California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed gun legislation inspired by Texas' heartbeat law, now allowing private citizens to sue those who violate state gun restrictions.

[Charlie T Waite]

California Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom on Friday signed a gun control bill into law that will allow private citizens to sue anyone who manufactures, sells, transports or distributes illegal "assault weapons and ghost guns."

The measure was crafted in response to last year's Texas abortion ban that prohibits the procedure once a heartbeat was detected and allows private citizens to sue physicians, drivers or anyone else who aids a woman in receiving an abortion for $10,000.

The California gun law would grant $10,000 in damages per weapon to private citizens who sue. Citizens could also be awarded the same amount if they file a lawsuit against someone who illegally sells firearms to people under 21 years of age.  The bill was introduced after Newsom directed state lawmakers in December to draft a gun control measure modeled after Texas' abortion law, S.B. 8. The governor called for the legislation just days after the Supreme Court ruled that the Texas heartbeat law could remain in effect following a legal challenge.

LAKERS' AUSTIN REAVES LOOKS TO DISTANCE HIMSELF FROM ‘AR-15’ NICKNAME

The California gun law would award $10,000 in damages per weapon to citizens who sue. (Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

"Our message to the criminals spreading illegal weapons in California is simple: you have no safe harbor here in the Golden State," Newsom said in a press release Friday. "While the Supreme Court rolls back reasonable gun safety measures, California continues adding new ways to protect the lives of our kids. California will use every tool at its disposal to save lives, especially in the face of an increasingly extreme Supreme Court."

The bill was signed at Santa Monica College, the location of a 2013 shooting in which the gunman killed five people using an unserialized AR-15 rifle that had been built using legally purchased parts. The weapon would have been restricted under the new law. 

The law is expected to cause lawsuits.

"It is obvious that this is a retaliation against lawful gun owners and the court because of the Texas decision. There’s a full expectation that the firearms industry will have a very strong reaction towards the signing of this bill," Sam Paredes, executive director of Gun Owners of California, said, according to the Los Angeles Times. "They are really, really trying to be nothing but vindictive against lawful people in the firearms industry. All of our attorneys are in the process of evaluating what we are going to do on this thing."

MEDIA DOWNPLAYS ‘GOOD SAMARITAN’ NARRATIVE FOLLOWING INDIANA SHOOTING, FIREARMS EXPERTS WEIGH IN

The bill was signed at Santa Monica College, the location of a 2013 shooting in which the gunman killed five people using an unserialized AR-15 rifle that had been built using legally purchased parts. (Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

Newsom had signed a number of other gun control bills on Thursday aimed at tackling gun violence. The measures include a 10-year prohibition for firearm possession on those convicted of child or elder abuse, a reduction in the number of guns someone is allowed to manufacture without a license and a requirement that the state justice department inspect gun dealers at least every three years beginning in 2024. 

HOUSE COMMITTEE APPROVES FIRST ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN BILL IN DECADES

Newsom had signed a number of other gun control measures on Thursday that target gun violence.  (AP Images)

"While some politicians put up roadblocks or say nothing can be done, here in California we are once again proving we can take on the gun lobby and protect our communities," state Attorney General Rob Bonta said in Friday's release. 

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

"With these new laws, California is protecting life, safety, and freedom." he continued. "We have the strongest gun safety laws in the nation, and one of the lowest firearm mortality rates. This is not a coincidence. More guns do not make us safer — laws like these do. Period."

Newsom has also taken out an ad in multiple Texas newspapers criticizing GOP Gov. Greg Abbott for his stance on guns and abortion, the latest ad launched in a Republican state, which suggests he could be eyeing a run for the White House. He recently aired an ad in Florida urging its residents to leave for California, claiming freedom is "under attack" in the Sunshine State.

[Muggle]

They conservatives in CA will start moving out in masses.

CA is finished.

[Wrangler Bob]

This, along with many other of their State laws, would prohibit me from returning to California. All of my family is there, so I visit them. I want to shoot with a club in California, but transporting my guns would be an issue. I'll have to check on what is required.

[Hendo]

Newsom is on a Presidential run.

There isn't one gun bill that is going to cross his pen that he won't sign.

None of these bills will stop the violence they are claiming they will.

All they will do is make penstroke felons of law abiding citizens. I'm trying as hard as I can to keep up on what's on the table right now, but I'm falling behind. 

