Fuck Texas!

[LargeOrangeFont]

Yup. People do this all the time with Handi-Cap access in buildings or business all the time.

Exactly! Forgot about all the ADA stupidity.

 

[500bbc]

Does anyone see a conflict of interest allowing citizens with no connection to the act suing these establishments?
Not to mention the case harvesting that can occur from opportunistic attorneys?

“The key difference is the enforcement mechanism. The Texas law relies on citizens suing abortion providers over alleged violations. Other states sought to enforce their statutes through government actions like criminal charges against physicians who provide abortions.”

EXPLAINER: What to know about the new Texas abortion law

The Supreme Court allowing a new Texas law that bans most abortions has Republicans eager to pass identical measures across the country.

apnews.com

You mean liking suing gun manufacturers for crimes committed by scumbags?
FI

 

[hallett21]

Frankly...you don’t understand the law or why it was written the way that it was. There is legal maneuvering to stand before the supreme court. That is our system.

Freedom, in the eyes of our founders, is not the right to do whatever turns you on. That’s a 1960’s hippy concept. Freedom is for a moral and educated people to do what is right.

an unborn child is an American. With a right to life.

besides...what kind of sane and decent country kills the most innocent?

“Freedom is for a moral and educated people to do what is right”.

While I agree with what you said. Shouldn’t we as a people do what’s right and stop killing, raping and assaulting each other?

Shouldn’t the government do what is right and stop infringing on our rights?

Of course, but I think everyone on here agrees that the second amendment makes sure the playing field is leveled in the above scenarios. An innocent women can defend herself if needed and a society can fight back against the government if necessary.

My point being that pretty much every anti 2A person or group says

“Freedom is for a moral and educated people to do what is right”.

And they expect people to give up their guns because it’s the right thing to do. In a perfect world we could all get along but it’s not a perfect world.

I’m pro life personally. But I believe in individual’s rights above that.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[pronstar]

Unless you live in utopia…

Don’t y’all in other states have your own laws to worry about?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[hallett21]

Typically it goes something like this:
“I’m pro 2A, but…”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

How many ARs do I need to post?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[530RL]

Putting aside the abortion debate as the OP was trying to do; this law allows any person -- as long as they're not a government official -- to bring a civil lawsuit in state court against anyone accused of violating such law, regardless of whether the person bringing the lawsuit has any connection to the crime, is a victim of the crime, or has suffered monetary injury from the crime. If they prevail, they are entitled to at least $10,000 in damages.

What this law does is essentially delegate enforcement of that violation to the populace at large. To any rich individual who can pay for an attorney or to any attorney willing to work on a contingency basis. And the SC in refusing to put a stay on it has for the time being given a thumbs up to such enforcement mechanism.

What if the opposition now passed in D controlled states an identical bill enacting such an enforcement provision against all state and local gun laws, speeding laws, nudity laws, liquor laws, zoning laws, and every other law imaginable. After all, turnabout is fair play isn’t it?

Trial attorneys and Republicans are typically not bedfellows. But I guess in this case they make quite a team.

 

[regor]

Putting aside the abortion debate as the OP was trying to do; this law allows any person -- as long as they're not a government official -- to bring a civil lawsuit in state court against anyone accused of violating such law, regardless of whether the person bringing the lawsuit has any connection to the crime, is a victim of the crime, or has suffered monetary injury from the crime. If they prevail, they are entitled to at least $10,000 in damages.

What this law does is essentially delegate enforcement of that violation to the populace at large. To any rich individual who can pay for an attorney or to any attorney willing to work on a contingency basis. And the SC in refusing to put a stay on it has for the time being given a thumbs up to such enforcement mechanism.

What if the opposition now passed in D controlled states an identical bill enacting such an enforcement provision against all state and local gun laws, speeding laws, nudity laws, liquor laws, zoning laws, and every other law imaginable. After all, turnabout is fair play isn’t it?

Trial attorneys and Republicans are typically not bedfellows. But I guess in this case they make quite a team.

