It's "Sheer Nonsense" To Attack Danielson And Winter For Gun-Safety Votes

8 thoughts on “It’s “Sheer Nonsense” To Attack Danielson And Winter For Gun-Safety Votes”

1. We've seen this bad movie before.

   In 2013, we lost two excellent Senators via recall, one by resignation, when RMGO , NRA and their fellow travellers saw a chance to take back the Colorado Senate , using these spurious attacks on "gun rights". That's all it was ever about – a naked power ploy for dominance of the legislature.  Nobody was ever coming to take their guns away. (They knew that, of course). The gunheads were used by people who lied to them and who played on their fears. 

   This time, RMGO is being used for power by people who are trying to frame it as a pro-woman, #metoo issue. The reality is that women are more likely to be victims of domestic violence via firearm from a romantic partner, than from some stranger in a dark alley, in spite of Humenik's and RMGO's propaganda.

   That's why we need a "red flag" bill.  We know exactly who the crazy gun nuts are.  They are not strangers. They are our ex or present husbands, our ex or present boyfriends. Most of them voted for Trump, buying the line that showing contempt for women somehow makes men more manly. Humenik  and Jensen call these guys their "base". That's the real betrayal of women.

   Jeffco and Adams County Dems, don't be fooled again.

   Log in to Reply

   1. The ploy for dominance of the legislature was prompted by an overreach of the Dems in the legislature, who were used by the Obama administration to do "something" after Sandy Hook, several of whom were contacted by Joe Biden to influence their vote in hopes of moving up the political ladder. 

      The beloved Evie Hudak noted above was willing to fall on her sword in order for the Dems to retain power, indicating clearly that the dominance of the legislature is not a partisan phenomenon, after voting for a law to disarm college age women (and men), which failed.  After a rape survivor Amanda Collins heartfelt request to be allowed to protect herself after being raped in the garage of the campus police station, a few feet away from an emergency call box, Ms Hudak concluded in a condescending manner that if Ms Collins had a gun it would have been taken away, a pure fabrication which is proven false by national statistics. 

      The remaining bills that passed have done nothing to decrease gun deaths in Colorado, which have grown faster than prior to the bills. So nice job. 

      So now you expect the masses to believe our legislature is competent in determining the proper manner in which to combat gun violence? The track record speaks for itself and is undeniably an abject failure.

      The betrayal of women is coming from you. If you really wanted to help women in need of protection you would promote the Colorado Mandatory Protection Order Pursuant to 18-01-1001, C.R.S. , which is current law and allows for the exact same restrictions provided in the "red flag" bill, which you are using solely for political posturing. 

      You are falling for the same ploy you critique the opposition of falling for.

       

      Log in to Reply

      1. You confuse cause and effect….as usual.

         You attempt to misdirect….as usual.

         And you even manage to get in a dig at Obama and Biden. Well played.

         Your argument is as full of holes as a restraining order held up to ward off an angry ex hubby with a rifle. Your condescending suggestion that I promote"  Colorado Mandatory Protection Order  prompts me to ask:  How many restraining orders have you personally served? How many victims of domestic violence have you helped? I’ve lost count over the years, but dozens. And yourself?

         I have an old restraining order. It's definitely worth all of the paper it was printed on. Far more valuable was the court's muscle in taking away the perpetrator’s guns. Which Evie Hudak, bless her uncompromising soul, did for domestic violence victims in Colorado, and paid a high price for it.

         We'll get this "red flag" bill passed, saving some women's lives in the process,when the Colorado legislature is as blue as the Colorado skies.  As usual, you gunheads will piss yourselves and moan and then decide to live with it, since, as usual, nobody's coming for your guns….unless, of course, you are a violent criminal. Are you?

         Log in to Reply

         1. I am certain you will get the red flag bill passed, as it appears common to somehow assume a new law will be more effective than one already in place. 

            If Hudak was uncompromising she would have stood and fought. She would have won. Instead she caved to the Dem party in order to retain power, the very thing you criticise the opposition of attempting to regain. 

            I commend you on your confidence of our blue state, and you are correct. I would have thought you felt the similarities us gunheads felt with the Kavanaugh imbalance in the SC, but you seem to forget both sides do whatever it takes to maintain or regain power. 

            And I know you will ignore my post and demand I answer your questions, so no, I have not served restraining orders personally, but I have had them delivered by law enforcement. I have helped 3 victims of domestic violence, and have been threatened by my ex to fabricate allegations in an effort to have my guns taken away on numerous occasion. And no, I am not a violent criminal. 

            It only takes 1 go around to understand that the law does not favor the victim. You have to be near killed, with photos of bruises, police reports, printed threats,  and a judge will still doubt your story. Emergency efforts require an even higher burden of proof as the due process of a perp is removed prior to evidence being presented, and a judge is hard pressed to approve without overwhelming evidence. 

            So if you have the experience you say you have with the legal system and stand firm that an emergency restraint of due process will be effective in its intent, you have not learned a thing in your travels. If you think a judge removing the firearms of a person intent to do harm will prevent them from doing harm, you betray your own intuitions. And if you think a person intent on causing death will adhere to the rule of law, you are naive. 

            I don't think you are any of those things.  

             

            Log in to Reply

      2. Red flag bills are relatively new and don't have a great deal of actual quantitative study yet.  My guess is there won't be a large number of people getting "flagged" for domestic violence, and those who are won't be deterred greatly by having "their" guns taken away.  When challenged, the effort to "prove" a need to remove guns won't be sufficient to overcome the (proper) skepticism of judges.  Too many abusers who may be flagged having a "forgotten" weapon.  Too many family and friends who will "loan" their weapon to such an abuser. 

         The more likely area for impact will be in suicides. Early studies are by no means conclusive, but appear to support the idea that keeping weapons away from those at risk of suicide does lower the number of attempts and the lethality of attempts. Psychology Today: Three Evidence-Based Strategies for Reducing Gun Violence

         Log in to Reply

2. The same bill that Cole the Mole supported and for which he incurred the Wrath of Dudley. And which Broccoli supported until he didn’t.

   Log in to Reply

3. It is not “Sheer Nonsense” as lies can be very effective.

   Left-wing PACs need to start doing this. Send out a mailer stating that the GOP is a pedophile. Truth no longer matters.

   Log in to Reply

   1. It is not a lie but an exaggeration, to wit Roy Moore and Denny Hastert. Turn over a few more rocks and we will find a few more of them slithering around.

      Log in to Reply