Naah, that won't work, juggling chainsaws isn't an an appropriate analogy to use here. Perhaps sword-swallowing is a more British thing?
The British/UK electorate were presented with a choice recently: to swallow a sword or to not swallow a sword. The responsible thing would have been for both sides to put forward appropriate arguments; the For and the Against camps.
The Against camp could have stated that, without adequate training, unsupervised sword swallowing is dangerous; that the sword has to have a dulled edge and rounded 'point', the sword must be introduced at the appropriate angle, the abdomen aligned appropriately, and that it'd be best to think about the implications were it to go a bit wrong - to have a backup plan involving the Emergency Services. Have a few, shallow, practice swallows before going all the way. It'd take the fun out of it, the unpredictability, the element of connection ring with our past, but it's safe.
The For camp could have said ah, fuck it, have a few pints beforehand, a couple of whiskies, and selfie-film it whilst your mates encourage you. Look back at our great history; we've a noble tradition of sword swallowing, embrace it! And if it goes wrong, well, those Against folks can sort it out.
And that's the basics of what happened before our European Referendum.
The right to throw a sword down your throat doesn't mean to say you don't deserve protection from the consequences of your actions. Prevention is always better than the cure.
Stark, isn't it.