Statistics obtained by CNN show the Army will report 128 confirmed suicides last year and another 15 suspected suicides in cases under investigation among active-duty soldiers and activated National Guard and reserves.The obvious factors are mentioned, war-related stress especially. Army officials said that although the national figure is slightly lower, it's not fair to compare the two.The confirmed rate of suicides for the Army was 20.2 per 100,000. Army officials were reviewing the suspected suicides Wednesday. If any of them are confirmed, the rate would rise.
Another factor is that military suicides tend to be committed by young men with access to weapons.I suppose that means that the availability of guns makes a suicide attempt easier and more likely to succeed. Isn't that an obvious logical conclusion?
The Los Angeles Times reported recently on the Marine Corps situation. For reasons that to me are unclear, they come in lower than either the Army or the civilian population.
Forty-one Marines are listed as possible or confirmed suicides in 2008, or 16.8 per 100,000 troops, the Marine Corps report said. Nearly all were enlisted and under 24, and about two-thirds had deployed overseas.To make further comparisons, I found this fascinating table on Wikipedia. The main thing that jumped out at me was the fact that the top countries are all former-Russian or other Iron Curtain countries. Why is that?
I'm reminded of some of our other discussions on whether suicide is an individual right. The talk of young military men taking their own lives saddens me deeply. I feel these suicides point out the terrible mistake that suicide is, in most cases. Here we're not discussing the terminally ill patients or quadriplegics trapped in an intolerable lifestyle; rather we're talking about young people in the flower of youth. What could be a greater waste than that? Everything and anything should be done to prevent it. What do you think?
The numbers are interesting too, in light of the murder statistics we've seen. If anything, my arguments about gun availability are strengthened by adding suicides to the equation. Besides the 5 or so murders per 100,000, it looks like we've got two or three times that number of suicides. Do you see what I mean?
"The Los Angeles Times reported recently on the Marine Corps situation. For reasons that to me are unclear, they come in lower than either the Army or the civilian population."
ReplyDelete"You will be in a world of shit because marines are not allowed to die without permission. Do you maggots understand?"-R. Lee Ermey as Gunnery Sergeant Hartman in Full Metal Jacket
It's very sad about the suicide rate. Obviously we need more resources in combating post traumatic stress. Also I'm curious if America's view of the military has any effect on it. Be interesting to see those numbers as breakdown by state.
Of course your "guns cause suicide" is a chicken-or-the-egg kind of question (a group of people who have access to and are familiar with guns choose suicide...do they choose suicide because of the guns, or choose guns for the suicide?) that I think looses quite a bit of water when you see the nations listed on the presented table.
But we know the results you WANT to see.
Mike,
ReplyDeleteOnce again, you prove that you aren't after gun control but simply control.
I feel these suicides point out the terrible mistake that suicide is, in most cases.
Because you feel it is a mistake, something has to be done to stop this problem....isn't that simply wanting to control everyone's life to your standard?
Who the F# are you to decide whether or not it is a mistake, who are you to put into place control of someone's life to stop such a mistake?
Whether or not it is a mistake doesn't mean we have a right to decide for those people!
You show continually that you aren't really after stopping deaths or you would be focusing on drinking, on car safety.
You simply want to control people's lives.
Further proof of this is simple to see, how much discussion about the REASONS the soldiers are committing suicide was in your post?
Instead of focusing on the CAUSE for suicide and trying to remove it, you simply focus on the HOW.
...while showing tables of higher suicide rates where guns are unavailable.
ReplyDeleteSo it MUST be access to guns *duhhh*
Weerd- I'm carefully trying to follow your example of comment etiquette so that I can get off the troll-classification. Please 'grade' me on the following:
ReplyDeleteWB- Also I'm curious if America's view of the military has any effect on it.
America's view of the military as cause-effect of increased military suicides? That is an interesting masters thesis waiting to be written: Is there a one-to-one statistical correspondence in military suicide and citizen opinion of its military?
How would one proceed to gather such data, Weerd? Phone solicitation? "Pardon me, I'm taking a survey, would you mind answering a few questions? What do you think of the United States Military?"
