The problem is that the question was incoherent, just like the recent vote on weapons. This question was asked in a vacuum, and didn't take into account that i

The problem is that the question was incoherent, just like the recent vote on weapons. This question was asked in a vacuum, and didn't take into account that it was in direct contradiction with current laws/agreements. Implementing the immigration law would most likely have meant exiting Schengen and a whole lot of EU things. This should have been made explicit in the vote, not implicit. I don't even understand how asking such a question is legal when one answer results in the law being incoherent.