In response to Texas abortion ban, Newsom calls for similar restrictions on assault weapons

[pknopp]

They took the case but they left the ban in place.

They could have put a stay on that law until the case was heard.

They didn't and right now, rape and incest survivors are being forced to give birth to a rapist's child in Texas.

Not really, there are 49 other states that they can get an abortion.

Women all over Texas are either being forced to carry a pregnancy to term that they don't want or they are being forced to travel to other states for an abortion.

Right now, that law is in effect in Texas. It's doing harm to women in Texas and women in other states who can't get an abortion because the clinic in their state is full of women who have traveled from Texas.

If you say so. It will be overturned.

 

[pknopp]

The same with the law that Newsom wants passed.

I someone sues a private citizen, the state doesn't have anything to do with it.

The Supreme Court opened the gates when they refused to put a stay on that law in Texas.

No they did not. It will be overturned.

 

[Donald H]

By default one would think a true “democracy” within a civil first world society would harbor a fundamental responsibility to protect the sanctity of life…no?

No. Your entire talking point is wrong and fatally flawed. All the world's modern democracies uphold the rights of women.

I like to think that in Canada we are opposed to supporting the 'need' for abortions and so we take social measures to reduce that need. We don't dictate religious priorities to half of our people. Women!

That's my talking point and there's no reason for me to need to add to it!

 

[Dana7360]

Do you know enough about it to say whether or not it's a parallel to the Texas maneuver of the same nature?
Or is it possible that this would only work as a scare tactic that can move the Scotus back in the right direction?

I personally believe it's a scare tactic and showing the court that their rulings apply to everyone.

Not just the anti choice people.

The law has not been written but I did read the article and it clearly states that it will be the same law as the one in Texas. The politicians in California will probably use the same wording as the Texas law replacing abortion with assault weapons and kits to convert a weapon into an assault weapon.

 

[WTH_Progs?]

Apparently Newsom wants revenge…
’If you’re going to stop us from killing babies, I’ll retaliate by taking your guns.’
Ladies and gentlemen, this is the Left.

In response to Texas abortion ban, Newsom calls for similar restrictions on assault weapons

The proposed law would let California citizens sue gun manufacturers, similar to how Texas has made it easier for its residents to sue abortion providers.

www.latimes.com

California already violates the 2nd amend. on a much larger scale You know, like the left say doesn't exist? What are they ever right about?

If I cross the border with my Glock, the largest clip I can have is 10 rounds, which last I knew you could hardly find. I have to keep the unloaded gun one place, locked up, and the ammunition in another place, locked up. Sure, that will work well when you're being assaulted right. I guess you just call time-out because it's only fair.

 

[Theowl32]

When it goes down, don't hesitate

 

[Nostra]

I personally believe it's a scare tactic and showing the court that their rulings apply to everyone.

Not just the anti choice people.

The law has not been written but I did read the article and it clearly states that it will be the same law as the one in Texas. The politicians in California will probably use the same wording as the Texas law replacing abortion with assault weapons and kits to convert a weapon into an assault weapon.

Unfortunately for Newsome, the Constitution clearly gives Americans the right to own firearms. Nowhere in the Constitution is the right to kill your kid found.

 

[22lcidw]

I think there's a possibility that he would understand it as a quid pro quo only. It might work as that even if it doesn't work as a parallel to the Texas thing.

The Scotus is most likely to the point at which they will go full kangaroo and disregard precedence of the Texas law.
Legal precedence plays no part in the decisions of a fully corrupt court. Newsome has to be demonstrating faith in the Scotus, when there's a very good reason that he shouldn't be.

Sorry Nostra but I believe that fascism has taken hold in many different ways. The Texas thing getting by the Scotus was a huge blow to democracy.

Just my opinion.

Much of the abortion issue is from irresponsible ways. It would be interesting to know the percentage of abortions from repeaters. Most of the gun issues are of irresponsible ways also. 55 years in on the Great Society. The War on Poverty. A percentage of voters have lived nothing but irresponsible ways not even trying to improve. Perhaps there is a connect the dots thing going on here.

 

[BrokeLoser]

Should the Court invalidate AWBs – which it likely will in the near future – states with AWBs will continue to enforce the law using lawsuits by private citizens, the same way Texas is using private lawsuits to enforce its un-Constitutional abortion ‘ban.’