Be interesting to see those numbers as breakdown by state.
Any hypothesis, Weerd?
Here's another inquiry regarding your thoughts on this matter: What other factor, beyond 'attitude of the public,' could be a contributing factor to this increase in military suicide?
I've got one: how about an incompetent Commander-in-Chief? Where might you rank this as a factor? Would that be above or below 'citizen opinion of the military?'
Mike,
ReplyDeleteIf availability of firearms is a big component of suicide, why does Japan have a higher suicide rate then America?
Muddy, a reasonable and thoughtful post! Hopefully not an outlier.
ReplyDeleteNo need to Grade you, as only Mike has any athority to count or discount a comment or commentor. Still you keep this up I will say you'll earn my respect, and I will have no right (or need) to call you a troll.
But as the old saying goes "One Gay doesn't make a parade" : ]
Your structure for the "Master's Thesis" sounds like a good one. Deomgraphic surveys could be done as well with factors like history of family military service (and lenth of service...I'd imgaine your home life and family view of the militay would be different if your Dad's a Bird Colonel vs. your Dad's a Comunity Organizer for Code Pink, vs. your Dad's average Joe Six-Pack, and was drafted in 'Nam) Proximity to a militay base would likely generate a lot more exposure than just what's presented in the news. Ect Ect.
Still what I was also getting at was say the difference between WWII Vets returning home from service, vs. Korean War Vets, Vs. Viet Nam vets. Vs. Gulf War Vets, Vs. Iraq War vets.
One group generally were greeted as heros, the second group are often titles "Vets of the Forgotton War", 'Nam vets were spit on and branded "Baby Killers" most famously, The Gulf War was overal impersonal by having very little ground-war confrontations, coupled with the Prime-Time Real-time coverage and the public sympathy for the people of Kuwait those vets were, while not greeted with the furvor of WWII Vets, were veiwed well by society.
I think it's a bit too early to comment on Iraq/Afganistan vets on a whole, but the popularity of the conflicts certainly must add a negative stigma to the vets.
I can't imagine that stigma helps with coping with the stress of war and returning to civlian life.
That more-or-less make sense to you, Muddy?
BTW it's nice to finally have a conversation with you. I look forward to future discussions.
"If anything, my arguments about gun availability are strengthened by adding suicides to the equation."
ReplyDeleteI don't think that's the case. The suicide numbers tell incomplete sotries, obviously, but look at that list: the countries that have higher suicide rates than ours are a mixed bag of nations with extremely strict gun prohibitions laws (Japan and Russia, for example) nations with less gun control than we have (Switzerland), and nations in which guns are generally available but are more strictly controlled (Canada).
This would seem to me to suggest that availability of guns is at most a minor factor in determining whether a person will commit suicide. I'd suggest that if you're concerned with how to decrease the number of people who kill themselves, it might be more useful to look at the general level of happiness and satisfaction with their lives the population of any given country has.
It might be worth pointing out that gun owners, in almost every way, are statistically happier than non-gun owners...
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120856454897828049.html
;)
As for the army in particular... I'd argue that, as stupid, pointless, and wasteful as I think Suicide is, it isn't my right to force a free adult to stay alive if he doesn't want to. That said, the Army is putting hundreds of thousands of people into extremely stressful situations, then dropping them cold back into "normal" life. If their process is resulting in large numbers of their "employees" committing suicide, I'd say they have at the very least a moral obligation to reassess their process.
Another way to look at this: The suicide rate among soldiers, who often have extremely stressful lives and ready access to fully automatic guns is a record 0.007% higher than the civilian rate.
ReplyDeleteIs a peak of 0.007% higher a trend, or just an anomaly? Is it even statistically significant with a population that small?
"Instead of focusing on the CAUSE for suicide and trying to remove it, you simply focus on the HOW."
ReplyDeleteI try hard to parse this statement and the implications and no matter how I try, I have top conclude that focusing on the CAUSE is very much a part of the HOW.
