![\"useagle3\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/angry.net\/blog2\/wp-content\/uploads\/2011\/07\/useagle3.gif\")
<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n
The governor, Progressives Liberal Democrat Jay Nixon, had vetoed a bill that had passed both houses of the state legislature and was vary popular among the citizens of the \u201cShow Me\u201d state. The legislature announced that they would move to override Nixon\u2019s veto and succeeded Wednesday. (September 14) Here are some of the details from Fox News<\/a>:<\/p>\n Missouri on Wednesday joined a growing list of states allowing most adults to carry concealed weapons without a permit, as the state’s Republican-led Legislature used its supermajority to loosen existing gun laws. <\/b><\/p>\n The measure, described by supporters as “constitutional carry,” allows people to carry hidden guns anywhere they can currently carry weapons openly, effective January 1. Missouri will join 10 other states with laws that allow most people to carry concealed guns even if they haven’t gone through the training required for permits, according to the National Rifle Association, which supported the legislation. <\/b><\/p>\n That wasn\u2019t the only thing the new law does. They now have a \u201cStand your ground\u201d law that will also go into effect with the new Constitutional Carry law.<\/p>\n The legislation also would create a “stand-your-ground” right, meaning people don’t have a duty to retreat from danger any place they are legally entitled to be present. The NRA says 30 states have laws or court precedents stating people have no duty to retreat from a threat anywhere they are lawfully present. But Missouri’s measure makes it the first new “stand-your-ground” state since 2011. <\/b><\/p>\n New Hampshire passed a \u201cStand your ground\u201d law in 2011. When the Democrats managed to take one house of the legislature, the first thing they tried to do was repeal it. In fact, they went so far as to institute, (or tried to), the requirement that you must retreat from a situation and that for all intents and purposes, couldn\u2019t use a firearm to defend yourself.<\/p>\n I attended a rally in Concord NH to stop the repeal. One of the things being discussed, rather loudly was New Hampshire\u2019s Article 10 of our state\u2019s constitution. That article reads:<\/p>\n [Art.] 10. [Right of Revolution.]<\/i><\/strong> Government being instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security, of the whole community, and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind. <\/i><\/p>\n The bill was defeated in the New Hampshire Senate by a fairly large margin and in the next election, the Democrats were kicked out of the majority in the New Hampshire House. The Stand your Ground laws are considered to be very popular. Basically, if you are in a place you have every right to be, and someone comes up and threatens you, you are permitted to use whatever force is required to protect yourself. This is a very simplistic overview, but you get the general idea.<\/p>\n Theoretically, former University of Missouri professor, Melissa Click, when she had called for \u201cSome muscle\u201d to physically remove a reporter covering a protest by some special snowflakes, could have caused the \u201cmuscle\u201d to be shot by the reporter in question. She would then have been charged with potentially murder if her \u201cmuscle\u201d have been killed.<\/p>\n The new law also expands the \u201cCastle Doctrine to include authorized visitors. If a visitor, or a baby sitter should have to shoot a criminal trying to break in, then that person , being an authorized visitor, would not be charged. The override vote was not unanimous. The usual suspects, (Moonbats), went off the deep end, as usual.<\/p>\n The guns legislation prompted some of the most intense debate Wednesday. Democrats asserted it could put racial minorities at a greater risk of being fatally shot.<\/b><\/p>\n Never underestimate a Democrat\u2019s screaming \u201cRacism\u201d at the drop of a hat. (They would probably call dropping a hat to be racism)<\/p>\n “The targets in our area are black boys, not pheasants,” said Sen. Maria Chappelle-Nadal, who represents Ferguson, where sometimes violent protests broke out after the fatal police shooting of 18-year-old Michael Brown in 2014. The police officer, Darren Wilson, was cleared of wrongdoing by state and federal investigations. <\/b><\/p>\n “What I don’t want to get to is the point where there is a trigger-happy police officer or bad Samaritan like Zimmerman who says, ‘Black boy in the hood. Skittles. Let’s shoot,”‘ Chappelle-Nadal said, a reference to Trayvon Martin, a black 