What goes around comes around (Abortion, Guns, Vigilantism)

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  krishna  •  5 months ago  •  51 comments

By:   Andy Rose, CNN

What goes around comes around (Abortion, Guns, Vigilantism)

Be careful what you wish for! 


S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



256

Photo: An important-looking building in Washington. The Guardian

California Gov. Gavin Newsom expressed his “outrage” Saturday at a  Supreme Court decision to allow the Texas six-week abortion ban to remain in effect and said he would use similar legal tactics to tackle gun control in his state.



I am outraged by yesterday’s US Supreme Court decision allowing Texas’s ban on most abortion services to remain in place, and largely endorsing Texas’s scheme to insulate its law from the fundamental protections of Roe v. Wade,” Newsom said in a statement .


“But if states can now shield their laws from review by the federal courts that  compare assault weapons  to Swiss Army knives, then California will use that authority to protect people’s lives, where Texas used it to put women in harm’s way,” the statement continued.

The Friday ruling from the Supreme Court allowed Texas’ abortion law that bars the procedure after the first six weeks of pregnancy to remain in place but said abortion providers have the right to challenge the law in federal court. However, the ruling limits which state officials can be sued by the abortion providers, which could make it difficult for them to resume providing abortions after the sixth week of pregnancy.

That is due to the law’s novel enforcement mechanism, which allows private citizens — from anywhere in the country — to bring civil suits against anyone who assists a pregnant person seeking an abortion in violation of the law.


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
Krishna
Professor Principal
1  seeder  Krishna    5 months ago

“I am outraged by yesterday’s US Supreme Court decision allowing Texas’s ban on most abortion services to remain in place, and largely endorsing Texas’s scheme to insulate its law from the fundamental protections of Roe v. Wade,” Newsom said in a   statement  .

“But if states can now shield their laws from review by the federal courts that   compare assault weapons   to Swiss Army knives, then California will use that authority to protect people’s lives, where Texas used it to put women in harm’s way,” the statement continued.

 
 
 
Krishna
Professor Principal
2  seeder  Krishna    5 months ago

The Friday ruling from the Supreme Court allowed Texas’ abortion law that bars the procedure after the first six weeks of pregnancy to remain in place but said abortion providers have the right to challenge the law in federal court. However, the ruling limits which state officials can be sued by the abortion providers, which could make it difficult for them to resume providing abortions after the sixth week of pregnancy.

In other words . . .  "vigilante justice".

 
 
 
Krishna
Professor Principal
3  seeder  Krishna    5 months ago

California Gov. Gavin Newsom expressed his “outrage” Saturday at a    Supreme Court decision  to allow the Texas six-week abortion ban to remain in effect and said he would use similar legal tactics to tackle gun control in his state.

The New York State Attorney General has  just announced she will be using the same method as Texas uses..having their citizens tattling on others to "the authorities'.

(And no doubt other states will follow Texas' lead (paying vigilantes to spy on, and report on, their fellow citizens) jrSmiley_91_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1  Texan1211  replied to  Krishna @3    5 months ago
The New York State Attorney General has  just announced she will be using the same method as Texas uses...to enforce the gun laws.

Might be kind of hard for her to write and pass and sign a bill into law all by herself.

What gun laws exactly are you talking about?

 
 
 
Krishna
Professor Principal
3.1.1  seeder  Krishna  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1    5 months ago
What gun laws exactly are you talking about?

I don't know, I'm not the Governor of New York State!

So you'll have to ask her ......  jrSmiley_9_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.2  Texan1211  replied to  Krishna @3.1.1    5 months ago

Oh, in that case, she seems to be talking out of her ass then.

That at least makes sense.

 
 
 
Krishna
Professor Principal
3.1.3  seeder  Krishna  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.2    5 months ago
Oh, in that case, she seems to be talking out of her ass then.

Whoa-- wait a minute! Wait just one gosh darned minute!

