08 Jul 2013, 9:03 am
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_an ... rom_a.html
The original report is linked inside the article in case you want to dig deeper.
The original report is linked inside the article in case you want to dig deeper.
55 posts •
Page 1 of 4 • 1, 2, 3, 4
-
- Truck Series Driver (Pro II)
- Posts: 897
- Joined: 29 Dec 2010, 1:02 pm
-
- Ambassador
- Posts: 21062
- Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am
08 Jul 2013, 10:09 am
Neal Anderth wrote:http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/human_nature/2013/06/handguns_suicides_mass_shootings_deaths_and_self_defense_findings_from_a.html
The original report is linked inside the article in case you want to dig deeper.
Keep pushing gun control. One of two things will happen: the Constitution will be amended or the people will wise up and realize that it's all about control and not about "guns."
Control our healthcare. Control our speech. Control our ability to defend ourselves.
No gun ever loaded itself.
No criminal cares whether his weapon is "legal" or not.
-
- Emissary
- Posts: 3405
- Joined: 12 Jun 2006, 2:01 am
08 Jul 2013, 11:07 am
There's nothing very surprising in that report. Most of it is stuff I'd picked up myself through extensive web trawling during various gun control debates, although I suppose this is more authoritative for having been studied more intensively.
I'm not sure the facts are going to make much difference to the debate unfortunately. It hasn't altered my own opinion one iota, and clearly hasn't changed DF's mind either. The facts are already well-known to anybody with more than a passing interest in the subject. The debate is about priorities.
I'm not sure the facts are going to make much difference to the debate unfortunately. It hasn't altered my own opinion one iota, and clearly hasn't changed DF's mind either. The facts are already well-known to anybody with more than a passing interest in the subject. The debate is about priorities.
-
- Ambassador
- Posts: 21062
- Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am
08 Jul 2013, 11:11 am
Sassenach wrote:The debate is about priorities.
And, common sense. We won't outlaw guns. We can't without changing the Constitution.
Gun restrictions in the US have not proved effective.
Background checks are fine, but will they stop criminals? Did they help in Newtown?
If criminals obeyed laws . . . they wouldn't be criminals. More restrictions just put more of a burden on those who already obey the law.
-
- Administrator
- Posts: 11284
- Joined: 14 Feb 2000, 8:40 am
08 Jul 2013, 11:42 am
The only somewhat surprising (to me) thing mentioned was that half of gun use was in self defense circumstances. That stat alone should make anyone on the side of gun bans reconsider.
and this is not all about control only, make control too strict and you in essence ban guns (as many want).
and this is not all about control only, make control too strict and you in essence ban guns (as many want).
-
- Ambassador
- Posts: 16006
- Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am
08 Jul 2013, 12:08 pm
Background checks done properly would help. Parents of a young man who had been committed seven times discovered that he'd been able to buy a semi-automatic from Walmart. Why? Because while they do a check, his stays in mental health care were not picked up, having been voluntary rather than forced upon him.
Checks would not stop all gun massacres or deaths, but they would help reduce them. Particularly suicides.
Checks would not stop all gun massacres or deaths, but they would help reduce them. Particularly suicides.
-
- Administrator
- Posts: 7463
- Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm
08 Jul 2013, 12:26 pm
danivon wrote:Background checks done properly would help. Parents of a young man who had been committed seven times discovered that he'd been able to buy a semi-automatic from Walmart. Why? Because while they do a check, his stays in mental health care were not picked up, having been voluntary rather than forced upon him.
Checks would not stop all gun massacres or deaths, but they would help reduce them. Particularly suicides.
I agree. Checks for Mental instability need to be in place. No way the medical community would go for it, though.
-
- Ambassador
- Posts: 21062
- Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am
08 Jul 2013, 2:02 pm
danivon wrote:Background checks done properly would help. Parents of a young man who had been committed seven times discovered that he'd been able to buy a semi-automatic from Walmart. Why? Because while they do a check, his stays in mental health care were not picked up, having been voluntary rather than forced upon him.
Checks would not stop all gun massacres or deaths, but they would help reduce them. Particularly suicides.
Regarding suicides, that is speculative. Japan has a very high suicide rate and very strict gun control. Where there's a will, there's a way.
Carbon monoxide poisoning is a far more pleasant way to go--and, no gun required.
-
- Emissary
- Posts: 3405
- Joined: 12 Jun 2006, 2:01 am
08 Jul 2013, 2:39 pm
It is speculative, but it's certainly not an unreasonable speculation. Very little planning is required to kill yourself with a gun, you just pick it up, hold it to your head and pull the trigger. It's far less work than most other forms of suicide and so you'd assume that a reduction in ready availability in guns would have some kind of impact on the suicide rate.
But this is not really an important part of the debate. As you say, if somebody is determined to take their own life then they'll find a way to do so. I don't think it makes a lot of sense for gun control advocates to build a case that's based on reducing the suicide rate.
But this is not really an important part of the debate. As you say, if somebody is determined to take their own life then they'll find a way to do so. I don't think it makes a lot of sense for gun control advocates to build a case that's based on reducing the suicide rate.