 

[ssc]

I thought we had put this horseshit to bed. There has already been injunctions issued in TX. Hence, this law is on ice for the time being. For those who still believe the SCT has ruled on the merits of the law, you are wrong. They had denied the injunction without considering the merits due to the procedural aspects. Read it for yourself.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/21a24_8759.pdf

This is the actual decision. It is less than a page and the rest is the dissent.

For a good read, check out what Jonathan Turley wrote. I do not see eye to eye with him on all matters and he is a democrat and didn't vote for Trump, but he is a constitutional scholar, who has been an advocate of the constitution without a political prejudice.
https://thehill.com/opinion/judicia...oesnt-threaten-roe-but-democrats-overreaction

Cheers, Steve

 

[t&y]

Putting aside the abortion debate as the OP was trying to do; this law allows any person -- as long as they're not a government official -- to bring a civil lawsuit in state court against anyone accused of violating such law, regardless of whether the person bringing the lawsuit has any connection to the crime, is a victim of the crime, or has suffered monetary injury from the crime. If they prevail, they are entitled to at least $10,000 in damages.

What this law does is essentially delegate enforcement of that violation to the populace at large. To any rich individual who can pay for an attorney or to any attorney willing to work on a contingency basis. And the SC in refusing to put a stay on it has for the time being given a thumbs up to such enforcement mechanism.

What if the opposition now passed in D controlled states an identical bill enacting such an enforcement provision against all state and local gun laws, speeding laws, nudity laws, liquor laws, zoning laws, and every other law imaginable. After all, turnabout is fair play isn’t it?

Trial attorneys and Republicans are typically not bedfellows. But I guess in this case they make quite a team.

So basically nothing at all is new. Well, except it distracts people from real issues like Afganistan, and your presidents daily fuck ups.

 

[Ultra...Good]

Putting aside the abortion debate as the OP was trying to do; this law allows any person -- as long as they're not a government official -- to bring a civil lawsuit in state court against anyone accused of violating such law, regardless of whether the person bringing the lawsuit has any connection to the crime, is a victim of the crime, or has suffered monetary injury from the crime. If they prevail, they are entitled to at least $10,000 in damages.

What this law does is essentially delegate enforcement of that violation to the populace at large. To any rich individual who can pay for an attorney or to any attorney willing to work on a contingency basis. And the SC in refusing to put a stay on it has for the time being given a thumbs up to such enforcement mechanism.

What if the opposition now passed in D controlled states an identical bill enacting such an enforcement provision against all state and local gun laws, speeding laws, nudity laws, liquor laws, zoning laws, and every other law imaginable. After all, turnabout is fair play isn’t it?

Trial attorneys and Republicans are typically not bedfellows. But I guess in this case they make quite a team.

What you speak of should not exist after it goes to SC. A person needs to have standing to sue another and the populace in general does not have standing. But with recent laws that have been upheld that are unconstitutional, who knows how it will play out.

Case in point, obama care. SC ruled it was a tax, yet it originated in the Senate. Per the constitution, taxes have to originate in the House. The tax for not buying over priced, worthless insurance was not repealed until Trump was in office. Not hard to find gun laws that have been unconstitutionally upheld either. You know, that pesk little shall not be infringed clause.

 

[ssc]

As I stated above, I don't want to even get into the standing aspect. Bottom line, it is a bad law that will be found to be unconstitutional. Frankly, anyone can file a lawsuit against anyone and accuse them of violating this law. They don't even need an attorney. The provision for fees to the prevailing party is the opposition to that narrative. (keeps people from filing frivolous lawsuits) However, an order is one thing. Collecting is another. Plus, the ones who want to sue will just have indigents (Strawman) file the action. Try to collect fees from them--not going to happen. The law is a clusterfuck in so many ways.

Cheers, Steve

 

[Looking Glass]

I keep wondering after reading all the responses here.

Do you live in Texas?

Are you planning a move to Texas?

I understand the S.C. will have a decision on this subject, but since many of the posts in here are California members there is more than enough Issues for you to concern yourself with and let Texas run their own Business.

 

[530RL]

What you speak of should not exist after it goes to SC. A person needs to have standing to sue another and the populace in general does not have standing. But with recent laws that have been upheld that are unconstitutional, who knows how it will play out.