17-year-old who was walking back from a Florida convenience store after buying ice tea and Skittles when he was fatally shot by neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman in 2012. <\/b><\/p>\n Shall we review what actually happened instead of what this worthless pile of manure claims happened? First Ferguson. This bitch has forgotten that Brown had just robbed a convenience store and roughed up the owner. When confronted by the officer, who was still in his car, Brown attacked him and tried to grab the officers sidearm. When the officer was able to fight him off, Brown retreated a bit and the officer got out of his car to arrest Brown. Brown then charged the officer who was then forced to fire.<\/p>\n Then we have the Trayvon\/Trayoff Martin\/George Zimmerman case. This has been gone over to death, but since Senator Chappelle-Nadal is obviously stupid, I\u2019ll break out the ClueBat and give her a few whacks. Zimmerman spotted Martin and was concerned that he was a burglar. Zimmerman got out of his car, called the police and started following Martin. As he did so he gave the dispatcher all the information he had. He then lost Martin.<\/p>\n Martin made it to his destination, and Zimmerman was told by the dispatcher that he didn\u2019t need to continue trying to follow Martin. Zimmerman turned around and started back to his vehicle. At that point, the original issue was ended. If Martin had gone inside the house he was visiting, he would be getting stoned today. Instead, he decided to go after Zimmerman and confront him.<\/p>\n Martin found Zimmerman and did just that. A few words were exchanged and Martin punched Zimmerman in the face, knocking him down. Martin then got on Zimmerman\u2019s chest and started slamming his head into a concrete sidewalk. Zimmerman, in fear of his life, pulled his pistol and shot Martin who died moments later. The case went to trial for one reason. Politics. The jury saw the evidence, and cleared Zimmerman.<\/p>\n Of course, being a good Progressive Liberal Democrat, Senator Chappelle-Nadal has never let little things like facts or common sense enter her empty head. Apparently, she didn\u2019t consider all the law abiding people of recent African decent who might also need a gun to protect themselves. I guess she refuses to consider that one of the reasons for the existence of the National Rifle Association was to make sure the former slaves, after the civil war, had the means and the training to defend themselves from the likes of the KKK. (The real ones, not whoever Progressive Liberal Democrats don\u2019t like at the moment)<\/p>\n Republican said such fears of greater gun violence are misguided. “The basis of this whole bill is that it allows law-abiding citizens to protect themselves and their families,” Republican sponsor Sen. Brian Munzlinger said. <\/b><\/p>\n And that crosses all ethnic backgrounds. There are two types of people out there. Your average person who obeys the basic laws and those who want to rob, rape, beat and murder them. Skin color or eye shape doesn\u2019t matter. Law abiding citizens are not going to go out and blast anything in a hoodie. The only ones doing that are the people that State Senator Maria Chappel-Nadal prefer to support.<\/p>\n And, as for Governor Nixon? He has made history in Missouri.<\/p>\n Lawmakers overrode 13 vetoes Wednesday while adding to Democratic Gov. Jay Nixon’s record as the most overridden governor in Missouri history, a distinction made possible by an era of extreme political division in the Capitol. Heading into Wednesday, lawmakers had successfully overridden Nixon on 83 bills and budget expenditures over his two terms in office — nearly four times more overrides than the combined total for all other governors dating back to 1820 when Missouri was still a territory. <\/b><\/p>\n Nixon is term limited and is in his last term. While I don\u2019t follow the politics in Missouri all that much, I recall what a fool he made of himself after the Brown shooting. I suspect that if he were allowed to run again, and did, this time he would have his head handed to him. It will be interesting to see what November brings for the people of Missouri. At least, as of January 1st<\/sup>, they will be able to defend themselves against criminals.<\/p>\n Thatisall<\/p>\n ~The Angry Webmaster~<\/b><\/i><\/p>\n [yasr_visitor_votes size=”large”]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Good day all. Wednesday, the Missouri state legislature shoved a thumb in the eye of their moonbat governor and overrode his veto of a bill that would allow concealed carrying of firearms without a permit. Continue reading <\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n