I said that I am not familiar with NYS gun laws. But I think its a reasonable assumption that she familiarized herself with those laws....

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.4  Texan1211  replied to  Krishna @3.1.3    5 months ago
But I think its a reasonable assumption that she familiarized herself with those laws....

Kind of weird then that you would also write this:

My guess would be that, just like the Texas Law,(which isn't aimed at manufacturers of abortion equipment but rather at the women having abortion,s what I believe the governor has in mind is not suing manufacturer but rather taking legal action individual citizens who break NYS laws. Perhaps a gun owner who doesn't have a license. Perhaps someone illegally dealing in guns, etc.

See, you say that if a citizen breaks the law, the state should take legal action. I agree, but WTF does the Texas law have to do with it?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.2  Texan1211  replied to  Krishna @3    5 months ago
(And no doubt other states will follow Texas' lead (paying vigilantes to spy on, and report on, their fellow citizens

Texas law doesn't call for the state to make payments to anyone regarding abortions. Why would you think it does?

 
 
 
Krishna
Professor Principal
3.2.1  seeder  Krishna  replied to  Texan1211 @3.2    5 months ago
Texas law doesn't call for the state to make payments to anyone regarding abortions.

I just checked-- found this about what the law says about making payments:

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott's signing of S.B. 8, a bill restricting the timeframe for abortions and allowing private citizens to sue abortion providers, and anyone who 'aids and abets' an abortion. Plaintiffs can recover at least $10,000 for each abortion prohibited under the law. 'The defendant --- whether a provider, funder, clergyperson, friend or family member --- pays the damages,' said a University of Texas at Austin law professor.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.2.2  Texan1211  replied to  Krishna @3.2.1    5 months ago
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott's signing of S.B. 8, a bill restricting the timeframe for abortions and allowing private citizens to sue abortion providers, and anyone who 'aids and abets' an abortion. Plaintiffs can recover at least $10,000 for each abortion prohibited under the law. 'The defendant --- whether a provider, funder, clergyperson, friend or family member --- pays the damages,' said a University of Texas at Austin law professor.

Oh, good, now you know what the law says and know that what I wrote about the state not paying was 100% correct!

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
Professor Participates
3.2.3  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Texan1211 @3.2.2    5 months ago
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott's signing of S.B. 8, a bill restricting the timeframe for abortions and allowing private citizens to sue abortion providers, and anyone who 'aids and abets' an abortion. Plaintiffs can recover at least $10,000 for each abortion prohibited under the law. 'The defendant --- whether a provider, funder, clergyperson, friend or family member --- pays the damages

I wonder how right wing conservative ammosexuals will react when this happens...

California Gov. Gavin Newsom's signing of S.B. 8, a bill allowing private citizens to sue gun providers, and anyone who 'aids and abets' an assault rifle sale. Plaintiffs can recover at least $10,000 for each assault rifle that they feel threatens their safety by existing in CA. 'The defendant --- whether a provider, funder, clergyperson, friend or family member --- pays the damages".

It will be interesting incentivizing the general public to rat on and get cash rewards for turning in anyone caught buying assault rifles. So while the State won't interfere with the assault rifle sales, the general public will be empowered to sue anyone owning one which will completely dodge the 2nd amendment just like the Texas abortion law dodges Roe v Wade.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.2.4  Texan1211  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @3.2.3    5 months ago

They'll all be safe then, because we know that scary black guns are too hard to look at for some progressive liberals, usually it sends them running! 

I can see it now--some gung-ho liberals hanging around the means streets of Compton, casing out gang territory, hoping to catch an illegal sale in some back alley!

LMAO!

 
 
 
Nowhere Man
Junior Expert
3.2.5  Nowhere Man  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @3.2.3    5 months ago
California Gov. Gavin Newsom's signing of S.B. 8, a bill allowing private citizens to sue gun providers,

I thought Cali's SB-8 was a housing bill?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.2.6  Texan1211  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @3.2.3    5 months ago
So while the State won't interfere with the assault rifle sales, the general public will be empowered to sue anyone owning one

Can you make up your mind please?