Microdot,
ReplyDeleteI'm sorry if that is hard to understand.
How a person commits suicide is the method: firearms, poison, overdose, driving a car into an bridge abutment, etc.
The cause is why a person choose that act: was it marital problems, financial hardships.
The two are related but if you can remove the root cause of the problem, then the HOW doesn't matter because it never gets to that point.
In Japan, there have been many cases recently of people committing suicide by using poisonous gases made from common household products.
Would it make sense to spend thousands of hours, millions of dollars to remove any possible adverse reactions? Or would it make more sense to focus on WHY these people are killing themselves and try to prevent those?
i saw that same article the other day. it saddened me greatly.
ReplyDeleteWeerd writes:
ReplyDeleteI think it's a bit too early to comment on Iraq/Afganistan vets on a whole, but the popularity of the conflicts certainly must add a negative stigma to the vets.
I can't imagine that stigma helps with coping with the stress of war and returning to civlian life.
Perhaps there is some truth to this. Yet, what about my Commander-in-Chief theory. You surely know that Bush's War on Iraq was terribly mishandled and Rumsfeld was most incompetent. His statement, "You go to war with the army you have not the army you want" was the height to stupidity and arrogance.
He and therefore Bush tried to fight the war on the cheap, not only in armament but on troop levels. Stop-loss orders and the continuing redeployment of troops along with shoddy armament and ever-changing missions weakens morale more than the opinions of the citizens back home, in my judgement.
The final straw for these men, I believe, was the realization that the war that they fought, that they bled for, that scrambled their psyche, that their buddies died in, was a sham- an unnecessary political scheme of a group of egghead ideologues back in Washington.
There's something to chew on.
Mud,
ReplyDeleteAny evidence to back up this opinion?
The final straw for these men, I believe, was the realization that the war that they fought, that they bled for, that scrambled their psyche, that their buddies died in, was a sham- an unnecessary political scheme of a group of egghead ideologues back in Washington.
Mike,
ReplyDeleteFrom a previous post you said:
Wouldn't you also agree that if we cut the number of guns down, we would also cut down on the numbers of these tragedies? Also undeniable, I say.
From this post you say:
Mike,
Again, sorry but the evidence doesn't back up what you say:
Wouldn't you also agree that if we cut the number of guns down, we would also cut down on the numbers of these tragedies? Also undeniable, I say.
From Nationmaster.com - great site for the statistics you avoid.
Suicide rates by age-group per 100,000 rankings.
15-24 - America is Number #7
25-34 - America is Number #10
35-44 - America is Number #12
45-54 - America is Number #13
55-64 - America is Number #13
65-74 - America is Number #11
75+ - America is Number #10.
America has more firearms per capita then any other nation in the world...shouldn't the suicide rate per capita then be higher then any other nation in the world?
From Nationmaster.com - great site for the statistics you avoid.
Suicide rates by age-group per 100,000 rankings.
15-24 - America is Number #7
25-34 - America is Number #10
35-44 - America is Number #12
45-54 - America is Number #13
55-64 - America is Number #13
65-74 - America is Number #11
75+ - America is Number #10.
America has more firearms per capita then any other nation in the world...shouldn't the suicide rate per capita then be higher then any other nation in the world?
Even calculating suicide rates for young men, according to Nationmaster, America is Number 15!!
Now, in the simplest possible, common sense terms: How can firearm availability be the issue especially when you consider many of the countries higher then the USA in the rankings have tougher gun control laws?
+1 To Bob. I know quite a few people who were over there, and I've heard none of that sentiment.
ReplyDeleteMany are pissed that the war was fought "on the cheap" but from those I've met and know they're 100% behind the cause.
I know it's not a huge data set but 100% is pretty consistant.
But maybe you've heard somthing I didn't.
Bob, Suicide stats, just like murder stats, have a number of factors. The gun availability is a major one, but it is only one of many.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMike,
ReplyDeleteNow I think we are getting somewhere.
Yes, there are many factors that affect suicide. If firearm availability was a controlling factor, wouldn't that be reflected in the statistics?
