Wednesday's House vote to override Missouri Governor Jay Nixon's veto of Missouri HB 436, the "Second Amendment Preservation Act," barely succeeded. The attempt in the Senate later that evening failed. By one vote.
HB 436 would have nullified any federal gun laws that "infringe on the people's right to keep and bear arms"--just about every federal gun law, in other words. Furthermore, it would have subjected anyone who attempted to enforce said federal gun laws to criminal prosecution.
Needing 23 votes from among the senate's 34 seats in order to achieve the two-thirds majority required for a veto override, the override attempt received 22 votes. Not surprisingly, none of those 22 came from any of the Senate's 10 Democrats (although in the House, even Democrats who claimed to think that HB 436 was somehow "unconstitutional" once claimed they would vote for it anyway, to protect their political careers--but only one, Rep. Ben Harris, seems to have done what he said he would).
Still, without two Republican backstabbers, the override would have succeeded. Unfortunately, there were two backstabbers among Missouri's Senate Republicans. Worse still, they constitute the Senate Republican "leadership"--Senate Majority Leader Ron Richard and Senate President Pro Tem Tom Dempsey. From the Associated Press:
Senators voted 22-12 for the veto override, coming up just shy of the required two-thirds majority. Senate President Pro Tem Tom Dempsey and Majority Leader Ron Richard split from the rest of the GOP caucus that they lead to instead sustain Democratic Gov. Jay Nixon's veto.
In other words, these "leaders" decided to lead the state into continued docile servility to the federal government and its unconstitutional infringements on that which shall not be infringed. Both Richard and Dempsey claimed to be concerned about the Constitutionality of the bill, and how it could affect police and prosecutors (wasn't that kinda the point?). That begs the question, though, of why they both voted for the bill back in May.
Or perhaps not. Perhaps it's far less important to know why they turned Quisling than it is to simply remove them from the position of being able to betray the rights of Missourians. You don't, after all, ask a rattlesnake why it's trying to bite you--you simply kill it, so its biting days are done.
- Missouri House Democrat implies desire to sell citizens' gun rights to feds
- Missouri House resoundingly passes strong 'Second Amendment Preservation Act'
- Gun bill veto override action expected on both sides of Mississippi
- Missouri Dems uphold Constitution, think they're violating it, do it anyway
- St. Louis firm threatens to sue over 'Second Amendment Preservation Act'