Anti-gun politicians often do strange things that make little sense to logical people. They have an amazing ability to twist an unrelated situation against guns, gun owners and the Second Amendment. For example, Governor Newsom is using the Texas abortion ban ruling in his attacks on gun rights.
Governor Newsom Attacks Gun Rights
California Gov. Gavin Newsom was irate over the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in a Texas abortion case. In response he used that ruling to attack California’s law-abiding gun owners and gun makers.
The high court’s ruling left in place a Texas law permitting average citizens to sue abortion clinics in that state. As a result, Newsom’s Friday announcement details the drafting of an anti-gun measure. It allows Californians to sue gun manufacturers, distributors and sellers of so-called “assault weapons” in the Golden State.
“I am outraged by yesterday’s U.S. Supreme Court decision allowing Texas’s ban on most abortion services to remain in place,” Newsom said in a statement shared on Twitter. “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.”
Newsom further expanded on the strange idea: “I have directed my staff to work with the Legislature and the Attorney General on a bill that would create a right of action allowing private citizens to seek injunctive relief, and statutory damages of at least $10,000 per violation plus costs and attorney’s fees, against anyone who manufacturers, distributes or sells an assault weapon or ghost gun kit or parts in the State of California. If the most efficient way to keep these devastating weapons off our streets is to add the threat of private lawsuits, we should do just that.”
The two topics—abortions in Texas and semi-auto firearms in California—seem to be worlds apart. However, Newsom’s abuse of the recent Supreme Court precedent highlights his decades-long fight against gun rights and law-abiding gun owners.
Comparing Apples and Oranges
Writing at Liberty.loft.com, JD Washington uses sound reasoning to explain why the two topics are actually apples and oranges. This despite the blinders worn by Newsom and other anti-gunners. Including many in the so-called mainstream media who proudly crowed over Newsom’s announcement.
“As has been stated multiple times, the right to an abortion is not specifically spelled out in the Constitution,” Washington wrote. “The ‘right’ as the radical left wants to claim, was made up through the minds of the Supreme Court in decisions like Roe v Wade and Planned Parenthood v Casey. Our Constitution does not guarantee the right to an abortion, but it does guarantee the right to life.
“The Supreme Court ruling also does not change the fact that a state can decide what it would like to do on the matter of abortion. The Supreme Court ruling does not make abortion illegal, but it pushes the issue back to the states to decide since it is not a constitutional issue.”
The right to own a firearm, however, is vastly different, as Washington explained.
“Newsom’s law on the other hand would directly prevent someone from being able to obtain a firearm, a right that is explicitly called out in the Constitution,” he continued. “The Second Amendment says, ‘the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.’ That is exactly what his law will do.
“Newsom believes that he has found a way to circumvent the Constitution by following Texas’ lead, but Texas was never circumventing the Constitution.”
“Newsom’s statement comes at a time where brazen crime continues to plague the state,” the NRA statement said. “But, instead of rightfully focusing his attention on criminal conduct, he continues to harass and demonize law-abiding gun owners. The NRA will fight this bogus effort in the legislature and the courts.”
The NRA statement continued: “Gov. Newsom misunderstands the actions of the Supreme Court—and the limits of his war on lawful gun ownership. His promise to run roughshod over the Second Amendment is little more than political theater. He and fellow Democrats should proceed at their own peril: The American people will not tolerate another taxpayer-funded assault on constitutional freedom.”