-
- Ambassador
- Posts: 16006
- Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am
08 Jul 2013, 2:51 pm
If you assume that suicides are always determined, and are not liable to change their mind during the process, then yeah, you can ignore the 'speculation'
But people are not stereotypes, and the issue with guns and suicide is that they are so quick and easy to use for an attempt that they can be little time to think, to re-think. CO is not so quick and takes preparation, so it may be 'nicer' (I've no idea), but I wonder if it's also less successful. Certainly my former brother-in-law tried a couple of times with a car exhaust and he is still alive.
Hence owning a gun is an increased risk to suicide, and that a high proportion of suicides recently obtained their gun.
But people are not stereotypes, and the issue with guns and suicide is that they are so quick and easy to use for an attempt that they can be little time to think, to re-think. CO is not so quick and takes preparation, so it may be 'nicer' (I've no idea), but I wonder if it's also less successful. Certainly my former brother-in-law tried a couple of times with a car exhaust and he is still alive.
Hence owning a gun is an increased risk to suicide, and that a high proportion of suicides recently obtained their gun.
-
- Ambassador
- Posts: 21062
- Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am
08 Jul 2013, 3:18 pm
danivon wrote:CO is not so quick and takes preparation, so it may be 'nicer' (I've no idea), but I wonder if it's also less successful. Certainly my former brother-in-law tried a couple of times with a car exhaust and he is still alive.
I'm sorry that he felt compelled to try.
That said, it really is easy, especially when cars and garages are so common. Now, if we could just make gasoline like $1000 a gallon, then that would help cut down on suicides.
Hence owning a gun is an increased risk to suicide, and that a high proportion of suicides recently obtained their gun.
Owning a gun is also an increased chance of defending yourself--against crooks and animals.
Again, it's all moot. Decry guns as evil. It doesn't matter. It's in the Constitution.
-
- Ambassador
- Posts: 16006
- Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am
08 Jul 2013, 3:25 pm
Yeah, well, if he wasn't a lying PoS, perhaps it wouldn't have screwed him up so much.Doctor Fate wrote:I'm sorry that he felt compelled to try.
Do you have comparitive stats on the numbers of people who use that method compared to guns (or the ratio of successful to failed attempts by the each method)?That said, it really is easy, especially when cars and garages are so common. Now, if we could just make gasoline like $1000 a gallon, then that would help cut down on suicides.
Just so we can see how many deaths you are looking to cut down on.
I don't 'decry guns as evil'. What is it with the need to put words into others' mouths? If guns were completely banned in the UK, my uncle would be out of work.Again, it's all moot. Decry guns as evil. It doesn't matter. It's in the Constitution.
-
- Ambassador
- Posts: 21062
- Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am
08 Jul 2013, 3:32 pm
danivon wrote:Do you have comparitive stats on the numbers of people who use that method compared to guns (or the ratio of successful to failed attempts by the each method)?
U.S. Suicide Statistics (2001)
Suicide Methods
Rate Per
Number 100,000 % of Total
Firearms..................16,869........5.9.........55.1
All Other Methods.........13,753........4.8.........49.9
Hanging or Suffocation.....6,198........2.2.........20.2
Poisoning..................5,191........1.8.........17.0
Falls........................651........0.2..........2.1
Cutting / Pieercing..........458........0.2..........1.5
Drowning.....................339........0.1..........1.1
Fire.........................147........0.1..........0.5
Note that firearms are, by far, the most common method for suicide (55% of all suicides are completed with a firearm). Thus it is imperative that a suicidal person not have access to a firearm.
Hanging or suffocation is used in about one out of five suicides, which is why you can never leave an acutely suicidal person alone for a second. People who have died by hanging have used virtually every conceivable thing to hang themselves with, including shoe laces, electric cords, belts, bedsheets,etc. Again, never leave an acutely suicidal person alone.
Poisoning accounts for slightly less than one out of five suicides.
The three most common methods of suicide – firearms, hanging, and poisoning – account for 92.3% of all suicides.
Now, prove that gun control will lower it.
-
- Ambassador
- Posts: 16006
- Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am
08 Jul 2013, 4:00 pm
I wasn't asking for proof, just evidence.
Found this on relative rates by method. BMJ study.
Firearms roughly 2-3x deadlier than suffocation (which includes CO as well as hanging/strangulation). Excess deaths assessed as 6.5% among adults and 32% for minors - assuming everyone who would try to commit suicide using a gun would choose another method (greater if they don't).
Found this on relative rates by method. BMJ study.
Firearms roughly 2-3x deadlier than suffocation (which includes CO as well as hanging/strangulation). Excess deaths assessed as 6.5% among adults and 32% for minors - assuming everyone who would try to commit suicide using a gun would choose another method (greater if they don't).
-
- Ambassador
- Posts: 21062
- Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am
08 Jul 2013, 7:16 pm
danivon wrote:I wasn't asking for proof, just evidence.
Found this on relative rates by method. BMJ study.
Firearms roughly 2-3x deadlier than suffocation (which includes CO as well as hanging/strangulation). Excess deaths assessed as 6.5% among adults and 32% for minors - assuming everyone who would try to commit suicide using a gun would choose another method (greater if they don't).
Doesn't justify banning guns, which is what Obama and his ilk actually want.
55 posts •
Page 1 of 4 • 1, 2, 3, 4
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