I think the next big ones are going to be the mandatory insurance scam and the tax per firearm/ precursor part/ammo bill (AB 1227?).

They may not directly ban every gun, but they WILL make ownership financially onerous for the common man.

[Blackwater 53393]

Governor Nuisance should run for the Chinese border!!  The commie b@$tard would fit right in over there!!!

[Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967]

California's governor is about as arrogant and egotistical as anyone alive today ~ ranks right up there with Mr Putin, but without that man's intellect - such as it is.  

 

To digress -  there is an old term, "Cash Cow," that comes to mind:

1 : a consistently profitable business, property, or product whose profits are used to finance a company's investments in other areas. 2 : one regarded or exploited as a reliable source of money a singer deemed a cash cow for the record label.

 

The left-leaning political party controlling California has adopted the concept and adapted it to meet their game plan with what I call a "Vote Cow."

 

To wit, they use "gun control" as a common campaign theme - a constant flow of new, so-called "common sense" gun laws that do nothing more than make life difficult for and bring misery to a huge but nevertheless minority segment of our society. 

 

And why?  So they can boast to the majority* of the citizens who are not firearms owners "Golly Gee!  Look what WE have done for YOU!  You will be MUCH safer and happier now that we have placed more control on evil gun owners!  Vote for US!"

*Per CalMatters.org, 4.2 million California adults are firearms owners.  A large number, but only  14.2% of the state's adult population.  "Vote Cow" politicians use their arguments to hold sway over more than 85% of the population.

 

As a member of the firearm-owning minority, I often feel like a member of a certain ethnic minority in any of several Southern states early in the last century.  We have been overburdened, our civil rights have been severely minimized, and we are continually deprecated, if not downright demonized.  

[Hendo]

2 hours ago, Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967 said:

California's governor is about as arrogant and egotistical as anyone alive today ~ ranks right up there with Mr Putin, but without that man's intellect - such as it is.  

 

To digress -  there is an old term, "Cash Cow," that comes to mind:

1 : a consistently profitable business, property, or product whose profits are used to finance a company's investments in other areas. 2 : one regarded or exploited as a reliable source of money a singer deemed a cash cow for the record label.

 

The left-leaning political party controlling California has adopted the concept and adapted it to meet their game plan with what I call a "Vote Cow."

 

To wit, they use "gun control" as a common campaign theme - a constant flow of new, so-called "common sense" gun laws that do nothing more than make life difficult for and bring misery to a huge but nevertheless minority segment of our society. 

 

And why?  So they can boast to the majority* of the citizens who are not firearms owners "Golly Gee!  Look what WE have done for YOU!  You will be MUCH safer and happier now that we have placed more control on evil gun owners!  Vote for US!"

*Per CalMatters.org, 4.2 million California adults are firearms owners.  A large number, but only  14.2% of the state's adult population.  "Vote Cow" politicians use their arguments to hold sway over more than 85% of the population.

 

As a member of the firearm-owning minority, I often feel like a member of a certain ethnic minority in any of several Southern states early in the last century.  We have been overburdened, our civil rights have been severely minimized, and we are continually deprecated, if not downright demonized.  

We may only 14.2% of the population, but consider the power of the LGBTwhatever community at 4.8% or the black community at 6.5%. Being a "minority" of the population isn't our problem. Being unified with a positive and cohesive message and voting block is.

[Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967]

5 minutes ago, Hendo said:

We may only 14.2% of the population, but consider the power of the LGBTwhatever community at 4.8% or the black community at 6.5%. Being a "minority" of the population isn't our problem. Being unified with a positive and cohesive message and voting block is.

 

As much as I appreciate the spirit of that thought, I don't think it exactly applies.

 

The missing link  here is that those "minorities" are the darlings of the voting majority (remember, california's voter profile is roughly D = 47%, R = 24%, U = 23%.  The remaining balance are miscellaneous oddball parties).

 

About 70% of U (Unaffiliated) voters typically join the D's; only about 23% lean toward the R side.  This gives an effective ratio of approximately:

 

D = 63%

R = 30%

 

You can pretty much bet that most of the D's follow the party line on gun control issues, but not all the R's will oppose.  More R's are gun owners than D's, but not all... and it doesn't matter anyway - we're vastly outnumbered.

