Connect with us

News

Concealed Carry And Other Popular Bills Vetoed by Liberal Kansas Governor

By vetoing a bill expanding concealed carry and other popular bills Kansas Governor Kelly proves she’s still connected to her liberal NY beginnings

Published

on

HB 2058 was passed by the Kansas legislature by a wide margin. The bill created reciprocity for CCW permits from other jurisdictions and a new class of concealed carry permits for 18-20-year-olds, in addition to other provisions. Democrat Kansas Governor Laura Kelly vetoed it, saying that dropping the concealed carry age from 21-18 would put more guns on school campuses.

The vote on HB 2058 was 80-43 in the Kansas State House and 30-8 in the State Senate to approve the bill.

Providing reciprocity for licenses to carry concealed handguns and creating a new class of concealed carry license for individuals 18 to 20 years of age, and creating the Kansas protection of firearm rights act to restore the right to possess a firearm upon expungement of certain convictions.

The bill specifies a valid license or permit to carry a concealed firearm issued by another jurisdiction is recognized in Kansas while such permit or license holder is not a Kansas resident.

take our poll - story continues below

Did SCOTUS make the right decision on medical mandates for large businesses?

  • Did SCOTUS make the right decision on medical mandates for large businesses?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

The bill provides valid licenses or permits issued by another jurisdiction entitle the lawful holder only to carry concealed handguns as defined in Kansas law, and it requires such persons to act in accordance with Kansas laws while carrying a concealed handgun in the state.

The bill also states criminal provisions in continuing law prohibiting the carrying of a concealed firearm by persons under age 21 do not apply to residents of another state who are less than 21 years of age and lawfully carrying a concealed firearm pursuant to a recognized out-of-state license.

In vetoing the bill, Governor Kelly (a Democrat) said:

“We can respect and defend the rights of Kansas gun owners while also taking effective steps to keep our children and families safe. Legislation that allows more guns on campus is neither safe nor effective, and it will drive prospective students away from our schools,”

State Representative Stephen Owens, a Republican, responded.

“It’s very disappointing to me that the governor doesn’t recognize that it’s not licensed holders that are committing crimes,” said

“This promotes getting the training, this promotes getting the license, so I just don’t understand why anybody would stand in the way of allowing that to occur,” Owens said.

HB 2058 wasn’t the only bill vetoed by Governor Kelly – she also vetoed an election integrity bill. One that would have banned biological male transgender athletes from competing in women’s sports and one that would have allowed license plates with the Gadsden flag.

The Republican president of the Senate, Ty Masterson, accused the Governor of placating the “hard left.”

“It’s disappointing that the governor has decided to use her veto pen to placate the hard left rather than support mainstream policies supported by most Kansans,” Masterson said. “Republicans will respond to the governor’s veto-a-rama with a veto-override-a-rama when we return in May.”

Kansas is a heavily red state. The GOP dominates both houses of the state legislature. Both U.S. Senators and three of the state’s four House members are Republicans. The party dominates voter registration. .A NY-born liberal, Governor Kelly is an anomaly, and her extreme leftist positions will be remembered when she runs for re-election in 2022. According to fivethirtyeight.com, governor Kelly is arguably the most endangered incumbent governor running in 2022.

Parts of this post were first seen at Conservative Firing Line.

Entertainment

YouTube Jumps the Shark, Bans Fox News Host’s Personal Channel

YouTube somehow thinks that it has arbitrary authority over content and content creators that cable TV deems appropriate.

Published

on

What arrogance YouTube must have.  What absolute cojones.

The internet’s premiere video streaming site, which began life as a place for cat videos and other such nonsense, now believes themselves to be the arbiters of all that is fit for consumption, eschewing the standards and practices of the FCC-regulated world for rules all their own.

They’ve now even taken to suggesting that what’s allowed to be broadcast on television is no longer suitable for their audience, and for no reason other than the company’s political slant.

YouTube banned Fox News host Dan Bongino, forever deplatforming one of the internet’s most popular conservative commentators.

take our poll - story continues below

Did SCOTUS make the right decision on medical mandates for large businesses?

  • Did SCOTUS make the right decision on medical mandates for large businesses?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

The popular video service run by Google said Bongino tried to circumvent a one-week ban for spreading COVID-19 misinformation on one channel by posting on another channel, resulting in a permanent suspension.

“We terminated Dan Bongino’s channels for circumventing our Terms of Service by posting a video while there was an active strike and suspension associated with the account,” YouTube said in a statement to USA TODAY. “When a channel receives a strike, it is against our Terms of Service to post content or use another channel to circumvent the suspension.”

Bongino, whose rhetoric appears to still pass muster in the established world of cable media, has once again proven that Silicon Valley isn’t interested in what’s right so much as it is interested in how far left they can skew the overall balance of the American media picture.

