Posted on 12/12/2021 3:23:36 AM PST by Carriage Hill
Please list the Justices you believe would vote to overturn Roe.
what’s all those rich people in LA gonna do now? Open game for the new wave of home attackers. Utter carnage would follow.......
There will be a very simple option for all those rich people. Deep down in the weeds of this bill, they’ll write in a carve out. Buried deep in the weeds. The fine print of the fine print of the fine print.
It’ll be something along the lines that executive protection companies/personnel, bodyguards, armed security, or whatever you want to call them, in the performance of their jobs, will be exempt from the provisions of the bill. They’ll be treated as cops. Because they’ll have to exempt law enforcement from the bill.
And there you go. The rich will just hire security and the rest of the people will suffer the consequences.
BUT— HE WILL spend thousands of Calif taxpayers $$$$ to go to court.
I am not postulating anything.
As far as I know, the Supreme Court affirmed that Texas has a Constitutional right to allow residents to file lawsuits against abortion providers who terminate a pregnancy after a fetal heartbeat begins.
Next question - can California do the same thing to gun makers and sellers when their guns harm innocent people?
Sure looks that way to me.
They’ll never see a dime from those scum.
Seemingly, the gov’t can confiscate anything they want to, anytime they want to.
How much money does the state of California receive from abortions ?.
Federal funding?
Tax money?
I do not understand your question.
I assume the families of suicide victims would sue the hand gun dealers.
No ban necessary.
The dealers will stop selling them in California because they cannot afford the lawsuits or win appeals in the California Supreme Court.
Because, unlike demonRATS we live in the land of reality not of silly fantasy.
Unlike abortion, there is a right to keep and bear arms in the constitution. Anyone, including the governor can be sued in their personal capacity for even attempting to infringe on this right, under 42 USC Section 1983.
He (or she or it) is.
They are like MurryMom but not as amusing.
Which is exactly what is happening now.
They can hire better lawyers because they can afford to pay them and they can afford to refile and refile.
We will soon find out that 2A stands for 2 Abortions.
I saw Stephen Gutowski posting about this on Twitter.
The lib responses to Newsome are mind blowing.
By their logic, Ford should be sued because that wack-job in Waukesha ran over and killed a bunch of people using a Ford SUV.
The proposed law does not allow people suing because someone bought a handgun. It would allow suits for the sale of an “assault weapon” or “ghost gun.” People are arguing over things not under consideration.
But the right to manufacture weapons is not in the constitution! **rolls eyes**
For the umpteenth time, Gavin Newsom, vile scoundrel that he is, is NOT proposing a law to allow lawsuits against those who buy handguns. The ill conceived legislation only covers “assault guns” and “ghost guns.”
If someone has info to the contrary let’s see it.
Yes he will.
Who cares what he wants and whether it’s “assault guns”, “ghost guns” or anything else? You seem to be in support of this.
If someone has info to the contrary, let’s see it.
He can do that when there is an amendment to the constitution to murder innocent unborn babies. What part of ‘shall not infringe’ doesn’t this piece of schiff get?
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.