Either they can sue because of a sale or they can sue anyone who already owns that type of gun?

I think you need to do more accurate research.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.2.7  Texan1211  replied to  Nowhere Man @3.2.5    5 months ago
I thought Cali's SB-8 was a housing bill?

It IS, but he was on such a roll, assured he was 100% correct about it all.

Liberals, still proving Reagan right!

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
3.3  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Krishna @3    5 months ago

Welcome, America, to your STAR CHAMBER COURT OF THE UNITED STATES  (SCCOTUS). But keep blaming other countries for their human rights abuses, because it can make people look elsewhere.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
3.3.1  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3.3    5 months ago

What infuriates me more than anything is that the well-published anti-abortion zealot did not recuse herself in the matter.  Your SCOTUS is now a sham, and as I just said, welcome to the middle ages and the Star Chamber court.  The human rights of Texas's women have been demolished, and no doubt this will spread throughout the USA - maybe we should just call what is going to result from this decision a GENOCIDE.

Going to go into the wire hanger business.  Will set up my ad shortly.  Choose your colour.

wire_hangers_x1.jpg

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
3.3.2  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3.3    5 months ago

I was always under the impression that a "star chamber " type court or tribunal was one that was held in secret , away from public discourse or viewing  and usually held by those that were never elected or voted for by those that had been elected and voted for by the general populus ...

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
3.3.3  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3.3.1    5 months ago

(chuckles ) no less or more of a sham than it would become under a court packing scheme , want the court to loose all respect , then i say make them as ineffective as the executive and the legislative appear to many now . 

 remember its not just winning elections that puts these people in power , it is the over all consent of those they are elected to serve , people are under no obligation to follow those they do not agree with .

but hey , by whatever means right? more than one way to skin a cat .

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
3.3.4  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @3.3.2    5 months ago

If I've appeared harsh, maybe it's because I come from Canada where the laws concerning abortion are sensible, medically valid, respect the rights of women, and are not controlled by a religion.  I would like to see Amy Barrett spend a week taking care of the monster babies that women should have but didn't abort, located on the top floor of Toronto's Hospital for Sick Children. Some of them only last a few days, so she wouldn't get attached to them.  Look forward to those starting to be born in Texas in greater numbers than the present.  Some get born with no brains, so they should fit right in.  If they survive, they can always become vigilantes, wearing their pistols on their hips.

 
 
 
zuksam
Junior Silent
3.3.5  zuksam  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3.3.1    5 months ago
What infuriates me more than anything is that the well-published anti-abortion zealot did not recuse herself in the matter.

I think she should have but only if the pro-abortion zealots also recused themselves. Let's face it we know where she stands on the issue, but we know where the leftists stand so what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
3.3.6  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  zuksam @3.3.5    5 months ago

Were the leftist justices such zealots, or did they agree with the constitution and the precedents, and did not publish essays on the topic?  It doesn't take much to establish that Barrett is known to be an anti-Abortion zealot.

 
 
 
zuksam
Junior Silent
3.3.7  zuksam  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3.3.6    5 months ago

Everyone knows how the liberal judges will vote because the left never appoints anyone who isn't a dyed in the wool leftist. Liberal Judges never swing right ever, the only swing votes come from republican appointed Justices and it's been that way for decades. As far as Barrett's essays they are no worse than Sotomayor's recent pro-abortion statements but like many on the Left you don't recognize Bias as long as it aligns with your own beliefs. The left's anger at their loss of the long standing liberal majority in SCOTUS is proof that they knew how their appointees would vote long before the cases came up, there's no surer bet than how a liberal judge will vote. The Left believes that SCOTUS having a conservative majority is somehow corrupt so their solution is to demand court packing to get Liberals back in the majority, it's just so hypocritical.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
3.3.8  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3.3.4    5 months ago

No worries , everyone has their own perspective and believe what their life experiences lead them to , and each is an individual view , and no one is expected to agree with anothers view  and that can go for anything  under the sun .

