Harry's Law Forums

NBC (ended 2012)

American Girl

  • Avatar of skippercollecto

    skippercollecto

    [1]Nov 10, 2011
    • member since: 07/20/05
    • level: 15
    • rank: Ginsu Knife
    • posts: 431

    Two comments about "American Girl":


    When Harry got pulled over, I thought for sure she was going to say to the police officer, "I'm older than you and have more insurance." I was disappointed that she didn't!


    The whole situation about Harry hunting quail was flawed, because there are almost no bobwhite quail left in southern Ohio. I grew up in a new subdivision outside Cincinnati in the 1970s, and hearing the bobwhite call was, to me, the ultimate sound of summer. But by the time I was in college in the early 1980s, I realized I no longer heard the birds. I figured it was because all of the new subdivisions that had been built had destroyed their habitat.


    Many years later I learned what happened. It wasn't the construction, it was the weather. The winters of 1976-1977 and 1977-1978 were the two worst in Cincinnati's recorded history, and the bitter cold killed all of the bobwhite quail. Cincinnati was about as far north as they could tolerate weather-wise, and those too winters were too much. Now, 35 years later, they are returning in small numbers to some of the large parks, but not enough to be substantial enough to hunt.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Shreela

    Shreela

    [2]Nov 14, 2011
    • member since: 04/05/09
    • level: 8
    • rank: Super-Friend
    • posts: 63
    I must have missed something: Where were the Chinese parents going to live after finding their second daughter? I'm guessing that somehow they've managed to find a way to stay in the US, since the judge mentioned visitation. If not, and they planned to return to China once they'd found the daughter, wouldn't she be at risk for being kidnapped by local govt employees yet again?

    I googled this and found a few "credible" news articles that make me believe this is likely going in China.

    The other trial with Harry, who owned the local tire plant, the mayor? Did I miss that too?
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of haldrey

    haldrey

    [3]Nov 22, 2011
    • member since: 02/23/08
    • level: 22
    • rank: Freak and Geek
    • posts: 3,921
    I always assumed it was going to be in China, but the storyline that really liked was the one about Harry.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of peak_a_bu

    peak_a_bu

    [4]Dec 11, 2011
    • member since: 01/18/09
    • level: 6
    • rank: Small Wonder
    • posts: 183
    I never took that comment literally I thought it was a dig to him being a republican.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of bmoshier

    bmoshier

    [5]Jan 5, 2012
    • member since: 03/01/06
    • level: 46
    • rank: Lothar of the Hill People
    • posts: 1,421

    I'm wondering where, if any place, people go on the Harry's Law forum to discuss the court rulings. Right now I guess it is in each individual episode, which is fine.


    Two comments:


    1) The ruling in Harry's auto case didn't make sense, as the judge said "it violates the First Amendment, the commerce clause." Ah, the First Amendment and the Commerce Clause are two different sections of the US Constitution. The Commerce Clause existed BEFORE the First Amendment, as it is Article I, Section 8, Clause 3. The reason it exists in the Constitution and isn't an amendment is because commerce was one of the failing aspects of the Articles of Confederation, which was what the US used before our current Constitution. The "Articles" were what we used between the time we won our freedom from England and we realized we needed a stronger central government than the "Articles" provided or allowed.


    The First Amendment deals with the rights of the people, while the Constitution - proper - deals with how the government is to function. Many of the people at the time wanted the rights of the people spelled out in the original Constitutions but Thomas Jefferson made the case that the "base" document should be about organization and several people proposed the amendments as a solution. People would support the Constitutions as long as Congress and the states passed rights based amendments ASAP. It is why they went through so quickly.


    2) The ruling on the child.


    Ah, this one is tough, but honestly, I feel the judge made the wrong call. Her ruling will only encourage additional kidnappings and in fact other courts could use her ruling as the basis for keeping children away from their biological parents. The judge said as a Mother she would go after her child for as long as it takes, but she didn't take the situation far enough ....


    Say someone took the judges 6 month old child and then took the child to another country, put it up for adoption, and gave it to a well off couple in that country. The judge after 4 or 5 year tracks down her child and wants the child back. As she would want to take the child back to the USA, after all her job is a judge / lawyer in the USA. Yet, the judge in that case could even point to this case saying it is for the benefit of the child that (s)he not leave the only country / family (s)he known. The local judge points out the child would be going back to the USA instead of growing up in the country (s)he knows.


    You say the ruling needs to be in the best interest of the child, but what would all the other children it can and will affect? I does NOTHING to discourage kidnapers and I'm sure some kidnapers / adoption agency would look upon it as validation of their behavior. If on the other hand the American family had to give up the child, they could use it to make life difficult for the adoption agency and China. The PR and legal rulings would discourage sending kidnapped children to the USA.


    Yes, it would be painful for the child but let me put it another way: What if the child had been an American child kidnapped from a hospital say during its first few days of life? The kidnapper either keeps the kid OR sells the child to an adoption mill. Four to 5 years later they find the child, should the child go back to their original family or stay with the kidnappers or those who ended up with a bought / sold child.


    Anyway, it's a tough call, but my recommendation to the writers is to bring this story back at some point as an appeal and this time have Harry also on the case. Look at the broader context.


    Honestly, I think it is OK to explore complex issue over multiple issue and/or with different clients (to see different aspects). One thought might be to look an American kidnapping for profit (sold to an adoption agency .....), have appeals, etc.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of karlmeszaros

    karlmeszaros

    [6]Jan 11, 2012
    • member since: 06/15/05
    • level: 106
    • rank: Truly Outrageous
    • posts: 341
    This is great stuff! It would be great to compress the info and submit it as trivia. That could be done for all episodes. For example, in Gorilla My Dreams, they talk about for personhood for animals in foreign countries. I'm guessing that's true.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of skippercollecto

    skippercollecto

    [7]May 22, 2012
    • member since: 07/20/05
    • level: 15
    • rank: Ginsu Knife
    • posts: 431

    An update on the quail comment:


    On Sunday I was in central Indiana, but still at the same latitude as Cincinnati. In a nearby field, I heard one of the bobwhite quails! It totally made my day. So the birds are returning, but it will probably be decades before they have the same numbers as before.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.