Case in point, obama care. SC ruled it was a tax, yet it originated in the Senate. Per the constitution, taxes have to originate in the House. The tax for not buying over priced, worthless insurance was not repealed until Trump was in office. Not hard to find gun laws that have been unconstitutionally upheld either. You know, that pesk little shall not be infringed clause.

Whether it be Obamacare or Trump’s 2A EO infringing on our collective rights, they all want to tell us what to do without regard to the Constitution, liberty or individual rights.

Seems the only freedom people on both the right and left believe in any more is enforcing their view of freedom on everyone else.

 

[dnewps]

“Freedom is for a moral and educated people to do what is right”.

While I agree with what you said. Shouldn’t we as a people do what’s right and stop killing, raping and assaulting each other?

Shouldn’t the government do what is right and stop infringing on our rights?

Of course, but I think everyone on here agrees that the second amendment makes sure the playing field is leveled in the above scenarios. An innocent women can defend herself if needed and a society can fight back against the government if necessary.

My point being that pretty much every anti 2A person or group says

“Freedom is for a moral and educated people to do what is right”.

And they expect people to give up their guns because it’s the right thing to do. In a perfect world we could all get along but it’s not a perfect world.

I’m pro life personally. But I believe in individual’s rights above that.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Respectfully...and I mean that. 2a is in stone. There is no justification for government to remove the right to defend with the same civilian weaponry that domestic government possesses.

my point is that that...our god given rights to LIFE, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (property) shall not be infringed! It starts with LIFE! If you don’t have faith...just remember that unborn child is an American!

the mental olympics of the left and their justifications...just like the justifications of the NAZIS...are false.

I don’t give a shit about their legal contortions. 2a has nothing to do with the fundamental right to exist.

maybe we are talking past each other???

 

[dnewps]

I am kind of interested in seeing how this could be spun too.

Just to note; when somebody has to tell you that they are pro 2A, it usually means.............................

Cannot spin a well grounded population. I call that educated. American history and a solid understanding of the founding principles makes the spin look like spin

 

[dnewps]

I have read the law a few times and it is, in my mind a clusterfuck. I believe it will be found to be unconstitutional on many levels. It is partly a States right issue and testing the waters in that regard. Other states have laws affecting abortion. So, it is not strange to see a state law on that issue. However, the law of any state must not infringe on the constitution. I believe that Roe will be upheld notwithstanding the SCT make up. Roe was upheld in the 90's with Planned parenthood. The SCT takes precedence very seriously. (Just my opinion)

What is interesting to me is how this law is to be implemented and enforced. The state can't get involved. So, how do you prove your civil suit? Find someone who had an abortion and have them claim they were forced to have an abortion by a doc who knew the fetus had a heartbeat etc??? Lets say a pro-life group files a lawsuit against an abortion clinic. How do they prove their case? Hippo laws would prevent the plaintiffs from getting the medical records. You don't need a "victim." Perhaps the unborn child is the victim. Perhaps having a pro-life go undercover with hidden recording devices and getting someone to admit a violation???

The law is so poorly written, that the people who could be sued for doing anything is so bizarre and vague and ambiguous that it will never, in my opinion , stand up to constitutional scrutiny. A person could be sued because they gave a dollar to a female because she needed bus fare. Unbeknownst to the good citizen, she was taking the bus to the abortion clinic to attempt to get an abortion of the unborn child who had a heartbeat, even if she didn't go through with it. Then she testifies she told you what she was doing and then you violated the law. That is how bad the law is written. I can just see the BS scheming.

Lastly, the law doesn't even set forth where one is to pay the fine. The State?? Plaintiff??? Yourself??? Crazy!!! I won't get into the Standing issue or the laws discussion on that issue. I just see political theater, with abortion and States Rights issues, which will cause them (abortion industry)to CYA themselves in many more ways. If I was their attorney, I would be implementing policies to protect themselves in additional ways. If I was hired by pro-life groups, we would be researching who to sue and developing strategies on how to prevail.

Cheers, Steve

Um. You may read it as imperfect. You will soon find how tight that law was written for our imperfect system.

