Do you realize how much chaos he has created? Just by all the news medias publishing this, it will cause murders nationwide. Actually, I think that is his real intention. How is the law enforcement protecting these said targets? My opinion is: All gays and/or lesbians need to get a permit to conceal carry for their own protection!
Gays would be 'put to death by bullets to the head' under proposed ballot initiative
The proposal by Matt McLaughlin, who lists his address in Huntington Beach, was received by the initiative coordinator at the Office of the Attorney General on Feb. 26. Enclosed was a $200 check and the complete text of his "Sodomite Suppression Act." The act outlines seven measures relating to those who engage in same-sex sodomy, "a monstrous evil that Almighty God, giver of freedom and liberty, commands us to suppress on pain of our utter destruction even as he overthrew Sodom and Gomorrha."
McLaughlin recommends punishment by death, even though a judge ruled that California's death penalty is unconstitutional last June: ... ... ... ...http://www.theindychannel.com/news/politics/gays-would-be-put-to-death-by-bullets-to-the-head-under-proposed-ballot-initiative-032115
BAKERSFIELD, Calif. - A proposed ballot initiative that calls for gays to be shot to death will most likely make its way through the Legislature.
The bill, titled the Sodomite Suppression Act, calls for any person that participates in sodomy to "be put to death by bullets to the head."
Interestingly, it does not appear that California has a way to avoid proceeding with a ballot initiative that advocates the murder of homosexuals. The ballot measure was initiated by a lawyer from Huntington Beach named Matt McLaughlin:
For less than the cost of an Apple iPad, Matt McLaughlin started a statewide legal conversation.An attorney from Huntington Beach, McLaughlin in late February spent $200 to propose a ballot measure that authorizes the killing of gays and lesbians by “bullets to the head,” or “any other convenient method.”McLaughlin’s “Sodomite Suppression Act” now is testing the limits of free speech and raising the question: Why can’t the state’s initiative process screen out blatantly illegal ideas?