 

In ever crackpot "anti" scheme that the D's have pushed over the years we have been as vocal and combative as possible; indeed, whenever some knot-head here on the Wire pops off with something about how it's OUR fault for not fighting hard enough, I want to slam the lid on their head when they go to take a drink.  

 

Oh... and remember, the public education system is pretty much totally run by the D's.  Our kids are being constantly exposed to an anti- mindset during their developing years.  I know LOTS of teachers and administrators; those few who are of a conservative bent are pretty much silenced.  

 

We're like a virtual Alamo in this state.  

 

 

 

 

[Hendo]

48 minutes ago, Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967 said:

 

As much as I appreciate the spirit of that thought, I don't think it exactly applies.

 

The missing link  here is that those "minorities" are the darlings of the voting majority (remember, california's voter profile is roughly D = 47%, R = 24%, U = 23%.  The remaining balance are miscellaneous oddball parties).

 

About 70% of U (Unaffiliated) voters typically join the D's; only about 23% lean toward the R side.  This gives an effective ratio of approximately:

 

D = 63%

R = 30%

 

You can pretty much bet that most of the D's follow the party line on gun control issues, but not all the R's will oppose.  More R's are gun owners than D's, but not all... and it doesn't matter anyway - we're vastly outnumbered.

 

In ever crackpot "anti" scheme that the D's have pushed over the years we have been as vocal and combative as possible; indeed, whenever some knot-head here on the Wire pops off with something about how it's OUR fault for not fighting hard enough, I want to slam the lid on their head when they go to take a drink.  

 

Oh... and remember, the public education system is pretty much totally run by the D's.  Our kids are being constantly exposed to an anti- mindset during their developing years.  I know LOTS of teachers and administrators; those few who are of a conservative bent are pretty much silenced.  

 

We're like a virtual Alamo in this state.  

 

 

 

 

 I surely hope you're not considering me one of the knotheads. If for nothing else, I really hate swirlies. 

I'm in no way saying we're not fighting hard enough, but am suggesting we can be smarter. We've been subject to the Anti 2a long game for something like five decades in this state and we have a lot of ground to recoup. The educational system has been conditioning students away from learning the basis of our Republic's foundation. Every successive generation is being taught less and less about our basic rights and more about socialism undr the guise of Social Studies. Look no further than how nobody raises an eyebrow when the Mumbler in Chief claims that no Amendment is absolute. How many times do you hear that the Constitution "grants" rights? Now we have AB2571 which prohibits advertising to minors. I have heard that it is vague enough that some ranges won't allow the youngins to shoot. (I can point to a thread in another forum where it happened.) How do we now reach kids with the proper message beyond the rot of Hollywood and Call of Duty?

 

 When Sandy Hook happened, blaming the NRA was a whisper and only vaguely linked to the firearm manufacturers. By the time Marjorie Stoneman hit the press, the NRA was synonymous with the gun industry and was lumped in as on big evil gun lobby. Notice that politicians now say they "took on the NRA and won". The rhetoric grew and put a huge target on the NRA's back. Unfortunately, the leadership didn't cover their six and now spends as much assets defending WLP as they do trying to fight for our freedom. The Board of Directors should've been way smarter. We paid them to be. I'm not going to argue whether WLP did anything wrong or not, but they all should've known that anything that could be extorted, would be and the answers should have been at the ready. 

 

 Remember when we had open carry in California? I do. I also remember when it got outlawed because a bunch of knuckleheads made an issue of some businesses (a certain coffee shop chain in particular) saying "No Guns Allowed". The Antis promoted the fear and the noncommitted voters fell in line. 

 

 We're loud, but are we organized? Remember Gunmaggedon? We fell short because we couldn't pull enough people together.

I can't tell you how many times I've heard GUN OWNERS say that we don't really need assault weapons. You don't win any of them over by telling them that "assault weapon" is a made up term. If you berate someone over the whole "clip/mag" thing, you won't gain any traction, either. I know gun owners who are Democrats, most of them aren't single issue voters, and you dang well won't get anywhere calling them "Demoncrats" or "Libtards". We need better messaging and a more positive way to reach people.

 

I believe you are right with the Alamo analogy, but I am not ready to roll over. I will stand for the rights protected by the Constitution and have sworn an oath to do so on several occasions. I just believe that we have to be way smarter about how we protect our rights. I don't have the answers, but I'll keep trying.