 

[ssc]

Um. You may read it as imperfect. You will soon find how tight that law was written for our imperfect system.

I have no clue what you are saying, so I won't even try to respond.

Cheers, Steve

 

[dnewps]

I have no clue what you are saying, so I won't even try to respond.

Cheers, Steve

Yeah...it’s a long discussion. Difficult in text or any short form. My point is that the “imperfect” written law was written for the purpose of passing supreme court scrutiny. It’s a legal masterpiece...despite what it appears to be on it’s face. We will all look back and understand that

 

[94Nautique]

My body my choice. It really works well when people make a choice to avoid situations where they can get pregnant. Aborting a baby without it being the babies choice to destroy their body is disturbing. In the awful event that rape or incest caused a pregnancy, that’s a massively small number of the 56k abortions per year in TX.

once you’ve heard one of your children’s heartbeat, and then at the next dr visit it’s gone, you realize abortion is as barbaric of an action a human can do.

 

[dnewps]

My body my choice. It really works well when people make a choice to avoid situations where they can get pregnant. Aborting a baby without it being the babies choice to destroy their body is disturbing. In the awful event that rape or incest caused a pregnancy, that’s a massively small number of the 56k per year in TX.

once you’ve hear one of your children’s heartbeat, and then at the next dr visit it’s gone, you realize abortion is as barbaric of an action a human can do.

My body my choice was designed to get the Liberty loving Americans to join in. It was a lie. Remember that. Same people won’t let you decide if a vax is safe for your 12 year old

 

[94Nautique]

My body my choice was designed to get the Liberty loving Americans to join in. It was a lie. Remember that. Same people won’t let you decide if a vax is safe for your 12 year old

Exactly. That saying is nonsense. Just like telling us to wear a mask so that their mask will work.

Sent from my SM-T387V using Tapatalk

 

[Ultra...Good]

Whether it be Obamacare or Trump’s 2A EO infringing on our collective rights, they all want to tell us what to do without regard to the Constitution, liberty or individual rights.

Seems the only freedom people on both the right and left believe in any more is enforcing their view of freedom on everyone else.

True that. What I find interesting is that a pregnant woman could be on the way to get an abortion, and somebody does something to the mother that kills the baby "fetus", they will be charged with homicide. Double homicide if the pregnant woman dies.

What was Trumps EO that infringed on 2A rights? I must have missed it, no sarcasim, I missed it.

 

[dnewps]

Just remember this. The cohovid witnesses don’t wear masks now. Despite the science of vaxxed getting and asymptomatic spread. They are the unmasked spreaders...nobody cares. Take notes

 

[Ultra...Good]

Cannot spin a well grounded population. I call that educated. American history and a solid understanding of the founding principles makes the spin look like spin

Yeah, I seen the reply to this and there was no substance to it. Either explain your position or admit you don't have one. I was hoping he (him, her, fee fy fo fum; their preferred pronouns) would go back to the constitution or the origins of the supreme court, but no mas. I do not wonder why.

 

[dnewps]

Yeah, I seen the reply to this and there was no substance to it. Either explain your position or admit you don't have one. I was hoping he (him, her, fee fy fo fum; their preferred pronouns) would go back to the constitution or the origins of the supreme court, but no mas. I do not wonder why.

Ok... I see your point. Gimme a minute...I’ll be back. This is not a shoot off your hip 160 characters

 

[Ultra...Good]

Ok... I see your point. Gimme a minute...I’ll be back. This is not a shoot off your hip 160 characters

My reply was not aimed at you, FWIW. I understand and agree with your position.

Pointed back to hallet21 in post 154.

 

[Ultra...Good]

Whether it be Obamacare or Trump’s 2A EO infringing on our collective rights, they all want to tell us what to do without regard to the Constitution, liberty or individual rights.

Seems the only freedom people on both the right and left believe in any more is enforcing their view of freedom on everyone else.

True that. What I find interesting is that a pregnant woman could be on the way to get an abortion, and somebody does something to the mother that kills the baby "fetus", they will be charged with homicide. Double homicide if the pregnant woman dies.