 

What arrogance YouTube must have.  What absolute cojones. The internet’s premiere video streaming site, which began life as a place for cat videos and other such nonsense, now believes themselves to be the arbiters of all that is fit for consumption, eschewing the standards and practices of the FCC-regulated world for rules all their own. They’ve now even taken to suggesting that what’s allowed to be broadcast on television is no longer suitable for their audience, and for no reason other than the company’s political slant. YouTube banned Fox News host Dan Bongino, forever deplatforming one of the internet’s most popular conservative commentators. The popular video service run by Google said Bongino tried to circumvent a one-week ban for spreading COVID-19 misinformation on one channel by posting on another channel, resulting in a permanent suspension. “We terminated Dan Bongino’s channels for circumventing our Terms of Service by posting a video while there was an active strike and suspension associated with the account,” YouTube said in a statement to USA TODAY. “When a channel receives a strike, it is against our Terms of Service to post content or use another channel to circumvent the suspension.” Bongino, whose rhetoric appears to still pass muster in the established world of cable media, has once again proven that Silicon Valley isn’t interested in what’s right so much as it is interested in how far left they can skew the overall balance of the American media picture.  

Continue Reading

News

CRUEL: Unvaccinated Man Denied Heart Transplant by Boston Hospital

Unforgivable.

Published

on

Americans are facing a strange new pandemic of prejudice in 2022, as a number of organizations and establishments continue to discriminate against and segregate the unvaccinated from the vaccinated, and it’s beginning to get to the point where such separation could be deadly.

In restaurants and concert halls, as well as on many domestic flights, those who’ve chosen not to receive a COVID vaccination are being excluded and mistreated.  In some schools, this personal medical decision could even see you corralled around like cattle.

Now, in a stunning turn of events, choosing to remain unvaccinated could see you denied life-or-death medical help.

A Boston hospital is defending itself after a man’s family claimed he was denied a new heart for refusing to be vaccinated against COVID-19, saying most transplant programs around the country set similar requirements to improve patients’ chances of survival.

take our poll - story continues below

Did SCOTUS make the right decision on medical mandates for large businesses?

  • Did SCOTUS make the right decision on medical mandates for large businesses?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

The family of D.J. Ferguson said in a crowdfunding appeal this week that officials at Brigham and Women’s Hospital told the 31-year-old father of two that he was ineligible for the procedure because he hasn’t been vaccinated against the coronavirus.

“We are literally in a corner right now. This is extremely time sensitive,” the family said in its fundraising appeal, which has raised tens of thousands of dollars. “This is not just a political issue. People need to have a choice!”

The patient had serious, well-researched concerns.

D.J.’s mother, Tracey Ferguson, insists that her son isn’t against vaccinations, noting he’s had other immunizations in the past. But the trained nurse said Wednesday that he’s been diagnosed with atrial fibrillation — an irregular and often rapid heart rhythm — and that he has concerns about the side effects of the COVID-19 vaccine.

“D.J. is an informed patient,” Tracey Ferguson said in a brief interview at her home in Mendon, about 30 miles (48 kilometers) southwest of Boston. “He wants to be assured by his doctors that his condition would not be worse or fatal with this COVID vaccine.”

Sadly, D.J.’s case is not the first such discriminatory incident, and it certainly won’t be the last unless a dramatic shift in thinking was to occur within the medical establishment.

Americans are facing a strange new pandemic of prejudice in 2022, as a number of organizations and establishments continue to discriminate against and segregate the unvaccinated from the vaccinated, and it’s beginning to get to the point where such separation could be deadly. In restaurants and concert halls, as well as on many domestic flights, those who’ve chosen not to receive a COVID vaccination are being excluded and mistreated.  In some schools, this personal medical decision could even see you corralled around like cattle. Now, in a stunning turn of events, choosing to remain unvaccinated could see you denied life-or-death medical help. A Boston hospital is defending itself after a man’s family claimed he was denied a new heart for refusing to be vaccinated against COVID-19, saying most transplant programs around the country set similar requirements to improve patients’ chances of survival. The family of D.J. Ferguson said in a crowdfunding appeal this week that officials at Brigham and Women’s Hospital told the 31-year-old father of two that he was ineligible for the procedure because he hasn’t been vaccinated against the coronavirus. “We are literally in a corner right now. This is extremely time sensitive,” the family said in its fundraising appeal, which has raised tens of thousands of dollars. “This is not just a political issue. People need to have a choice!” The patient had serious, well-researched concerns. D.J.’s mother, Tracey Ferguson, insists that her son isn’t against vaccinations, noting he’s had other immunizations in the past. But the trained nurse said Wednesday that he’s been diagnosed with atrial fibrillation — an irregular and often rapid heart rhythm — and that he has concerns about the side effects of the COVID-19 vaccine. “D.J. is an informed patient,” Tracey Ferguson said in a brief interview at her home in Mendon,…

Continue Reading
The Schaftlein Report

Latest Articles

Best of the Week