Finland has about the 2nd or 3rd highest firearms per capita ranking...and a high suicide rate..but not as high as New Zealand with strict gun control laws.
America with the highest per capita of firearms in the World isn't the leader in suicide rates.
So, what could be the controlling factors. I'll turn to this Wikipedia page
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Assessment_of_suicide_risk
Key areas to be assessed include the person's predisposition to suicidal behavior; identifiable precipitant or stressors; the patient’s symptomatic presentation; presence of hopelessness; nature of suicidal thinking; previous suicidal behavior; impulsivity and self-control; and protective factors. Suicide risk assessment should distinguish between acute and chronic risk: acute risk might be raised because of recent changes in the person's circumstances or mental state, while chronic risk is determined by a diagnosis of a mental illness, and social and demographic factors. Bryan and Rudd (2006) suggest a model in which risk is categorized into one of four categories: Baseline, Acute, Chronic high risk, and Chronic high risk with acute exacerbation.[4] Risk level can also be described as Nonexistent, Mild, Moderate, Severe, or Extreme, and the clinical response can be determined accordingly. (emphasis mine)
The following is a list of the demographic factors: Age, Gender, Ethnicity and culture, Marital status, Sexual orientation, Biographical and historical factors, Mental state, Suicidal ideation, Planning, Motivation to die, Other motivations for suicide, Reasons to live, Past suicidal acts, Suicide risk and mental illness.
Only in planning does access to method become a consideration. From Wikipedia:
Assessment of suicide risk includes an assessment of the degree of planning, the potential or perceived lethality of the suicide method that the person is considering, and whether the person has access to the means to carry out these plans (such as access to a firearm). A suicide plan may include the following elements: timing, availability of method, setting, and actions made towards carrying out the plan (such as obtaining medicines, poisons, rope or a weapon) , choosing and inspecting a setting, and rehearsing the plan). The more detailed and specific the suicide plan, the greater will be the level of risk. The presence of a suicide note generally suggests more premeditation and greater suicidal intent. The assessment would always include an exploration of the timing and content of any suicide note and a discussion of its meaning with the person who wrote it.[21][22]
Sorry but with all the other factors I read it as firearms being a small part. If a person really wants to commit suicide they are going to, regardless to access to firearms or not.
The statistic back that view up.
Bob and Weerd- are you in denial as to the idiocy surrounding the so-called "mission" in Iraq? The reality of it is clear to those of us not wearing the rose-colored glasses.
ReplyDeleteThis entire 'mission' was a purely political ideological scheme, cooked up by the neo-con junta from PNAC: Rumsfeld, Cheney, Wolfowitz, Kristol, Kagan, Abrams, Libby and Bolton.
If you are in denial of this reality, then you have been living in an alternative universe.
Mud
ReplyDeleteA profound quote from a great philosopher:
I reject your reality and substitute my own-- Adam Savage.
Sorry if we see things differently. I saw a country that failed to obey dozens of U.N. Sanctions.
I saw a country that daily shot at planes performing a U.N. mandated function.
I saw a country where the dictator in charge lead everyone to believe that the country had weapons of mass destruction....and a willingness to use them.
Before you continue talking about how This entire 'mission' was a purely political ideological scheme, maybe you should talk to people who have been there, if you haven't.
Both of my best friends have been there multiple times. The son of one of them had been there....maybe talking to people on the ground about the mission might give you a different picture.
Once again, I reject your reality and substitute one of my own...one closer to the truth.
Well Covered Bob. I don't feel the need to add much more of a responce to Muddy's very strong feelings on the issue, but I to am amazed at the selective nature of fact-gathering from the other side, coupled with fantastic conspiracy theories, while some pretty shoking shit doesn't get discussed at all.
ReplyDelete(I present this story as a gesture of Good-will
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2117840/posts There are many more like it)
But such discussions are Moot, Bush is no longer President. Iraq is free, and more safe than many of our Urban areas. Hopefully President Obama does go through with his plans to troop withdrawal, as the mission was compleated, it's a sucess, America should be done spending money and lives over there.