What was Trumps EO that infringed on 2A rights? I must have missed it, no sarcasim, I missed it.

So, is there an EO fromTrump that infringed on 2A rights? I would like to read it. Anybody????

 

[Bear Down]

my point is that that...our god given rights to LIFE, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (property) shall not be infringed! It starts with LIFE! If you don’t have faith...just remember that unborn child is an American!

the mental olympics of the left and their justifications...just like the justifications of the NAZIS...are false.

I am 100 % Pro Life.... I feel once a heartbeat is created...life has begun.. I began loving my daughter the 1st time I knew my wife was pregnant..I then fell in love with my Daughter when I heard her heart beat for the 1st time. I am happy about these laws against abortions and my thinking is, what is the difference between a child at unborn at 16 weeks vs 2 weeks from birth...they are both 100% dependent on the mom/parent, does that give the right of the mom to terminate life at those 2 periods of development? I don't think so...but yes its a personal decision from the MOM on both circumstances to end life right? But the above quoted statement in my view is incorrect (based on the Constitution)... Since the baby is unborn, its not considered a US Citizen (no SS# /Birth Certificate) so the fetus/unborn child isn't a protected as US citizen... Otherwise the country would start issuing #s to the unborn. My $.02

 

[81Sprint]

Go to the bar anywhere in TX and say Fuck Texas and let me know how that goes for you.

I'm Texan born and raised and that was the first thing that came to mind when I read the post.

 

[Universal Elements]

I'm Texan born and raised and that was the first thing that came to mind when I read the post.

Silly Californians think Texas is like California. You know, talk shit at a bar, get slapped and then sue. Texas bars are a Texas institution. Talk shit or act disrespectfully and you will find some teeth missing and lot of pain,

 

[Racey]

So how about if your wife or daughter gets raped? Your ok with them being forced to carry a rapist baby?

Or how about if you're a married couple, and pregnant when you don't want to be? Can't afford it? You're ok with an outsider determining your decision?

Once again...

It's a personal decision. No one should be forced to be pregnant. Just like they shouldn't be forced to be vaxed.

The thing is the law is of the the belief that life begins at that point of heartbeat, and therefore you cannot abort if it ends a life. A child created by rape is not a criminal nor perpetrator of the rape, the rape argument for abortion is very weak because it essentially says "You can morally kill an innocent child as long as it falls under these specific circumstances".

The argument for abortion has always come down to this timeline of when is it a person, and when is it not? It can be rather arbitrary for a number of reasons, but it is still arbitrary, even to the majority of pro life people. On the flip side take the example of a mother who drinks while pregnant... i think most would agree that it is a crime and should be punishable as such. Ok so what about a husband and wife on their honeymoon who consummate the marriage and then enjoy themselves for the next week and have some drinks at the beach or at dinner? I don't think most pro-life people would place that in the same realm as drinking while 30 weeks pregnant, but if life begins at the moment of conception then life is life? so even for pro-life people there is a line somewhere.... The opposite to that is even you as a pro-choice would not support an abortion up until the moment of birth right?

That is separate to the fact that if you bear pregnancy from rape there is more than enough time to have an abortion before this particular timeline.

The silver lining of this law is maybe it will drive a bunch of liberals back out of TX.

Im not advocating for either side here, i'm just stating some logical basis. I never wanted kids so i got snipped a young age to never have to make this decision.

 

[81Sprint]

Silly Californians think Texas is like California. You know, talk shit at a bar, get slapped and then sue. Texas bars are a Texas institution. Talk shit or act disrespectfully and you will find some teeth missing and lot of pain,

Been there, done that.

 

[pronstar]

Exceptions don’t make the rule.

I’m against killing people.
But break into my home with intent to harm, and it won’t end well for you.

So abortion after a heartbeat is illegal in TX.
If your wife or daughter are raped, then the law makes an exception.

If I applied the Pro Choice argument to the first example above, I should have the right to just go around and kill anybody.