Way i see it ? is this can end up one of three ways .

 roe can get "gutted "and states are allowed to place their restrictions with no judicial review  . 

another is that there will be no restrictions allowed again with no judicial review  meaning the court washes it hands of the matter , which happen if the latter happens as well . 

 the third and most likely is that the court can decide that the state can place some restrictions  dependant on what the people of the jurisdiction want ., the so called compromise , which is what has been going on since roe was first decided . and keeping a thumbnail so to speak on the issue so they can have a say it what is and is not allowed .

No one has asked me where i stand on the matter , but i am from a time where as a male , i was and have been told i have no say . and there is a certain amount of agreement with that position , but not for the reasons usually used .

 
 
 
Duck Hawk
Freshman Silent
3.3.9  Duck Hawk  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @3.3.2    5 months ago

When was the last time cameras were allowed the USSC while court was in progress? I would love to see the pics. Tell me again about an open court. Additionally why doesn't the USSC operate along the lines of a normal court? Cases aren't argued before the court, only its merits are argued.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
3.3.10  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Duck Hawk @3.3.9    5 months ago

no arguments from me , but i also understand that each court can decide for itself , what they will allow inside while proceedings are in session ,  so what you bring up to what i said , is to me a wild goose chase , red herring or strawman ,deflection ,  and since most federal courts disallow cameras , its to be expected .

 and since the court decides , thats likely why we have those crummy court room sketch artists .

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
3.3.12  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  zuksam @3.3.7    5 months ago
"Everyone knows how the liberal judges will vote...."

Yeah, you're right.  Maybe it's because the liberal judges are living in the present time and not the Middle Ages.  Hey, but even I wish I could be beamed back to the early 1950s, so I guess lots of people feel there are benefits to living in the past rather than these days. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
4  Texan1211    5 months ago

Should be a hoot when he finds out that federal law prohibits it.

Can You Sue a Gun Manufacturer for a Homicide? - Berkowitz Hanna (berkowitzlawfirm.com)

The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act , passed in 2005, is the most formidable barrier facing plaintiffs wishing to sue gun manufacturers for gun deaths. The PLCAA prevents gun manufacturers and retailers from being held liable in civil courts simply because crimes have been committed with the guns they manufactured or sold.
 
 
 
Krishna
Professor Principal
4.1  seeder  Krishna  replied to  Texan1211 @4    5 months ago
Should be a hoot when he finds out that federal law prohibits it.

Well, as I said, I have know idea what she means.

Apparently you are making an assumption.

Which strikes me as a bad guess.

My guess would be that, just like the Texas Law,(which isn't aimed at manufacturers of abortion equipment but rather at the women having abortion,s what I believe the governor has in mind is not suing manufacturer but rather taking legal action individual citizens who break NYS laws. Perhaps a gun owner who doesn't have a license. Perhaps someone illegally dealing in guns, etc.

But those are just guesses on my part. I don't know what their governor is thinking!

And I also don't know what gun laws NYS has on the book.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
4.1.1  Texan1211  replied to  Krishna @4.1    5 months ago
Well, as I said, I have know idea what she means. Apparently you are making an assumption.

And what assumption would that be?

My guess would be that, just like the Texas Law,(which isn't aimed at manufacturers of abortion equipment but rather at the women having abortion,s what I believe the governor has in mind is not suing manufacturer but rather taking legal action individual citizens who break NYS laws. Perhaps a gun owner who doesn't have a license. Perhaps someone illegally dealing in guns, etc.

Here is a link so you can understand the Texas law better. It isn't aimed at women who get abortions.

Texas' near-total abortion ban: What the law says | The Texas Tribune

And seems to me that someone illegally dealing guns should have already been charged. No special announcement from the Governor or AG needed to do their job. If a gun owner is required to have a license, why would anything extra be necessary for law enforcement to do their jobs?

