More guns, more murders and suicides

[pErvinalia]

That's making an objective moral judgement that simply does not exist. So what if they would continue on living happily? Why does that change anything?

[JimC]

That's making an objective moral judgement that simply does not exist. So what if they would continue on living happily? Why does that change anything?

It would, in many cases, save relatives and loved ones a lot of grief, and stop the unnecessary waste of a human life. Leaving the whole gun thing out of it, I think that suicide prevention measures by society, such as the existence of counselling and help lines is a good thing overall, particularly in preventing impulse suicides by young people. Sure, there will be cases where people think long and hard about ending their lives, and make their own existential choice, and I'm not going to condemn them in the slightest. Self-euthenasia by people with terminal illness is an obvious example.

That, however, is very different to an 18 year old boy taking his own life because of a temporary emotional turmoil...

[pErvinalia]

The thing is, it really isn't a problem for society (well, perhaps it is in Japan, but they are horrendously overpopulated, so it could be a good form of natural thinning... ). As you say, it's a more personal problem for relatives etc. And that's their business. They can work with their relatives to control their access to guns (surely you can get a permit revoked if you are mentally unstable?? - although, nothing would surprise me about Merca) and counselling etc. A person's life is their life. Nobody elses. You can't force someone to live against their will. It's breaking probably the most fundamental human right - that of being in control of your own body/life. Extending the gun debate to suicide is just desperation. There's simply no need to include suicide in it. There's enough violent deaths and accidental deaths from guns that the case can be argued successfully from that point. To introduce weak arguments like the "suicide" issue, just weakens the whole case.

[FBM]

Re suicide.

First, the comparison to Japan is misleading. The implied argument is that guns play little role since Japan has few guns and a high rate of suicide. The flaw in that argument is that guns are only one factor determining suicide rate. It is the dominant factor in the USA, but the dominant factor in Japan is the attitude that suicide is honorable. Apples and oranges.

On the importance of stopping suicide.
I have said this so many times before, but many people fail to understand.

Suicide is mostly on impulse, and most people who attempt suicide and fail, do not attempt it again. If you can prevent the impulsive attempt at suicide from succeeding, the person will very likely live a long and reasonably happy life. Each death is a tragedy.

The argument just put up by Audley is based on the fallaceous assumption that people who attempt suicide are total failures at life. Research shows that most are not. Most are simply people who are down and sad for a short time. If they can survive that period of depression, they can live good lives.

Having a gun available prevents those people from having that chance. Bang, bang and you are dead.

Small correction - with suicide, not "bang bang", just "bang"

[JimC]

The thing is, it really isn't a problem for society (well, perhaps it is in Japan, but they are horrendously overpopulated, so it could be a good form of natural thinning... ). As you say, it's a more personal problem for relatives etc. And that's their business. They can work with their relatives to control their access to guns (surely you can get a permit revoked if you are mentally unstable?? - although, nothing would surprise me about Merca) and counselling etc. A person's life is their life. Nobody elses. You can't force someone to live against their will. It's breaking probably the most fundamental human right - that of being in control of your own body/life. Extending the gun debate to suicide is just desperation. There's simply no need to include suicide in it. There's enough violent deaths and accidental deaths from guns that the case can be argued successfully from that point. To introduce weak arguments like the "suicide" issue, just weakens the whole case.

There are 2 arguments here. I agree with you that there is no real need to mix the suicide argument into the gun control issue, it simply adds confusion and a plethora of other issues.

However, you are taking an existentialist position on the right to suicide. You're not an emotionally vulnerable young person, you are a bloke of a certain age who can think and express all the ramifications of the decision. To give the blessing of a somewhat bleak philosophy to teenagers in a state of emotional immaturity making rash decisions is not tenable, and also not compassionate. Young people in emotional torment need support to the max, they do not need a Gallic shrug of the shoulders and advice to follow their own destiny because it fits with a certain philosophy...

[pErvinalia]

I'm talking more about adults. Children and teenagers aren't legal adults, and are under the protection of the state to a far greater degree than adults. And rightly so. Every effort should be made to help teenagers to avoid suicide, even to the point of the state stepping in. But once you are an adult, the state can mind it's own business, as far as I'm concerned.

eta: And after having this debate before with BG, I'd be fairly certain he thinks the state should concern itself with adult suicide. Well, I don't know if that's what he truly thinks, or whether it is a convenient belief to hold because he thinks it boosts his anti-gun position.

[JimC]

I'm talking more about adults. Children and teenagers aren't legal adults, and are under the protection of the state to a far greater degree than adults. And rightly so. Every effort should be made to help teenagers to avoid suicide, even to the point of the state stepping in. But once you are an adult, the state can mind it's own business, as far as I'm concerned.

Even adults could benefit from some form of counselling. For some, it may provide a different perspective, and lead to a change of mind. For others, it may not, and I'm certainly not going to condemn a seriously thought-out decision, even though I may regret it...

[pErvinalia]

I'm talking more about adults. Children and teenagers aren't legal adults, and are under the protection of the state to a far greater degree than adults. And rightly so. Every effort should be made to help teenagers to avoid suicide, even to the point of the state stepping in. But once you are an adult, the state can mind it's own business, as far as I'm concerned.

Even adults could benefit from some form of counselling. For some, it may provide a different perspective, and lead to a change of mind. For others, it may not, and I'm certainly not going to condemn a seriously thought-out decision, even though I may regret it...

I'm sure they could benefit from counselling, and they should be encouraged to get it as much as possible. But to say that an adult can't take their life is pretty much religious moralising.