 

[rivermobster]

The thing is the law is of the the belief that life begins at that point of heartbeat, and therefore you cannot abort if it ends a life. A child created by rape is not a criminal nor perpetrator of the rape, the rape argument for abortion is very weak because it essentially says "You can morally kill an innocent child as long as it falls under these specific circumstances".

The argument for abortion has always come down to this timeline of when is it a person, and when is it not? It can be rather arbitrary for a number of reasons, but it is still arbitrary, even to the majority of pro life people. On the flip side take the example of a mother who drinks while pregnant... i think most would agree that it is a crime and should be punishable as such. Ok so what about a husband and wife on their honeymoon who consummate the marriage and then enjoy themselves for the next week and have some drinks at the beach or at dinner? I don't think most pro-life people would place that in the same realm as drinking while 30 weeks pregnant, but if life begins at the moment of conception then life is life? so even for pro-life people there is a line somewhere.... The opposite to that is even you as a pro-choice would not support an abortion up until the moment of birth right?

That is separate to the fact that if you bear pregnancy from rape there is more than enough time to have an abortion before this particular timeline.

The silver lining of this law is maybe it will drive a bunch of liberals back out of TX.

Im not advocating for either side here, i'm just stating some logical basis. I never wanted kids so i got snipped a young age to never have to make this decision.

Really suprised that you missed the point of this thread.

This ridiculous law is using abortion as a distraction, so ya don't notice they are creating laws that incentive people to turn on their neighbors.

If I lived in Texas...

I'd be doing Everything I could to get the guy that signed it into law out of office.

But then if you do that...

You're labled as pro abortion at any cost.

Someone did their homework on this one!

 

[Racey]

Really suprised that you missed the point of this thread.

This ridiculous law is using abortion as a distraction, so ya don't notice they are creating laws that incentive people to turn on their neighbors.

If I lived in Texas...

I'd be doing Everything I could to get the guy that signed it into law out of office.

But then if you do that...

You're labled as pro abortion at any cost.

Someone did their homework on this one!

My response was in direct quote to your post, and the entire first page of this thread, I didn't bother reading the other 3 pages, so I never saw the point you are referring to made, the first page of this was all about 6 weeks and rape....

 

[Sandlord]

It was a law that made it legal in the first place, and placed a date on the timeline that allowed it. A date that has been changed by many states from time to time.
All the Texas law did was change the date as many other states has done.

 

[rivermobster]

It was a law that made it legal in the first place, and placed a date on the timeline that allowed it. A date that has been changed by many states from time to time.
All the Texas law did was change the date as many other states has done.

And give you a 10k reward, for a successful law suit? When has That ever been done before??

 

[playdeep]

Silly Californians think Texas is like California. You know, talk shit at a bar, get slapped and then sue. Texas bars are a Texas institution. Talk shit or act disrespectfully and you will find some teeth missing and lot of pain,

Pretty much...
I've witnessed it.

 

[Ace in the Hole]

Pretty much...
I've witnessed it.

I would LOVE for someone to walk into my local bar and say "Fuck Texas". Their teeth would be the least of their worries.

A number of my west coast/havasu friends come down to stay/visit. We don't welcome those who would make that mistake in our house..

 

[rivermobster]

I would LOVE for someone to walk into my local bar and say "Fuck Texas". Their teeth would be the least of their worries.

A number of my west coast/havasu friends come down to stay/visit. We don't welcome those who would make that mistake in our house..

So much for Texas hospitality eh?

Most people in CA, understand being a rat is about as low as you can go.

Getting paid to be a rat?

I'm probably not interested in going to a state that creates laws that promote that.

But with that being said...

I'd be happy to buy you dinner, in Seal Beach.

 

[Sandlord]

And give you a 10k reward, for a successful law suit? When has That ever been done before??

Its not unheard of.
The 10K only applies when the law is broken.
One example, If someone turns in a clinic that breaks the law, performing illegal abortions, the clinic pays 10K.

 

[Ace in the Hole]

So much for Texas hospitality eh?

Most people in CA, understand being a rat is about as low as you can go.

Getting paid to be a rat?

I'm probably not interested in going to a state that creates laws that promote that.

But with that being said...

I'd be happy to buy you dinner, in Seal Beach.

