The ballot drop boxes in Washington and Oregon both have fire suppression systems that are designed to activate when the temperature inside reaches a certain point, coating ballots inside with a fire-suppressing powder.
For unknown reasons, the system failed to prevent the destruction of hundreds of ballots in Vancouver, just across the Columbia River from Portland.
You know what image that kind of language invokes. It’s also not germane to the issue either way, because I’m not talking about politically persecuting people, I’m talking about judicial expediency dealing with people who are committing actual crimes and using their political views as justification for it.
Uh huh, yeah. The crime here being… (Checks up thread) Living in a rural area.
Shitty strawman but I guess we can’t expect much from the schools out there
And who are you? You’re out here defending something awfully close to stochastic terrorism by assuming all the worst stuff about the people someone else was talking about. They literally said,
And you’re out here like, they’re obviously talking about the locking up criminals. And you blow right by the fact that long sentences are the traditional means of setting an example, it’s already a thing to lock people up in way they never come back to the street, as an example. So what’s next? What’s further down the path? Beyond long sentences to set an example? Well your bestest buddy here uses the words, “enforced attrition.” Let’s have a look at the definitions for those words.
So we’re going cause the reduction in strength of rednecks by force. And lest you think we would be talking about forcing them to eat less, this is a specific example in the dictionary for attrition,
So I don’t know where you went to school, but at mine they taught us critical reading. And this reads like some shit Goebbels would say. And that’s proving Godwin’s Law.