[JimC]

I'm talking more about adults. Children and teenagers aren't legal adults, and are under the protection of the state to a far greater degree than adults. And rightly so. Every effort should be made to help teenagers to avoid suicide, even to the point of the state stepping in. But once you are an adult, the state can mind it's own business, as far as I'm concerned.

Even adults could benefit from some form of counselling. For some, it may provide a different perspective, and lead to a change of mind. For others, it may not, and I'm certainly not going to condemn a seriously thought-out decision, even though I may regret it...

I'm sure they could benefit from counselling, and they should be encouraged to get it as much as possible. But to say that an adult can't take their life is pretty much religious moralising.

I'm not sure anyone in this thread is taking such a position, not even BG. Mistakenly or not, he was simply saying that increased gun ownership leads to increased suicide rates, and that, on average, is a bad thing...

That could be a true statement without anybody condemning a particular act of suicide. These days, increasingly irrelevant churches might mutter about suicide being a sin, but the State no longer gives criminal sanctions to failed suicides. I think the only remaining legal issue involves life insurance, where a vestige of the old morality may remain...

[Blind groper]

Let me clarify this.
Most attempts at suicide are on impulse. Those impulses last anything from a couple minutes to a couple hours. In most cases, the would-be suicide survives, and does not repeat the attempt.

The reason for tis is that most suicide attempts are by drug overdose, and only 2% of drug overdose attempts result in death. There are 220,000 attempts at suicide in the USA every year, and about 20,000 suicide deaths. However, there are about 13,000 suicide attempts in the USA each year with guns, and 12,000 of these succeed.

So would-be suicide without a gun will normally survive and go on to live a reasonable life. But a would-be suicide with a gun normally dies and we are left with a tragedy.

I have no problem with a person who genuinely wants to die being able to take his/her own life. But I am opposed to a person with a brief impulse to suicide because of a short period of sadness, destroying what is left of a possibly long and happy life.

If a person is genuinely determined to die, not as a result of impulse, then that person will find a way, even without guns. Most people, though, act on impulse, and a gun turns a silly impulse into a terrible tragedy.

[piscator]

There are 220,000 attempts at suicide in the USA every year, and about 20,000 suicide deaths. However, there are about 13,000 suicide attempts in the USA each year with guns, and 12,000 of these succeed.

So, 6.5% of American suicide attempts are with a firearm? I thought it would be higher.
Comparative stats of course assume a certain uniformity of reporting "Attempts" across samples, but how would that 6.5% number compare with, say, "Jumping from a high place"?

[JimC]

There are 220,000 attempts at suicide in the USA every year, and about 20,000 suicide deaths. However, there are about 13,000 suicide attempts in the USA each year with guns, and 12,000 of these succeed.

So, 6.5% of American suicide attempts are with a firearm? I thought it would be higher.
Comparative stats of course assume a certain uniformity of reporting "Attempts" across samples, but how would that 6.5% number compare with, say, "Jumping from a high place"?

However, if BG's figures are correct, those 6.5% of attempts end up producing 60% of the suicide death toll. One could thus argue that a substantial reduction in gun availability would indeed have a significant impact on the suicide death rate...

[piscator]

There are 220,000 attempts at suicide in the USA every year, and about 20,000 suicide deaths. However, there are about 13,000 suicide attempts in the USA each year with guns, and 12,000 of these succeed.

So, 6.5% of American suicide attempts are with a firearm? I thought it would be higher.
Comparative stats of course assume a certain uniformity of reporting "Attempts" across samples, but how would that 6.5% number compare with, say, "Jumping from a high place"?

However, if BG's figures are correct, those 6.5% of attempts end up producing 60% of the suicide death toll. One could thus argue that a substantial reduction in gun availability would indeed have a significant impact on the suicide death rate...

I just wonder if similar impact correlations could result from drilling down and considering other high success-probability methods, like jumping from high places?

[JimC]

There are 220,000 attempts at suicide in the USA every year, and about 20,000 suicide deaths. However, there are about 13,000 suicide attempts in the USA each year with guns, and 12,000 of these succeed.

So, 6.5% of American suicide attempts are with a firearm? I thought it would be higher.
Comparative stats of course assume a certain uniformity of reporting "Attempts" across samples, but how would that 6.5% number compare with, say, "Jumping from a high place"?

However, if BG's figures are correct, those 6.5% of attempts end up producing 60% of the suicide death toll. One could thus argue that a substantial reduction in gun availability would indeed have a significant impact on the suicide death rate...

I just wonder if similar impact correlations could result from drilling down and considering other high success probability methods, like jumping from high places?

Could be, but it is also harder to conceive of ways to reduce access to high places in comparison to guns...

(although not always - a tall bridge in Melbourne, the Westgate Bridge regularly had a number of suicides until the authorities wisely installed a well-designed fence...)

[piscator]

There are 220,000 attempts at suicide in the USA every year, and about 20,000 suicide deaths. However, there are about 13,000 suicide attempts in the USA each year with guns, and 12,000 of these succeed.

So, 6.5% of American suicide attempts are with a firearm? I thought it would be higher.
Comparative stats of course assume a certain uniformity of reporting "Attempts" across samples, but how would that 6.5% number compare with, say, "Jumping from a high place"?

However, if BG's figures are correct, those 6.5% of attempts end up producing 60% of the suicide death toll. One could thus argue that a substantial reduction in gun availability would indeed have a significant impact on the suicide death rate...

I just wonder if similar impact correlations could result from drilling down and considering other high success probability methods, like jumping from high places?

Could be, but it is also harder to conceive of ways to reduce access to high places in comparison to guns...

It may be a significant amount of tragedy to impulsively handwave. And tragedy reduction is "the good", right?