CO state Sen. Hudak (D) resigns to avoid recall after anti-gun-rights votes

Little-Acorn

Gold Member
Jun 20, 2006
10,025
2,410
Hudak was one of the Colorado State senators who voted for gun laws that disarmed lw-abiding citizens while doing nothing to disarm lawbreakers. Two other state lawmakers who did the same, have already been recalled and kicked out.

Even as she heads for the door, she still doesn't get it. The reason she resigned rather than facing recall, was so that Democrats could appoint her replacement, instead of letting the people choose via an election. The "danger" of their choosing someone who respected their right to keep and bear arms, was too much for her.

She also chickened out of a press conference she had set up earlier, to avoid the inevitable questions from people who might disagree.

Consistent character to the last.

--------------------------------------------------

State Sen. Evie Hudak, faced with recall, resigns, not present at supporter rally - The Denver Post

State Sen. Evie Hudak, faced with recall, resigns, skips press conference

By Kurtis Lee and Lynn Bartels
The Denver Post
Posted: 11/27/2013 08:48:38 AM
Updated: 55 min. ago

Democratic state Sen. Evie Hudak has resigned her seat to forestall a recall effort launched by constituents who sought to oust her for her support of gun-control laws passed in the legislature this spring.

The senator made the announcement in a letter to Democratic leadership Wednesday. She did not attend a news conference scheduled for 10:30 a.m. at the Arvada Library that was scheduled to make her decision public.

"By resigning I am protecting these important new laws for the good of Colorado and ensuring that we can continue looking forward," Hudak wrote in her resignation letter in regard to her gun votes.

Hudak's move ends the recall process, as now a Democratic vacancy committee can appoint someone to fill her seat until 2014.
 
This gun thing has really backfired on the dems. Dems take the simple-minded view that the way to stop gun violence is to ban guns, but ppl know just the opposite is true. An armed society is a polite society.
 
Guns were banned in the Aurora, CO theater where that nutcase did his thing.

That sure worked well. No one was able to shoot back.

Mission accomplished.
 
The dems will run a more acceptable candidate, defusing the far right's attempt to take over the GoP.
 
This gun thing has really backfired on the dems. Dems take the simple-minded view that the way to stop gun violence is to ban guns, but ppl know just the opposite is true. An armed society is a polite society.

This is what happens when politicians create and pass a bill on pure emotion instead of common sense.
 
This gun thing has really backfired on the dems. Dems take the simple-minded view that the way to stop gun violence is to ban guns, but ppl know just the opposite is true. An armed society is a polite society.

Which guns did the Democrats ban?
 
This gun thing has really backfired on the dems. Dems take the simple-minded view that the way to stop gun violence is to ban guns, but ppl know just the opposite is true. An armed society is a polite society.

Which guns did the Democrats ban?

Is that question Rhetorical or for real?

Here is a partial list of guns that Diane Feinstein wanted to have banned in the bill she submitted last year.


M1 Carbine,
Sturm Ruger Mini-14,
AR-15,
Bushmaster XM15,
Armalite M15,
AR-10,
Thompson 1927,
Thompson M1;
AK,
AKM,
AKS,
AK-47,
AK-74,
ARM,
MAK90,
NHM 90,
NHM 91,
SA 85,
SA 93,
VEPR;
Olympic Arms PCR;
AR70,
Calico Liberty ,
Dragunov SVD Sniper Rifle or Dragunov SVU,
Fabrique National FN/FAL,
FN/LAR, or FNC,
Hi-Point20Carbine,
HK-91,
HK-93,
HK-94,
HK-PSG-1,
Thompson 1927 Commando,
Kel-Tec Sub Rifle;
Saiga,
SAR-8,
SAR-4800,
SKS with detachable magazine,
SLG 95,
SLR 95 or 96,
Steyr AU,
Tavor,
Uzi,
Galil and Uzi Sporter,
Galil Sporter, or Galil Sniper Rifle ( Galatz ).
Pistols (or copies or duplicates):
Calico M-110,
MAC-10,
MAC-11, or MPA3,
Olympic Arms OA,
TEC-9,
TEC-DC9,
TEC-22 Scorpion, or AB-10,
Uzi.
Shotguns (or copies or duplicates):
Armscor 30 BG,
SPAS 12 or LAW 12,
Striker 12
 
Which guns did the Democrats ban?

Is that question Rhetorical or for real?

Here is a partial list of guns that Diane Feinstein wanted to have banned in the bill she submitted last year.


M1 Carbine,
Sturm Ruger Mini-14,
AR-15,
Bushmaster XM15,
Armalite M15,
AR-10,
Thompson 1927,
Thompson M1;
AK,
AKM,
AKS,
AK-47,
AK-74,
ARM,
MAK90,
NHM 90,
NHM 91,
SA 85,
SA 93,
VEPR;
Olympic Arms PCR;
AR70,
Calico Liberty ,
Dragunov SVD Sniper Rifle or Dragunov SVU,
Fabrique National FN/FAL,
FN/LAR, or FNC,
Hi-Point20Carbine,
HK-91,
HK-93,
HK-94,
HK-PSG-1,
Thompson 1927 Commando,
Kel-Tec Sub Rifle;
Saiga,
SAR-8,
SAR-4800,
SKS with detachable magazine,
SLG 95,
SLR 95 or 96,
Steyr AU,
Tavor,
Uzi,
Galil and Uzi Sporter,
Galil Sporter, or Galil Sniper Rifle ( Galatz ).
Pistols (or copies or duplicates):
Calico M-110,
MAC-10,
MAC-11, or MPA3,
Olympic Arms OA,
TEC-9,
TEC-DC9,
TEC-22 Scorpion, or AB-10,
Uzi.
Shotguns (or copies or duplicates):
Armscor 30 BG,
SPAS 12 or LAW 12,
Striker 12

Where's the list of the guns the Colorado Democrats banned?
 
