Let me get this straight: your position on this is that the issue is only worth even talking about when on average, each American experiences a shooting at least once? Or are you just making small talk?

It's okay, folks, the IDF investigated and found "no civilians were killed."

Burning down the houses of parliament would also suspend voting on the bill. Do the ends justify the means?

I'm eager to see how this community will support the conservatives when they loudly disrupt the debate chamber and silence the Maori members of parliament, now the precedent has been set that this is acceptable behavior.

This comment is unrelated to my position. (Which, for what it's worth, is in favor of the Maori.)

The bill is now suspended; is the strategy to keep performing hakas to continuously silence members of parliament? The risk is that the next time, when the opposition wants to influence a bill, they also create a circus in the debate chamber. That is not a democratic process.

There are many enjoyable things that are not appropriate to do in parliament.

While I personally don't see how performing haka is constructive to include in a debate about the bill, I think it's unrelated to the discussion about what is or is not appropriate in the debating chamber.