This Ping List is for all things pertaining to infringes upon or victories for the 2nd Amendment.
FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from the list.
More 2nd Amendment related articles on FR's Bang List.
Posted on 12/12/2021 3:23:36 AM PST by Carriage Hill
In responding to the U.S. Supreme Court decision allowing the Texas abortion ban to stay in place, California Gov. Gavin Newsom on Saturday said he plans to propose a gun control law that would be modeled on the Texas one. Newsom said the Supreme Court’s decision has set a precedent that will allow states to avoid federal courts when enacting laws.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
True. People tried suing abortion providers and failed, too. But the purpose of this law, like the Texas law, is to open a floodgate of suits from anyone who feels they were impacted, however remotely, by the sale of the gun. Faced with hundreds, potentially thousands, of lawsuits may make sellers and manufacturers feel that the California market isn't worth the hassle. That's the whole point.
So they move, or stop selling to California. That leaves many gun-friendly states to manufacture in or sell to.
I cannot spend any more time on this today; I have things to accomplish. I will relentlessy destroy your points, serially, when I have time later.
I disagree.
It means that all gun sales will stop in places like California, Washington state, Hawaii, and Massachusetts.
There were 24,000 gun suicides in 2020.
A couple dozen states are going to get buried in gun legislation and gun litigation.
He must not have listened to Justice Thomas. Thomas mentioned the 2nd amendment as describing a specific right. No right to abortion can be found in the Constitution.
As for liability, then someone can sue auto manufacturers because a criminal used an auto to commit a crime in any fashion.
In our legal system, liability occurs when someone uses a product in an unsafe, careless fashion, and the liability transfers to the person, not the product.
Of course you will.
The right to keep and bear arms is actually IN the constitution. That should make a big difference.
Somehow, they can’t seem to find it.
Excellent points, both.
The idea to assert and protect a right to kill a baby in private is ridiculous on its face.
Abortion is taking the life of another person. It has nothing to do with a right to privacy.
Roe v Wade is bunk. It’s teenagers telling their parents they can’t come in their room.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/21-463/197884/20211027164758725_21-463%20tsac%20WWH%20-amicus-FPC-final.pdf
Exactly. I'm pretty sure I posted something along the lines the moment Texas passed this law.
“The Constitution protects us from the government, not us from other people.”
But liability laws do and there is a difference between liability and rights.
As Justice Thomas pointed out, owning guns is spelled out in the Constitution; abortion is not.
The Constitution does not shield a person from the misuse of a firearm. But to transfer liability from the person to the manufacturer of a product that is not defective opens up a endless stream of litigation that would paralyze manufacturing.
Of course you will.
As I always do, DoodleTroll. :^)
Bash ya later! :^)
Lay out the specific legal mechanisms for this, please.
Does Newsome propose to allow private individuals to sue individual gun owners? Gun sellers? Gun manufacturers? What would be the specific cause of action?
Could I sue the person living next door to me for owning a gun? How about some guy 3 towns or 3 counties away? Could I sue a gun manufacturer located in Texas? Could I sue Bubba’s Bait, Tackle, and Guns for doing lawful commerce? How would this square up against the Lawful Commerce in Arms Act which specifically forbids such silliness?
I await your responses with bated breath.
L
Hence the reason for Newsom's law.
Then Republican mayors should label their towns as sanctuary cities as far as gun control. 🤣
How is one person harmed when a second person buys a gun from a third?
This Ping List is for all things pertaining to infringes upon or victories for the 2nd Amendment.
FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from the list.
More 2nd Amendment related articles on FR's Bang List.
How is one person harmed when a complete stranger gets an abortion? In either case the answer is that they're not. So by rights any lawsuit filed under the Texas law or any lawsuit filed under the Newsom law should be immediately dismissed due to lack of standing.
The Texas law is predicated on the add of the fetus, set at six weeks for the purpose of the law. It does not allow lawsuits for any abortion. You can’t sue if the abortion takes place after two weeks, for example. Where is the analog for guns?
The Texas law is predicated on the add of the fetus, set at six weeks for the purpose of the law. It does not allow lawsuits for any abortion. You can’t sue if the abortion takes place after two weeks, for example. Where is the analog for guns?
Well if I'm reading Newsom's proposal correctly you can't sue if someone sells a shotgun or hunting rifle or most handguns. If your point is that some abortions remain safe from lawsuit while others are not then there's your analogy with Newsom's law right there.
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.