Families of SOs Community Group
WE HAVE MOVED!!! ............................. ............................... ......................... ............................ ............................. .......................... HERE: http://support-for-families.boards.net ............. ................ ............... ................ ............................... .................Please create a profile...
Deena
That's what I thought when I read the article. Hell, both parties agreed that the bills were a step in the right direction. All he had to do was sign the damn thing. It is not like he would be going against his own party.
rewdiazepam
Nixon was a state senator for three terms and then moved on to become the Attorney General for the state for 13 years before becoming governor. Being "tough" on crime has been a huge part of his platform for decades.
@brightside313 I don't know if there will be any attempt to override the veto or not but changing registration requirements and the registry has been a big issue in the legislature for the past three years with wide bipartisan support to do something. Not signing this doesn't make any sense at all, only a moron would have vetoed it like oneofthem pointed out.
If Nixon had signed it, it would have chilled the calls for even broader change which would suck but would have been a "politically smart" move on his part if the goal is to keep the registry as punitive as it is. Because of the broad support he would have gained a lot more political capital by signing it. Since he didn't there almost has to be a financial gain in it somewhere for him to offset that.
Claiming the lack of victim notification before being removed from the registry as a reason to veto the bill is totally bogus here. The bill removed juveniles from the PUBLIC registry only. They would still be on a private state registry. Petitioning to be removed from the registry completely would trigger victim notification just as it does now.
This Nixon character is just a tool for the Fed Govt...My State tried the same thing in regards to gun control but never made it to the floor....I live in the "Reddest of Red States"..I'm an 'Unapologetic Conservative" as most know, but I do agree with oneofthem(it occasionally happens) in that the Repugnants and Dumbocrats are basically the same, either a "Pseudo Religious Theocracy'(Using Religion to appeal to those who believe.)Dictatorship) or an 'Atheistic' Pseudo Socialistic Dictatorship where the 'mostly' young people believe that the Govt. has their best interests...
Just a quick bit of history if you don't mind....
The Civil War is commonly believed to be about ending Slavery, but initially Slavery had little to do with it...The War was about States rights...It was about the Federal Govt. imposing their will on the States against the Peoples wishes, the same as 85 yrs earlier when we stood up against England for basically the same thing...Ending Slavery was just a good thing that came from it....
I retain ALL my Civil Rights and own several Firearms and 'Pity the person who to take them away from me'.I know that many want to blame the Republicans for taking all their rights away, and in some ways I'll agree, but look who is in charge now, he was EXTREMELY indignant that HIS gun control legislation was 'Shot Down"....We argue about the "Right and Left" and rightly so, but when it comes to taking away OUR RIGHTS, it is BIPARTISAN.....My VERY Red State Govt.(Many call it the "Religiouslature) is still giving the Feds the 'Middle Finger' on the AWA..
I hope I made sense, Didn't get much sleep last night....Utards hate liquor but they sure LOVE to eat Ice Cream and blow shit up ALL NIGHT!!!!