Originally Posted By: eddie
Since the previous thread has devolved into a discussion of the merits of circumcision I thought I would bring this back and relate it to Initiative 1639.


This mass shooting event would have still taken place if 1639 had been passed. I don't see the connection.

Nothing in 1639 either:

a) pertains to this mass shooting event
b) Would have prevented it.

On a side note:

No Washington State Initiative *ever* proposed or passed will ever accomplish anything for the good. In the period of EVER.

Washington State ranks #1 in Nation as the dippest of shittiest state initiatives ever conceived and passed then, now, and in to the future.

Washington State ranks #1 in the Nation of the dumbest voters. Ever.

Sorry Hank, we (206'ers for the most part) got you Californians beat for moronic liberalism...hands down.

Originally Posted By: steeleworldwide


So you can't explain how 1639 would have stopped this synagogue shooting?

Doing nothing is the default. If you want something done, you have to make the case as to why.

1639 violates people's constitutional and natural rights. So we need a very compelling reason to take such drastic actions. So how would 1639 have stopped this synagogue shooting?


This.

You don't have to like our malt-liquor drinking friend, but he's not wrong and you seem afraid to answer his simple questions.
_________________________
T.K. Paker