Missouri Legislature Overrules Leftist Governor’s Veto Of Law Allowing Teachers To Be Armed In School

Missouri Legislature Overrules Dem Governor’s Veto, Provides Huge Gun Rights Victory – TPNN

.

.
Our system of government was designed with a redundancy of checks and balances. In recent years, Democrats have charged Republicans with supposed obstruction and have maintained that their unwillingness to rubber-stamp the president’s agenda is, somehow, an anti-American concept when, in reality, blocking bad ideas from becoming law is a tremendously American idea upon which our system of government relies.

Similarly, across the country, there have been battles in state legislatures as one party battles another. Recently, Missouri passed legislation that would allow schools to train teachers in the use of firearms and allow such teachers to defend students from a would-be attacker.

The legislation, SB 656, was vetoed by Democrat Governor Jay Nixon. With regards to his veto, Nixon stated, “Arming teachers will not make our schools safer. I have supported and will continue to support the use of duly authorized law enforcement officers employed as school resource officers, but I cannot condone putting firearms in the hands of educators who should be focused on teaching our kids.”

What’s amazing is that every time a “bad guy with a gun” seeks to create carnage, the defenseless are forced to run, hide and cower and pray that a trained “good guy with a gun” makes it to the scene in time to save their life. What this legislation accomplishes is exactly that plus offering the added benefit of a deterrent effect.

I ask: how many would-be shooters would be willing to wage an assault on a school knowing that there are trained, armed teachers everywhere? This legislation will save lives.

However, our representative democracy prevailed as this week, Missouri’s House and Senate voted to override the governor’s veto and the legislation is set to become law.

The House voted to overrule the governor 117 to 39 and the Senate voted to overrule Nixon 23 to 8.

SB 656 doesn’t just arm teachers, but makes adjustments to current laws concerning concealed carrying of firearms. It disallows public housing authorities to infringe upon “a lessee or a member of the lessee’s immediate household or guest [to] personally [possess] firearms.”

It further augments the places in which open and concealed carry is lawful and even lowers the concealed permit requirements from 21 years of age to 19. It also prohibits healthcare professionals from inquiring about a patient’s firearm ownership.

This is a tremendous step in the right direction and an affirmation of our American values. More guns in the hands of responsible citizens has been the only tried-and-true method of lowering violent crime and the right to carry and use firearms in defense of oneself or another is a right that must be recognized and supported.

The anti-Second Amendment crowd is sure to hate this development, but for those who love freedom and have a clear understanding of our rights as Americans should rejoice at the news of this victory that is relatively undiscussed within the leftstream media.

.

.

I think Liberals should buy a dictionary and read it

Because there are certain words, they do not understand, at all. Words like diversity, and inclusivity

A California high school principal has banned the football booster club from selling Chick-fil-A sandwiches during a back-to-school night fundraiser because she disagrees about gay marriage with the president of the Atlanta-based fast food chain.

The principal who outlawed Chick-fil-A sandwiches is Val Wyatt of Ventura High School in the coastal town of Ventura, Calif.

“With their political stance on gay rights and because the students of Ventura High School and their parents would be at the event, I didn’t want them on campus,” Wyatt said, according to CBS Los Angeles.

Wyatt said she is worried that the presence of the chicken sandwiches might offend someone.

The superintendent of the Ventura Unified School District Superintendent, Trudy Tuttle Arriaga, backed the decision.

“We value inclusivity and diversity on our campus and all of our events and activities are going to adhere to our mission,” Arriaga said in explaining the decision to exclude a chicken sandwich company because of the political beliefs of its president.

So, what about diversity? Clearly diversity means that  a wide array of opinions on any topic would be welcomed, and present right? What of inclusivity? How is excluding sandwiches from a restaurant chain because of their CEO’s views on Gay marriage “inclusive”? Well, of course, it isn’t. It is the exact opposite. The left uses words to hide behind. They use words to avoid debate, and discussion. they use these words to brow beat anyone who dares hold an opposing viewpoint. Chick-fil-A, has donated $21,000 to his school over the years, no doubt supporting EVERY student there. That is inclusivity, maybe Trudy Tuttle Arriaga and Val Wyatt should try picking up a dictionary at some point. Then maybe they ought to try practicing another word Totalitarians like them like throwing around, TOLERANCE!!

*VIDEO* Andrew Klavan: The Newest Threat On College Campuses – Microaggression


.

.

*VIDEOS* Another Taste Of What You’ll Find At The Ever-Expanding DALEY GATOR VIDEOS Page


BILL WHITTLE: PRESIDENT COWARD

.
LLAMAS WITH HATS

.
DINESH D’SOUZA: WHAT’S SO GREAT ABOUT CHRISTIANITY?

.

.

What could possibly go wrong?

A clusterfuck of epic proportions is born

Wake Forest University kicked off the fall 2014 semester by instituting a campus-wide online system that has the potential to restrict free speech by allowing students and staff to anonymously file reports on any occurrences they deem biased or hateful.

Known as the Bias Incident Report system, the online form does not specify the criteria for filing a report, nor does it explicitly define the word “bias.” Instead, students are pressured to submit a report anytime they believe they are encountering an incident of hate or bias — potentially opening the floodgates for students to report incidents without cause.

The report form lists a bevy of reasons an incident could be perceived as biased, some of which include: citizenship, gender identity, national origin, pregnancy, religion, sexual orientation and economic background. The form even offers an option to upload a video, photos or audio of the occurrence.

The guidelines as to what “bias” relies heavily on student emotion — when a student feels at all offended by someone’s differing political or religious ideologies, a file is reported and is required to be officially investigated by university officials

Just another all-out assault on freedom of speech

*VIDEOS* Newt Gingrich: Rediscovering God In America


.

.

.

.

Now the color pink is sexist or something

The sheer stupidity of Leftism just gives me a haedache

Add pink to the list of colors you’re not allowed to use anymore.

Dave Huber at The College Fix reports:

Color the Opposing Team’s Locker Pink and … Risk a Lawsuit?

An article at Inside Higher Ed highlights (no, not in hot pink) a … “controversy” at the University of Iowa: the opposing team’s (football) locker room is painted pink.

Controversy? Why?

Well, this is the Age of Political Correctness, especially on college campuses:

While it remains a beloved bit of visual smack-talk for many Hawkeye fans — and was even featured in a recent ESPN ad about college traditions — some students and faculty have decried the color scheme as sexist and discriminatory.

“There is no denying that [former Iowa football coach Hayden] Fry’s tactic is rooted in an antiquated age when homophobic and sexist epithets were the norm in sports,” [protester Kembrew] McLeod said.

Since 2005 Jill Gaulding, a former University of Iowa law professor, has threatened to sue or file a federal complaint against the university under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, the law that forbids gender discrimination at colleges. On Thursday, Gaulding, who is now a lawyer with the nonprofit law firm Gender Justice, said the “discussions are still ongoing,” and that the locker room’s color is a type of gender slur.

“It sends the message that anything associated with female is lesser-than,” Gaulding said. “The minute I read about the pink locker room and how the university had built it even pinker, it felt like somebody had just reached out and slapped me across the face. It was that insulting. People know what it means.”