Again, you Tards are swinging for the fences on a silly theory concocted by Leftist whackadoodles..
Look, a ban on assault weapons is in fact unconstitutional as our great framers never laid a caveat within the 2A, they were smart as fuck with amazing foresight…they wanted citizens to bare arms equivalent to government issued weaponry…How else would a citizenry defend itself against a rouge tyrannical government?
This is such simple shit Tards…think once.

 

[Dana7360]

Not really, there are 49 other states that they can get an abortion.




If you say so. It will be overturned.

There are many women in Texas who can't get an abortion now and can't travel to another state for an abortion.

Using your logic, the other 49 states won't have that assault weapon law so it's ok to enact it in California.

I disagree.

No one can say for sure it will be overturned. In fact, allowing it to go into effect by not putting a stay on it, gives an indication that they might leave it in place.

If they weren't going to leave it in place, if they had any respect for 50 years of precedence, they would have put a stay on the law.

They didn't.

It's very premature to say what the court will do. Either way.

We have to wait to find out.

 

[BrokeLoser]

No. Your entire talking point is wrong and fatally flawed. All the world's modern democracies uphold the rights of women.

I like to think that in Canada we are opposed to supporting the 'need' for abortions and so we take social measures to reduce that need. We don't dictate religious priorities to half of our people. Women!

That's my talking point and there's no reason for me to need to add to it!

“Women’s rights” does not include the right to murder the unborn…never should have.

 

[Dana7360]

No they did not. It will be overturned.

Yes they did. If they didn't, we wouldn't be debating what California is talking about doing.

We don't know if it will be overturned.

It should be. That is the correct thing to say.

Anything else is very premature.

We have to wait for their ruling.

 

[pknopp]

There are many women in Texas who can't get an abortion now and can't travel to another state for an abortion.

Using your logic, the other 49 states won't have that assault weapon law so it's ok to enact it in California.

Bite me. I do NOT support either law because they are incredibly hateful and stupid.

I disagree.

No one can say for sure it will be overturned. In fact, allowing it to go into effect by not putting a stay on it, gives an indication that they might leave it in place.

If they weren't going to leave it in place, if they had any respect for 50 years of precedence, they would have put a stay on the law.

They didn't.

It's very premature to say what the court will do. Either way.

We have to wait to find out.

It will be overturned.

 

[Donald H]

Much of the abortion issue is from irresponsible ways. It would be interesting to know the percentage of abortions from repeaters. Most of the gun issues are of irresponsible ways also. 55 years in on the Great Society. The War on Poverty. A percentage of voters have lived nothing but irresponsible ways not even trying to improve. Perhaps there is a connect the dots thing going on here.

I hear you!
But can you explain what you mean with 'connect the dots'?

What I've been saying is that the Scotus wouldn't acknowledge the precedence set on vigilante justice and apply it to guns. A corrupt court need not encumber itself in that way. I suggested that it has gone 'full kangaroo'.

 

[Zincwarrior]

They did using the reasoning that no law had been enforced yet nor was it properly filed. You will note that after it was refiled they took the case.

But didn't kick it, still.

 

[pknopp]

But didn't kick it, still.

Because they have not ruled on it yet.

 

[mudwhistle]

I believe congress passed a law on a national level protecting gun manufacturers.

Yeah....gun-grabbers are really on gun owner's sides. RLMMFAO!!!


No problem here considering the fact that Democrats are trying their best to make sure nothing is manufactured in this country anymore, because we can't get the raw materials we need to do it thanks to Biden closing down mining everywhere he can....and charging outrageous taxes on waste from mining operations.
Obama outsourced our space program to Russia....and Biden outsourced our mining industry to China.

 

[EyeBRollin]

The Supreme Court has already acknowledged that upholding the Texas law would lead us here which is why they will not be upholding it in the end.

Fuck the Supreme Court.

 

[cnm]

One does not need to be a “political zealot” to know we have a humane duty to protect the sanctity of life.

Oh yeah. I can see you're ready to go to the barricades for those 'dark lives'.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Apparently Newsom wants revenge…
’If you’re going to stop us from killing babies, I’ll retaliate by taking your guns.’
Ladies and gentlemen, this is the Left.

In response to Texas abortion ban, Newsom calls for similar restrictions on assault weapons

The proposed law would let California citizens sue gun manufacturers, similar to how Texas has made it easier for its residents to sue abortion providers.

www.latimes.com

Elections have consequences. Cali deserves everything it gets.