2022 SB 1327 Hertzberg - Firearms: private rights of action (SB8-like Private Suits)

[Dirtlaw]

Shocking.

[Dirtlaw]

California needs a huge smack down from the Supremes.

[Dirtlaw]

https://www.billtrack50.com/BillDetail/1459879 Its SB 1327; not AB 1327. Part of the new law that allows lawsuits against manufacturers.

[Dirtlaw]

[QuickDraw]

Ever since Texas passed its anti abortion law a few months back, newscum has been on the offensive against anything deemed “right wing” especially gun owners and guns. The 2nd amendment ruling recently really put him in overdrive. Its a bold strategy if he plans to run for President, most of the country isn’t as wacky as California. Then again, he has the dem fraud machine behind him. I wonder how much election fraud has gone on in California the past 20 years.

[johncage]

Who manufactures illegal assault weapons or untraceable ghost guns?

These people are amazingly stupid.

no, they just never got the memo that america is no longer america

[Dirtlaw]

If challenging a particular law exposes you to the likelihood that you AND YOUR ATTORNEYS will owe millions in attorney's fees that creates somewhat of a chilling effect to anyone making a challenge -- assuming they could find an attorney willing to take the gamble. So what if our legislators decide to make a law confiscating all firearms? And why not up the ante a bit. Anyone challenging their law gets a firing squad.

[BAJ475]

If challenging a particular law exposes you to the likelihood that you AND YOUR ATTORNEYS will owe millions in attorney's fees that creates somewhat of a chilling effect to anyone making a challenge -- assuming they could find an attorney willing to take the gamble. So what if our legislators decide to make a law confiscating all firearms? And why not up the ante a bit. Anyone challenging their law gets a firing squad.

That would be interesting, because those facing a firing squad would be shooting back!

[gobler]

The main difference; and it's a major difference, is one is protected by the 2nd Amendment of the constitution. The other is no where found in any legal document and in fact frowned upon by our founders.

Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk

[Dirtlaw]

The main difference; and it's a major difference, is one is protected by the 2nd Amendment of the constitution. The other is no where found in any legal document and in fact frowned upon by our founders.

Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk

It's one thing to be willing to follow the rules; quite another to write your own as you go along (even writing two rules on the same subject ... one for you ... and one for me).

[fireguymfd]

Not sure if this bill has already changed into something far worse, but found this link on YouTube in regards to amending the California Penal Code to end our ability to Sue California for violating our 2nd amendment rights due to threat of mandating that the litigant bringing suit against California having to reimburse the state for legal costs as they seek to defend their unconstitutional gun control laws.

Talk about a chilling effect on lawsuits involving the 2nd amendment. If Gavin Newsom ever had any desire to be a presidential candidate signing a law like this would go a long ways with progressives… Wouldn’t think it would be very popular with Independents or Republicans but pretty sure he can’t call himself a moderate supporting anti constitutional laws…. Not that he cares. This is unprecedented craziness!

https://youtu.be/mUs__7ZZ01Y

[abinsinia]

https://youtu.be/mUs__7ZZ01Y

The video has been posted three times in this thread. The bill has not changed and will be signed by Newsom shortly.

[Dirtlaw]

This is really bad stuff. To me it is like the Governor saying that he is above the law and that only he has the right to determine what the law is. Bad. Really bad.

[bruss01]

Signed into law this morning. Needs to be fought tooth and nail.

Even the ACLU opposes this one, and that's saying something.

[MolonLabe2008]

Told you this would happen. Regardless of how you feel about abortion, the Texas law is incredibly dumb and dangerous.

Republicans: Pass law to try to get around established constitutional protections for abortion

Democrats: Pass similar law to try to get around constitutional protections for firearms

Republicans: *surprised Picachu face*

My guess (and hope) is that all this crap will eventually get thrown out due to established legal principles of standing: a random individual who is not directly affected would not have standing to sue another random individual for breaking a law. But until then it's going to be a freakin' clown show as both parties try to pass similar laws.

Abortion was never a constitutional right. It is (and always was) a state's rights issue.