You and I have already went down the road about this law and im not interested in rehashing it. We must agree to disagree.. I just may take you up on that dinner lol. I'll cover the drinks afterwards...

I was more making a joke about the comment I cc'd.

 

[rivermobster]

You and I have already went down the road about this law and im not interested in rehashing it. We must agree to disagree.. I just may take you up on that dinner lol. I'll cover the drinks afterwards...

I was more making a joke about the comment I cc'd.

Sounds good!

And we do NOT disagree (I don't think)...

I'm not a fan of abortion either. I've tried to make that clear more than once.

And I'm pretty sure...

You don't condone being a rat, much less paying someone to be a rat.

Agreed?

 

[Ace in the Hole]

Sounds good!

And we do NOT disagree (I don't think)...

I'm not a fan of abortion either. I've tried to make that clear more than once.

And I'm pretty sure...

You don't condone being a rat, much less paying someone to be a rat.

Agreed?

Agreed...much to my much earlier point..I would sue the ever living shit out of one person,..but never a random. The flip side of the coin is corporate companies will come in and use this law as a profit center. It's a flawed law...everyone knows it...the state just tried to circumvent the feds in the only way "legally" possible.

I had to chew on your post for a few days and separate my personal feelings. I 100% understand your view point..but something had to be done.

 

[rivermobster]

Agreed...much to my much earlier point..I would sue the ever living shit out of one person,..but never a random. The flip side of the coin is corporate companies will come in and use this law as a profit center. It's a flawed law...everyone knows it...the state just tried to circumvent the feds in the only way "legally" possible.

I had to chew on your post for a few days and separate my personal feelings. I 100% understand your view point..but something had to be done.

Peace brother.

 

[FROGMAN524]

So much for Texas hospitality eh?

Most people in CA, understand being a rat is about as low as you can go.

Getting paid to be a rat?

I'm probably not interested in going to a state that creates laws that promote that.

But with that being said...

I'd be happy to buy you dinner, in Seal Beach. [emoji6]

That’s it, no more wanted posters or rewards for turning in murderers, that would be “ratting” or “snitching”.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[rivermobster]

There are news reports showing up about the actually constitutionality of this new law.

One guy correctly stated...

What's going to happen if this passes? Will the anti gun crowd use it to further Their so called rights?? Can you imagine if the far left tried this work around on gun rights? In Texas??

The media is staying fairly silent on this. Abortion is a polarizing issue. No one wants to be on the wrong side of it. That's why they used it to test this theory.

Scary what is Really happening here.

 

[spectra3279]

Exceptions don’t make the rule.

I’m against killing people.
But break into my home with intent to harm, and it won’t end well for you.

So abortion after a heartbeat is illegal in TX.
If your wife or daughter are raped, then the law makes an exception.

If I applied the Pro Choice argument to the first example above, I should have the right to just go around and kill anybody.

You can call it a late term abortion

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

 

[RodnJen]

A friend from high school posted this on Facebook. I didn’t verify but no reason to believe it isn’t true. She’s a social worker.

 

[Wedgy]

I'm Texan born and raised and that was the first thing that came to mind when I read the post.

If Texas is the rabid enemy, ya'll need to know who you're dealing with.

One thing I've noticed is many non Texans have a dim view of Texas, and Texans in general. My family has deep roots here, I live in the same county as Grandma's 100 acre dry farm, where she raise 4 kids. From dust bowl poverty, She and the kids made it work. Uncle Buck bought a Brick house in town, Dad enlisted in the Marines after Pearl Harbor. Grandma made him graduate from Anton HS first. He was 17. Roughnecked after WW2, Korea.

This state is chock full of Men like them. I'll tell you this. The Old Dogs here, are fed the fuck up..

From Ranching, Farming, to Oil production, Texans scratched a decent living out of this land, and

Texans are tied to this land, binding those ties, is a long history of overcoming adversity. We fought and won our Independence once, we certainly can do it again.

Texas is it's own country. We allowed the US to let us join. We can tell the U.S. to Fuck off too.

So Fuck off Joe Biden, and your pussy minions too...