA romance about a sullen teen girl in love with a Yog Sosoth. Maybe I can drag you in as a consultant?
I’m going to try some of the Rand/Bricker tricks to convince you to support Obama Care.
For Rand: It’s not big government at all, you see. It’s small government, it’s just big in places.
For Bricker: It is of no concern! Nothing to worry about. It’s like pi plus delta squared e to the nth power divided by itself minus 1.
See how convincing your tropes are?
No?
Fine. But rest assured, it’s oh so meaningful when you guys do it.