who are we to deny or obstruct a right and freedom to our neighbors and future children because we personally are ok with not exercising it?

Im not sure I understand what you mean here.

I get the freedom thing but if someone isnt capable of exercising their freedom without encroaching on someone elses, that is where that persons freedom stops.

There has to be checks and balances to make sure one persons freedoms are not stopping on others. Example: Mentally ill, past criminal offences, etc.

If we dont get better, kids will keep dying. I am willing to sacrifice my freedom to save lives.

What do we do and sacrifice when the mass killings continue to happen and when they either still get and use guns or they switch to explosives or other weapons

You are assuming they will continue at the current rate without legal access to guns. How do you know that will happen? One thing you can say for sure if that people who are law abiding will still be able to get guns so there isnt really a concern on freedom if you are law abiding and of sound mind.

1. Making it harder to get a gun is the first step. Using a legal gun is the easiest way to kill on-mass right now. Make it harder to get a legal gun when the person is not fit would force them into the black market which would complicate things, do you know anyone who sells black market guns? I dont.. So lets pretend the gun is out of the equation now. Use a knife? Sure, less people die, easier to take down. Well shit, knife is out.. Okay, how about bombs? It isnt as easy as you think to make a bomb, especially if the person isn't smart. They will probably end up blowing them selves up or throwing up a red flag when attempting to purchase the products needed to make one and even if they can get all of the parts who is to say they would be a success at putting it together and using it?

Taking away the easiest option is going to force the person into harder means of achieving their goal which in turn will probably sway them from it altogether in most cases. Its too much work at that point and if they do manage to make it all the way there will be many more opportunities to catch them during the processes vs walking into a gun store, buying a gun/ammo and driving straight to your local garlic festival where you can unload.

To recap, just because there are other options to kill is NO REASON to remove the easiest option or at the very least make it harder to obtain.

no clue how often, no clue the rate they will, no clue more or less

but they will happen so we aren't talking infringing on rights to eliminate mass harm we are talking infringing on rights to feel like we did something and maybe get murderers to switch weapons and possibly from time to time snag up the incompetent

your view is honest which is you are willing to sacrifice certain freedoms for what you believe to be a safer environment so I just disagree

the fact that your personal stance on the issue happens to align with many (not all) trump cultists is in itself NO proof of you being principled, that's another basic logic fail. if you were actually principled on constitutional rights and the radically literal interpretation of the document, you'd be much closer to one of those libertarian caricatures (not necessarily all their alleged 'principles', but the hilarious way in which they have to reframe everyday issues in order to make the 'principled' claim in the first place) we have in pard.
in reality, you are just as selectively 'principled' - meaning whenever it fits your narrative.

and for that you're 'willing to pay that price' (thousands of preventable deaths of innocent people each year) with NO realistic upside (poor people suffer the most under america's gun obsession, it did nothing to prevent the erosion of your freedoms and rights), other than the simplistic 'the constitution says so - i'm just being principled' claim...

i'd be fine with most gun control suggestions that have been put forward
i currently own 3 firearms
i'm not a criminal, i'm mentally stable, and i'm not lazy
so i have no concern that whatever hurdles were put in place could be easily cleared
gun nutters piss me off
don't be a stupid ass fuck and you'll still have your guns to play with
would stricter control solve all of our gun problems?
no
but it wouldn't hurt
and should be in place anyways

I still maintain there has to be a line drawn somewhere.
You can say "nothing can be done" but in the end when its 2 a day or 3 a day?
You think there will not be a tipping point?
America will just continue to have mass shootings every day and nothing will be done?

This post was edited by Plaguefear on Aug 12 2019 06:40pm

As I said before in a similar thread: It's peculiar that the "nothing can be done" narrative exists in the one and only developed country that has this problem.