 
 
 
Krishna
Professor Principal
4.1.2  seeder  Krishna  replied to  Texan1211 @4.1.1    5 months ago
And seems to me that someone illegally dealing guns should have already been charged.

Shoulda, coulda, woulda....

You are missing the point. What's unusual about the Texas law is that in addition to regular law enforcement officers tracking down "violaters", it gives ordinary citizens the right (and probably in many cases the motivation to spy on people)as they could receive money payments, for spying on and reporting their fellow citizens!.

Previously that was not the case in California or NYS. But now apparently, those 2 states are going to copy Texas' tactics-- starting with the gun laws (with which, as you so helpfully have pointed out, I am not familiar! But-- just a guess-- but their governors may well be!

Capiche?

 
 
 
Krishna
Professor Principal
4.1.3  seeder  Krishna  replied to  Texan1211 @4.1.1    5 months ago
Here is a link so you can understand the Texas law better. It isn't aimed at women who get abortions.

Why thank you Texan 1211...you are too kind! jrSmiley_2_smiley_image.png

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
4.1.4  Texan1211  replied to  Krishna @4.1.2    5 months ago
You are missing the point. What's unusual about the Texas law is that in addition to regular law enforcement officers tracking down "violaters", it gives ordinary citizens the right (and probably in many cases the motivation to spy on people)as they could receive money payments, for spying on and reporting their fellow citizens!.

You STILL have not read the law or continue to misunderstand what it says. LEO will NOT be allowed to enforce the law, it says so specifically in the law.

Here:

(Sec. 171.207.)

LIMITATIONS ON PUBLIC ENFORCEMENT

(a)

Notwithstanding Section 171.005 or any other law, the requirements of this subchaptershall be enforced exclusively through the private civil actions described in Section 171.208. 

Please do note the words in bold.

Previously that was not the case in California or NYS. But now apparently, those 2 states are going to copy Texas' tactics-- starting with the gun laws (with which, as you so helpfully have pointed out, I am not familiar! But-- just a guess-- but their governors may well be!

If they are aping Texas, then they will need to pass new laws, as has been my contention all along.  If people are breaking gun laws, by all means charge them under current state or federal laws.  

It just sounds as if a couple of liberal states are pissed that Texas passed a law. Too fucking bad for them.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
4.1.5  Texan1211  replied to  Krishna @4.1.3    5 months ago
Why thank you Texan 1211..

Anytime, always glad to help out.

Hope it helps.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
5  Sparty On    5 months ago

Jesus .... Newsome is such a tool.  

And all the hives worker drones scarf down his nonsense with a huge serving spoon ......

 
 
 
evilgenius
PhD Guide
5.1  evilgenius  replied to  Sparty On @5    5 months ago
Jesus .... Newsome is such a tool.  

It was going to happen. It was only a matter of time. It's a ploy to point out the absurdity of the Tx abortion law mechanism.

And all the hives worker drones eat up his nonsense with a spoon ......

None of these laws, including the Tx one, will likely stand as is. So rather than get our panties in a bunch, I'll just watch the circus play itself out.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
5.1.1  Sparty On  replied to  evilgenius @5.1    5 months ago

The only bunched up panties i see around here are on the left side of the aisle.

In fact, many appear to be chronically knotted up all the time

 
 
 
evilgenius
PhD Guide
5.1.2  evilgenius  replied to  Sparty On @5.1.1    5 months ago
The only bunched up panties i see around here are on the left side of the aisle. In fact, many appear to be chronically knotted up all the time

I wasn't speaking specifically of you... LOL! Twisted knickers is a partisan issue - not a specific single party - and is a result of how social media has evolved than anything else.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
5.1.3  Sparty On  replied to  evilgenius @5.1.2    5 months ago
I wasn't speaking specifically of you... LOL!