 

It is my wish that at least some of that made sense.

Be well and stay strong.

 

[Gunner Gatlin, SASS 10274L]

So...any lawsuits by the CRPA, NRA, GOA on this?

 

GG ~ 

[Hendo]

4 hours ago, Gunner Gatlin, SASS 10274L said:

So...any lawsuits by the CRPA, NRA, GOA on this?

 

GG ~ 

There are a slew of lawsuits being filed. I'll try to get a list up from the CRPA in a bit.

[Hendo]

12 hours ago, Gunner Gatlin, SASS 10274L said:

So...any lawsuits by the CRPA, NRA, GOA on this?

 

GG ~ 

Sorry it is taking me some time to get back. I've got a lot of dogs barking in the kennel right now.

I've started setting up a list that is trying to cross reference the NRA-ILA, the CRPA foundation, Gun Owners of California, SAF and the GOA.

It's a bit of a haul and honestly, with Gavin's signing spree, it's really hard to round up into anything that makes sense. (It's not really my wheelhouse, but I try.)

You can start with the CRPA litigation list. Mind you, it will change by Friday if I don't miss my guess.

You'll notice it doesn't list the pending lawsuit involving the CADOJ info dump from last week.

https://crpa.org/programs/litigation-program/

LITIGATION PROGRAM

The right to keep and bear arms (RKBA) is sometimes called “Liberty’s Teeth” because it protects all the rest of our liberties. The CRPA legal team works to strategically develop Second Amendment jurisprudence and to challenge unconstitutional or illegal and ill-conceived gun laws in court. Our team of highly regarded civil rights attorneys and scholars from across the country have the experience, resources, skill, and expertise needed to maximize the potential for victory in California’s often hostile 2A environment.

The ruling in the hard fought McDonald case (in which The CRPA Foundation filed an amicus brief) opened the door for additional legal challenges to state and local gun laws in California.  Now that we have court rulings confirming that the Second Amendment civil right applies nationally.  Winning decisions in other jurisdictions can be used as important legal precedent in California.  The CRPA legal team litigates against ill-conceived gun control laws and ordinances.  With decades of experience litigating civil rights issues, the lawyers and experts that make up The CRPA Legal team provide perspective and experience that is more critical than ever.

NEW!! CFL Litigation Report

Additional Resources & Active Cases

• Junior Sport Magazine, Inc. , et al v. Bonta (New Filing to Protect Youth Shooting)
• NYSRPA v. Bruen- Update Page
• NYSRPA v. Bruen– Carry outside of the home
• NEW! B & L Productions v. Newsom ( B & L II)
• Rhode v. Becerra– Ammunition Restrictions Litigation Updates (Remanded and Additional Briefing Ordered)
• NEW! Duncan v. Becerra– Large Capacity Magazine Litigation Updates (Remanded and Additional Briefing Ordered) 
• Caniglia v. Strom– VICTORY- Community Caretaking & Warrantless Searches
• Amicus Filing Updates
• B & L Productions, Inc. d/b/a Crossroads of the West, v. 22nd District Agricultural Association– Gun show Protection
• Kirk v. City of Morgan Hill– Mandatory Reporting of Lost/Stolen Firearms- Preemption Case
• Rupp v. Becerra– Challenge to the California Assault Weapon Ban.

 

 

• News-CRPA Files Motion to Stay Issuance of Mandate in Duncan v. Bonta
• News- CRPA Files Amicus Brief Urging the Supreme Court to Strike New York’s Restrictive Carry Law and Adopt a Meaningful Standard for Reviewing Second Amendment Challenges
• News- BREAKING NEWS! NINTH CIRCUIT EN BANC PANEL HEARS ORAL ARGUMENT IN CRPA CHALLENGE TO STATEWIDE BAN ON STANDARD CAPACITY MAGAZINES
• News- COURT RULES THAT $30 MILLION LAWSUIT AGAINST CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE FOR BLOCKING LEGAL GUN SALES CAN PROCEED
• News-California’s “Assault Weapon” Ban Ruled Unconstitutional: What Does Miller really mean for gun owners?
• News- CRPA, Gun Owners of California, and the Second Amendment Law Center Join Forces to File Amicus Brief Urging the Supreme Court to Review New Jersey’s Unconstitutional Magazine Capacity Restrictions
• News- CRPA Joins New Second Amendment Law Center and Gun Owners of California in Brief Before the U.S. Supreme Court

 

[Charlie T Waite]

FPC Statement on California Governor Gavin Newsom’s Signing of Anti-Rights Bills

[Gunner Gatlin, SASS 10274L]

On 7/26/2022 at 11:33 PM, Hendo said:

Sorry it is taking me some time to get back. I've got a lot of dogs barking in the kennel right now.