But back to the task at hand, I think one element Mike doesn't talk about...or maybe even think about is what I call the "Will to Kill".
Many of you read a blog post where I mentioned I had a fairly emotional fight with my wife one night...happened to be I was carrying a firearm. The story ends there, we resolved our issues, made up, and went on with our days. Never did the gun come out of my pocket, never did I think of using it. Hell I wasn't even thinking about my gun durring the discussion. Bob Chimed in with a "Been there, done that, wait till you have teenagers, sport" Comment.
According to Mike's rational, I was angry and well armed...blood should have been spilled.
There have been times when I've been very upset....since I had guns I should have killed myself.
Those things didn't happen, and when it comes to the number of times similar stories to mine....vs the ones Mike choses to address, they're very rare.
What's missing? The Will to Kill. I have no desire, nor will, nor interest to kill anybody who is not immidiatly threatening my life....let alone the LOVE of my life, Mrs. Weer'd....doubly so to myself who I'm a huge fan of.
If I saw two stangers engaging in mortal combat I'd likely reach into my pocket.......and pull out my cellphone and let the Five-Oh handle the mess.
No will to kill.
Now turn to my *over*used example of prisons. No guns...no knives....hell they use PLASTIC silverware...and probably not even those bitchen plastic knives that can cut through an overcooked streak! So really no practical weapons. What they DO have is SCADS of "Will to Kill" that's why they're there to begin with. They're violent people, they speak the language of violence, and violence is a heavy currency in prison (There's a reason why the prison advice of "Beat the shit out of somebody big on the first day" has become a cliche) What's the end result?
VIOLENCE Lots of it. You have some of the most shewdly invented murder weapons, from sticks and stones, to hand-crafted knives from mundane meterials.
"Availability of Guns" amounts to NOTHING in the end, Mike.
muddy on iraq:
ReplyDeleteThis entire 'mission' was a purely political ideological scheme, cooked up by the neo-con junta from PNAC: Rumsfeld, Cheney, Wolfowitz, Kristol, Kagan, Abrams, Libby and Bolton.
seconded, in general point if possibly not in fine details. there was absolutely no legitimate U.S. interest in invading Iraq, nor did any other country have any interest that would have justified us invading on their behalf. that invasion was a war of choice waged purely to further and entrench neoconservative interests, at the expense of the interests (and security, and economy, and...) of the USA.
what i'm still unclear on is how many, and which ones, of the warmongers were aware that it would hurt their country yet pushed it anyway. i'm having trouble believing they could all have been too willfully blind to realize such a blatantly obvious thing. some of them probably believed their own propaganda, but all of them can't possibly have been naive enough to delude themselves.
(another interesting question: just how much will that whole misadventure end up benefiting Iran before the books are closed on it? not that that's necessarily a bad thing --- we'll have to make up with Iran eventually, and handing them a big ol' benefit of some sort will have to be involved in that, surely --- just i'd prefer to see their current theocratic regime out of power before starting the give-aways. but then, i guess i'm not a neo-conman.)
Fantastic conspiracy theories, you must be kidding me, Weer'd. And if you believe that article about Bush and his advisors keeping mum when they learned that there really were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, I'm speechless. It doesn't take a cynic like me to see that that may very well be nonsense.
ReplyDeleteI agree with those who feel the military industrial complex is behind much of this trumped-up war stuff. I'm starting to wonder about Obama and Afghanistan.
It seems as if Bob and Weerd drank heavily the Kool Aid offered by the neocons in the Bush Administration back in the winter of 2002-2003.
ReplyDeleteNot I. Not a drop. I knew this 'war' was unnecessary and nothing but an farcical and ideological foray.
Not to get personal, but Weerd and Bob are some of the remaining hold-outs left in America who actually still believe the plate of propaganda fed to us by that junta.
That surprises me because you both seem like intelligent people.
Troll status confirmed by Muddy. Instead of discussing issues, he attacks the people. Nice
ReplyDelete