Didn't think you were ...... just pointing out a reality of the situation at hand.

 
 
 
Krishna
Professor Principal
5.1.4  seeder  Krishna  replied to  Sparty On @5.1.1    5 months ago
The only bunched up panties i see around here are on the left side of the aisle.

Yes, that typically is the case.... 

(Not surprising in the least )

 
 
 
Veronica
Masters Expert
6  Veronica    5 months ago

Hey Krish....What's up???

All I have to say is that I am so tired of fighting this same fight.  My new saying is going to be "keep your nose out of my crotch".

 
 
 
Hallux
Sophomore Principal
6.1  Hallux  replied to  Veronica @6    5 months ago

Good luck, the short one's are always sticking their nose into another's business and the tall ones are always sticking their business into another's nose.

 
 
 
Krishna
Professor Principal
6.2  seeder  Krishna  replied to  Veronica @6    5 months ago
Hey Krish....What's up??? All I have to say is that I am so tired of fighting this same fight.  My new saying is going to be "keep your nose out of my crotch".

I'm getting tired of it as well. 

That's why I've decided to take long breaks from the craziness. 

 
 
 
Veronica
Masters Expert
6.2.1  Veronica  replied to  Krishna @6.2    5 months ago
That's why I've decided to take long breaks from the craziness. 

I cannot blame you in the least.  

 
 
 
Nerm_L
PhD Principal
7  Nerm_L    5 months ago

What's Gov. Newsom outraged about?  Assault rifles are already banned in California.  And that ban has already been upheld in Federal courts.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
7.1  Texan1211  replied to  Nerm_L @7    5 months ago
What's Gov. Newsom outraged about?

Who knows what that dweeb is all upset about, and more importantly, who cares?

 
 
 
Krishna
Professor Principal
7.1.1  seeder  Krishna  replied to  Texan1211 @7.1    5 months ago

I think y'all are missing the point.

This seed is not about debating the pros and cons of abortion laws, gun laws, etc. There's been plenty of discussion of those topics.

Rather it is about the type of enforcement tactics the recent Texas Anti-Abortion Law uses. 

Specifically, the fact that non-elected "ordinary people' can report (alleged) violation and have the reports listened to.

In addition, people are encouraged to report alleged violations and even encouraged to do so because they could receive a monetary reward for doing so.

It encourages vigilante justice.....

 
 
 
Krishna
Professor Principal
7.1.2  seeder  Krishna  replied to  Krishna @7.1.1    5 months ago

I think y'all are missing the point.

This seed is not about debating the pros and cons of abortion laws, gun laws, etc. There's been plenty of discussion of those topics.

Rather it is about the type of enforcement tactics the recent Texas Anti-Abortion Law uses. 

Specifically, the fact that non-elected "ordinary people' can report (alleged) violation and have the reports listened to.

In addition, people are encouraged to report alleged violations and even encouraged to do so because they could receive a monetary reward for doing so.

It encourages vigilante justice.....

Right wing Anti-Abortion advocates generally like this new tactic-- if ordinary citizens are allowed to report (alleged) violations of Anti-Abortion Laws...and even encouraged to do this by financial rewards, it will probably eliminate all abortions in Texas! 

Great for the anti-Abortionists.... but ....

This could well become a case of "Be careful what you wish for" .

Why?

Because this sets a precedent: what if liberals encourage the same sort of Vigilante Justice for their pet causes-- for example, rewarding citizens financially if they report alleged violations of any local gun laws? And of course they could extend this to any type of laws that preogressives favour....

 
 
 
Krishna
Professor Principal
7.1.3  seeder  Krishna  replied to  Texan1211 @7.1    5 months ago
Who knows what that dweeb is all upset about, and more importantly, who cares?

Who cares?

See comment 7. 1. 1. , below.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
8  Thrawn 31    5 months ago

Lol, fair is fair. 

 
 

Who is online









cobaltblue


40 visitors