Tx like citizen enforcement for California

[jmorris]

Wow, and I thought he was a idiot. Newsom is correct.

 

[danez71]

Why do you think the same thing doesn’t apply to abortion? At this point abortion is legal in every state of the union. A number of states are trying to change that but are waiting on the Supreme Court to rule on several cases before them. Under your theory, someone in Texas who was prevented from getting an abortion by a private citizen could counter sue as well.

No... not at all.
In TX, a private citizen would be suing a provider of an illegal abortion. Just as in CA, a private citizen would be suing a gun store that provides illegal guns.

They would have to prove it was an illegal abortion (or maybe just offering illegal abortions)

How many times has that happened?

 

[danez71]

Wow, and I thought he was a idiot. Newsom is correct.

He's right in the sense that it's a bad law structurally.

But you're still right in that he's an idiot.


IMO, Neither law will be effective at anything other than virtue signaling and sound bites. Both are similarly dumb in their structure.


I'm just taking the same position that a few of the well known constitution lawyers are taking.

 

[Basura Blanca]

Everything they can sue for is already illegal and the State would/should be after the criminal activity if it was known

True and agreed, except that this bill is dotted with numerous mentions of "precursor parts", "kits", etc. so it's not entirely toothless in that respect. But sure, what would a civil suit brought from this even look like? I still have a feeling this will die in committee somewhere along the line but as I said before, worse has passed.

What Newsom did was weaponize the legislature by urging them to write a revenge bill for something that didn't even affect Californians in the first place. If we have an angle to take to the public to get support, it should be that. Do you really think it's appropriate for the governor to use the legislative process to make social/political statements?

There's also a lesson to be learned here once more about the melding of politics and the 2A. What happened in Texas was an attack on a perceived "left" cause, abortion. So tit for tat, the "left" is going to attempt to slaughter one of the "right's" own sacred cows, guns. This wouldn't even be a thing if guns weren't the wedge issue they've become. That's what we need to focus on changing.

 

[BreechFace]

There may be hell to pay , but this needs to be said-
Texas law aside , you simply cannot compare 2nd Amendment rights and abortion rights.

Private gun ownership does not, in and of itself, result in the termination of life.
Abortion does just that.

Let the record show that I did not start this. And no disrespect to THR.

God help me , Doc.

You get an emphatic absolutely spot on @Waveski. Comparing the two is like comparing a rotary engine to a kumquat.

Not to mention one is a constitutional right (2A) and one destroys an innocent life's ability to have "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness," before they take their first breath out of the womb they've been alive in for x number of days. Abortion is merely a defective and abhorrent interpretation of the Fourth Amendment on it's behalf.

 

[rust collector]

The OP was about a proposed CA law. Other issues are not relevant, are not gun related, and will get this thread locked.