Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

California governor signs gun bill modeled after Texas abortion law Those who make or sell banned weapons could face $10,000 in damages.
ABC NEWS ^ | July 22, 2022 | Meredith Deliso

Posted on 07/22/2022 3:35:17 PM PDT by Morgana

California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a new gun bill on Friday that is explicitly modeled after Texas' unprecedented abortion law. The state is now the first to allow citizens to sue people who make or sell banned weapons, state officials said.

The bill, SB 1327, allows Californians to sue those making, selling, transporting or distributing illegal assault weapons or ghost guns for at least $10,000 in damages. Gun dealers who illegally sell firearms to those under the age of 21 could also be liable for the same damages.

The law is modeled after the Texas "heartbeat act," SB 8, which prohibits abortions as early as six weeks into a pregnancy. That law relies on private citizens filing lawsuits to enforce it by placing $10,000 bounties on doctors, providers and others involved in providing abortion care.

Legal experts had predicted that the SB 8 formula could be used beyond abortion. After the U.S. Supreme Court declined to block the abortion law last year, Newsom called on his state's legislature to pass a similar bill around gun safety.

Newsom called the law the "most impactful thing we have done in decades" to advance gun safety during a press briefing Friday, calling ghost guns a "crisis."

The governor signed the bill into law at Santa Monica College, which was the site of a deadly mass shooting in 2013 where six people, including the shooter, were killed. The gunman used an AR-15-style semi-automatic rifle he built using legally purchased components -- a ghost gun that now would be subject to a lawsuit under SB 1327.

(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Chit/Chat; Health/Medicine; Local News
KEYWORDS: 2a; 2ndamendment; abortion; banglist; california; gungrabbers; guns; prolife; rkba; secondamendment; texas
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-37 next last
Never mind having California succeed, lets kick them out.
1 posted on 07/22/2022 3:35:17 PM PDT by Morgana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Morgana

Comrade Kommissar Newsom just gave himself something to rub himself more, in the shower bath!


2 posted on 07/22/2022 3:38:47 PM PDT by Terry L Smith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

What is newsom......12 years old? SMH


3 posted on 07/22/2022 3:40:26 PM PDT by V_TWIN (America...so great even the people that hate it refuse to leave)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

Newsom The Child


4 posted on 07/22/2022 3:40:30 PM PDT by butlerweave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

Which would be the first gun laws California actually enforced with any effort.

And even then, they probably wouldn’t enforce them on illegals.


5 posted on 07/22/2022 3:40:32 PM PDT by airborne (Thank you Rush for helping me find FreeRepublic! R)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

The Supremes will have a field day with this.


6 posted on 07/22/2022 3:44:36 PM PDT by Da Coyote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

Completely irrelevant to safety, illegal at that.

How is a woman going to defend her speech and abortion rights now? Doh


7 posted on 07/22/2022 3:46:27 PM PDT by JudgemAll (Democrats Fed. job-security in hates:hypocrites must be gay like us or be tested/crucified)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

Romans 1:28


8 posted on 07/22/2022 3:51:22 PM PDT by Dogbert41 (Fill your lamps!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Morgana
Never mind having California succeed, lets kick them out.

I think you mean "Secede". :)

9 posted on 07/22/2022 3:52:49 PM PDT by libertylover (Democrats are as determined to kill innocent people as the Nazis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Morgana
make or sell

I may have found a loophole. Nothing about giving them away. Maybe we can set up a ghost gun charity to help law abiding Californians.

10 posted on 07/22/2022 3:55:03 PM PDT by PAR35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

“Never mind having California succeed, lets kick them out.”

Only with extreme prejudice.


11 posted on 07/22/2022 4:01:25 PM PDT by Howie66 (Let's Go Brandon!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PAR35

I may have found a loophole. Nothing about giving them away.
== == ==
Or losing one and finding one?

Those dems are smarter. Read the fine print. The make or sell probably is a journalist’s summary.

They use this type of language:
“... the purchase, sale, offer to sell, or transfer of any ...”


12 posted on 07/22/2022 4:05:38 PM PDT by Scrambler Bob (My /s is more true than your /science (or you might mean /seance))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

Yawn


13 posted on 07/22/2022 4:13:35 PM PDT by Jonny7797
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Da Coyote

“The Supremes will have a field day with this.”

How? California is using USSC precedence they worded their law identically to what the USSC just upheld in Whole Women’s Health v. Jackson.

Here read the actual decision.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21-463_3ebh.pdf

The USSC has yet to strike down California’s assault weapons law so as long as that stands California is using their own wordings against them. They said they would do this as soon as Texas’s law was upheld it’s not a bad strategy it could force them to review Whole Women’s Health v. Jackson or let California’s law stand.


14 posted on 07/22/2022 4:16:05 PM PDT by JD_UTDallas ("Veni Vidi Vici" )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

I have often wondered why the Indian Reservations in California, which are under Federal Law, don’t start selling in California, illegal guns to the Citizens living outside the Reservation.

I believe State laws have no control over them.


15 posted on 07/22/2022 4:22:34 PM PDT by Ruy Dias de Bivar (“Both oligarch and tyrant mistrust the people, and therefore deprive them of their arms.” – Aristotl)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

Gee, if I was a gun maker I would stop selling guns to law enforcement in California, their next.


16 posted on 07/22/2022 4:32:11 PM PDT by Lockbox (politicians, they all seemed like game show hosts to me.... Sting)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ruy Dias de Bivar

For people living in the rez you are probably right. Depends on the treaty the tribe has with the USA. For transport off the rez into California as soon as you leave the rez California jurisdiction comes to play. They have laws against the possession not just the sale or transfer which includes “gifting”. Cali will bring the hammer of Thor down on people importing prohibited arms from a reservation into California.


17 posted on 07/22/2022 4:32:20 PM PDT by JD_UTDallas ("Veni Vidi Vici" )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Ruy Dias de Bivar

” have often wondered why the Indian Reservations in California, which are under Federal Law, don’t start selling in California, illegal guns to the Citizens living outside the Reservation.

I believe State laws have no control over them.”

This is the same argument for setting up abortion clinics on Indian lands. So do you support Native American sovereignty where state abortion laws have no control inside those sovereign lands. A simple yes or no will suffice. Goose meet gander.


18 posted on 07/22/2022 4:35:58 PM PDT by JD_UTDallas ("Veni Vidi Vici" )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Lockbox

Most LEO use Glock or SIG neither of which are going to stop selling to LEO because California is cracking down on civys. LEO have immunity from civil suits so it’s a moot point for LEO. You couldn’t sue the LAPD for firearms even if you wanted too. No standing.


19 posted on 07/22/2022 4:39:47 PM PDT by JD_UTDallas ("Veni Vidi Vici" )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

Leftists aren’t spiteful or anything.


20 posted on 07/22/2022 5:02:19 PM PDT by Disambiguator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-37 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson