Kavanaugh Asks if Texas Abortion Law Could Be Model for Bans on Gun Rights

[Otis Mayfield]

Justice Brett Kavanaugh floated the possibility of Texas's abortion law becoming a model for states to restrict other constitutional rights, such as gun rights under the Second Amendment.

The associate justice, appointed by former President Donald Trump, specifically posed a theoretical law that would allow the seller of an AR-15 semi-automatic weapon to be sued for $1 million.

The Texas solicitor general acknowledged the possibility but said Congress could pass laws to protect such rights. Kavanaugh seemed wary of such intervention.

"Some of those examples, I think, would be quite difficult to get legislation through Congress," Kavanaugh said.

Kavanaugh Poses Possibility That Texas Abortion Law Can Apply to Gun Rights

U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar told the Supreme Court Monday that "no constitutional right is safe" if the Texas law is allowed to stand.

www.newsweek.com

So you could use a Texas abortion style law to restrict guns in California? It gets around the Constitution.

I did not see this coming. Did you?

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Nowhere in the Constitution is there anything that even hints at a right for a woman to have her own child killed in cold blood.

The case for a Constitutional right to abortion is based on a mountain of falsehoods piled on falsehoods.

The Constitution does, however, explicitly affirm a right, belonging to the people, to keep and bear arms, and forbids government from infringing this right.

There is no honest comparison between the two.

 

[Auld Phart]

abortion is a constitutional right?

 

[Man of Ethics]

GREAT!

Abortion kills unborn children.
Guns enable suicide and murder.

Human Life is precious.

 

[Otis Mayfield]

abortion is a constitutional right?

It gets around the Constitution because Texas is allowing private citizens to sue when abortions happen. If a the fetus has a heartbeat, it can't be aborted under the law, but it's private citizens who enforce the law through lawsuits.

Justice Kavenaugh is saying the same can be done with guns.

I'm not a Supreme Court scholar so I'm not sure exactly but Justice Kavenaugh is on the Supreme Court.

 

[Man of Ethics]

Guns enable over 20,000 suicides and over 10,000 murders in USA each year.

 

[Man of Ethics]

Justice Kavenaugh is saying the same can be done with guns.

If relatives of suicide and murder victims could sue gun manufacturers, it would be great!

 

[Auld Phart]

If relatives of suicide and murder victims could sue gun manufacturers, it would be great!

If relatives of suicide and murder victims could sue gun manufacturers,

for what?

 

[Colin norris]

If relatives of suicide and murder victims could sue gun manufacturers, it would be great!

Oooooo. It looks like by your boy doesn't like guns either.
Watch the gun nuts buy more weapons and ammo. That'll stop him.

Tyranny in the SC. Who'd have thought it.

 

[JoeB131]

Nowhere in the Constitution is there anything that even hints at a right for a woman to have her own child killed in cold blood.

Nowhere in the constitution are blobs of tissue designated as children. So your argument is faulty on its face.

In fact, when the constitution was written, the child mortality rate was something like 50%, and they didn't even count children until they were old enough to wear pants.

 

[Man of Ethics]

for what?

Guns, like hard drugs enable harm. Neither guns nor opioids cause harm on their own. Opioids are banned.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

GREAT!

Abortion kills unborn children.
Guns enable suicide and murder.

Human Life is precious.

Guns also enable one to defend one's self against criminal attack; and for some, they allow hunting as a means of providing food.

 

[Otis Mayfield]

I didn't realize it but this topic is like the perfect storm, abortion and gun control.

Now all I need is figure out how to throw tipping into the mix.


lol

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Guns enable over 20,000 suicides and over 10,000 murders in USA each year.

And prevent approximately 2.5 million violent crimes from being completed, per year.

 

[Man of Ethics]

And prevent approximately 2.5 million violent crimes from being completed, per year.

That seems very dubious. Justifiable homicides are very few.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Guns, like hard drugs enable harm. Neither guns nor opioids cause harm on their own. Opioids are banned.

So what was that that the paramedics injected into me to control the pain, before they hauled me with a broken leg out of a construction site two years ago?

And what was in the pills that my doctor gave me to control the pain during my early recovery from that mishap?

 

[Man of Ethics]

So what was that that the paramedics injected into me to control the pain, before they hauled me with a broken leg out of a construction site two years ago?

And what was in the pills that my doctor gave me to control the pain during my early recovery from that mishap?

WOW!

Opioids are permitted but not for uncontrolled consumption by private citizens.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

That seems very dubious. Justifiable homicides are very few.

It's from a famous study carried out, I think, in the 1990s, by Gary Keck. He initially estimated that approximately a million and a half crimes were prevented by the defensive use of firearms. He later upped that estimate to about two and a half million.

Your big error is in assuming that the only way a gun can be used to prevent a crime is by killing the would-be criminal. The vast majority of legitimate defensive use of firearms have not involved killing the criminal, nor even discharging the firearm.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Opioids are permitted but not for uncontrolled consumption by private citizens.

Which contradicts your earlier statement that opioids are banned.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Nowhere in the constitution are blobs of tissue designated as children.

Nowhere in the Constitution does it deny that these innocent human beings are what they clearly are. This denial comes from the exact same evil that once denied that blacks were fully human. The very same degenerate ideology is responsible for both. See also, “Untermenschen” in 1930s-1940s Germany. Or an of the other instance throughout history where one group denied the humanity of another, in order to excuse and justify horrific abuses against that other group. That, Incel Joe, is the side on which you stand.