I've started setting up a list that is trying to cross reference the NRA-ILA, the CRPA foundation, Gun Owners of California, SAF and the GOA.

It's a bit of a haul and honestly, with Gavin's signing spree, it's really hard to round up into anything that makes sense. (It's not really my wheelhouse, but I try.)

You can start with the CRPA litigation list. Mind you, it will change by Friday if I don't miss my guess.

You'll notice it doesn't list the pending lawsuit involving the CADOJ info dump from last week.

https://crpa.org/programs/litigation-program/

LITIGATION PROGRAM

The right to keep and bear arms (RKBA) is sometimes called “Liberty’s Teeth” because it protects all the rest of our liberties. The CRPA legal team works to strategically develop Second Amendment jurisprudence and to challenge unconstitutional or illegal and ill-conceived gun laws in court. Our team of highly regarded civil rights attorneys and scholars from across the country have the experience, resources, skill, and expertise needed to maximize the potential for victory in California’s often hostile 2A environment.

The ruling in the hard fought McDonald case (in which The CRPA Foundation filed an amicus brief) opened the door for additional legal challenges to state and local gun laws in California.  Now that we have court rulings confirming that the Second Amendment civil right applies nationally.  Winning decisions in other jurisdictions can be used as important legal precedent in California.  The CRPA legal team litigates against ill-conceived gun control laws and ordinances.  With decades of experience litigating civil rights issues, the lawyers and experts that make up The CRPA Legal team provide perspective and experience that is more critical than ever.

NEW!! CFL Litigation Report

Additional Resources & Active Cases

• Junior Sport Magazine, Inc. , et al v. Bonta (New Filing to Protect Youth Shooting)
• NYSRPA v. Bruen- Update Page
• NYSRPA v. Bruen– Carry outside of the home
• NEW! B & L Productions v. Newsom ( B & L II)
• Rhode v. Becerra– Ammunition Restrictions Litigation Updates (Remanded and Additional Briefing Ordered)
• NEW! Duncan v. Becerra– Large Capacity Magazine Litigation Updates (Remanded and Additional Briefing Ordered) 
• Caniglia v. Strom– VICTORY- Community Caretaking & Warrantless Searches
• Amicus Filing Updates
• B & L Productions, Inc. d/b/a Crossroads of the West, v. 22nd District Agricultural Association– Gun show Protection
• Kirk v. City of Morgan Hill– Mandatory Reporting of Lost/Stolen Firearms- Preemption Case
• Rupp v. Becerra– Challenge to the California Assault Weapon Ban.

 

 

• News-CRPA Files Motion to Stay Issuance of Mandate in Duncan v. Bonta
• News- CRPA Files Amicus Brief Urging the Supreme Court to Strike New York’s Restrictive Carry Law and Adopt a Meaningful Standard for Reviewing Second Amendment Challenges
• News- BREAKING NEWS! NINTH CIRCUIT EN BANC PANEL HEARS ORAL ARGUMENT IN CRPA CHALLENGE TO STATEWIDE BAN ON STANDARD CAPACITY MAGAZINES
• News- COURT RULES THAT $30 MILLION LAWSUIT AGAINST CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE FOR BLOCKING LEGAL GUN SALES CAN PROCEED
• News-California’s “Assault Weapon” Ban Ruled Unconstitutional: What Does Miller really mean for gun owners?
• News- CRPA, Gun Owners of California, and the Second Amendment Law Center Join Forces to File Amicus Brief Urging the Supreme Court to Review New Jersey’s Unconstitutional Magazine Capacity Restrictions
• News- CRPA Joins New Second Amendment Law Center and Gun Owners of California in Brief Before the U.S. Supreme Court

 

 Thanks pard.

 

GG ~