From her resignation letter:

“Most Coloradans believe that the convenience of high-capacity ammunition magazines is less important than saving lives in tragedies like Sandy Hook, Aurora and Columbine. That’s why I sponsored SB 13-197, a bill that takes guns out of the hands of domestic abusers… By resigning, I am protecting these important new laws.”

Let's take that one point at a time, shall we Ms Hudak?

Most Coloradans believe that the convenience of high-capacity ammunition magazines is less important than saving lives in tragedies like Sandy Hook, Aurora and Columbine

The problem dear, is that banning high-capacity magazines has ZERO effect on the crazies and thugs that don't give two shits about your laws. Those accessories and the semi automatic rifles that were used WERE banned in Sandy Hook and Aurara. How'd that work out dumbshit? You've only served to ensure law abiding citizens are at a tactical disadvantage when facing criminals that are never going to obey your laws. Well done, well done.

That’s why I sponsored SB 13-197, a bill that takes guns out of the hands of domestic abusers

Tell us exactly how THIS law will be obeyed by criminals when they're already ignoring all the previous laws, such as abusing a domestic partner? What the fuck makes you think SB 13-197 will make criminals obey the law? Why would you want to disarm or in any way impede the ability of that domestically abused person to defend themselves? Do you believe a 120lb woman should have the 'right' to fistfight a 250lb rapist? How fucking evil are you Ms Hudak?

By resigning, I am protecting these important new laws.

Yes, your cowardice and willingness to go against the will of the people is noted. You will protect this stupid ass law until 2014 when your replacement is booted from office and reasonable people overturn these idiotic and counter productive laws.
 
From her resignation letter:

“Most Coloradans believe that the convenience of high-capacity ammunition magazines is less important than saving lives in tragedies like Sandy Hook, Aurora and Columbine. That’s why I sponsored SB 13-197, a bill that takes guns out of the hands of domestic abusers… By resigning, I am protecting these important new laws.”
Let's take that one point at a time, shall we Ms Hudak?

Most Coloradans believe that the convenience of high-capacity ammunition magazines is less important than saving lives in tragedies like Sandy Hook, Aurora and Columbine
The problem dear, is that banning high-capacity magazines has ZERO effect on the crazies and thugs that don't give two shits about your laws. Those accessories and the semi automatic rifles that were used WERE banned in Sandy Hook and Aurara. How'd that work out dumbshit? You've only served to ensure law abiding citizens are at a tactical disadvantage when facing criminals that are never going to obey your laws. Well done, well done.

That’s why I sponsored SB 13-197, a bill that takes guns out of the hands of domestic abusers
Tell us exactly how THIS law will be obeyed by criminals when they're already ignoring all the previous laws, such as abusing a domestic partner? What the fuck makes you think SB 13-197 will make criminals obey the law? Why would you want to disarm or in any way impede the ability of that domestically abused person to defend themselves? Do you believe a 120lb woman should have the 'right' to fistfight a 250lb rapist? How fucking evil are you Ms Hudak?

By resigning, I am protecting these important new laws.
Yes, your cowardice and willingness to go against the will of the people is noted. You will protect this stupid ass law until 2014 when your replacement is booted from office and reasonable people overturn these idiotic and counter productive laws.

Why pass any laws? Why have speed limits or any kind of traffic laws at all since law breakers don't care about the law?
 
Colorado. I guess they like mass killings. Whatever.

Denver is a nice blend of all kinds of people from everywhere surrounded by a state full of gun nuts and then skewed to the far right by the crazy off-the-chart wingnuts in the Colorado Springs area. The right side of the state, past the Front Range, is mostly people who hate all the Californians who have moved into the west part of the state. But I don't think they will fall prey to the sheer level of stupidity that Texas has. (I hope).
 
Why pass any laws? Why have speed limits or any kind of traffic laws at all since law breakers don't care about the law?

Boy did you miss the point. Traffic laws do not put law abiding citizens at a disadvantage against those that break the law. Gun control does. Big frickin' difference.

But now that you mention it, perhaps we should not have speed limits. Many countries do not. Why not pass laws that punish those that have actually harmed or taken from another, instead of all these bullshit attempts to socially engineer society.

If you drive in a manner that does not interfere with other drivers, who cares how fast you're going? Cause an accident at any speed, you've broken the law. Pretty simple concept that works. I would suggest you consider supporting the idea that laws and rules should be made based on results and not intention. You really don't know what's best for everyone else, nor do the central planners you elect.
 
If Democrats win the presidency again it won't be because of their nominating an acceptable candidate. Rather, the result of Republicans nominating YET ANOTHER unacceptable one.
 

Forum List

Back
Top