I can understand the pro-gun attempt to separate suicides from other gun deaths. I disagree with it, but I can understand that it serves their argument. They say there aren't all that many gun deaths to worry about. Further restrictions are unnecessary. Of course this is not true, but that's their argument.According to CDCP data, 217 of the 2009 firearm deaths — more than 80 percent — were classified as suicides.John Malouf, a psychologist from Valley Mental Health, said guns are the most common method used in completed suicides, while pills account for the most attempted suicides.Malouf said he feels that if guns were more controlled or less available, people might be less inclined to commit suicide."It’s easy access to a lethal method," Malouf said, "When you think about it, if someone is suicidal and they don’t have a lethal method, they usually get through the crisis OK. If they have a gun, they kill themselves, not realizing they would get through the next day."
What I can't understand is the justification that usually accompanies this argument, that people have a right to commit suicide, that it's a simple choice and that people are free to choose.
The psychologist quoted above put it perfectly. The way I say it is this: suicide is a permanent solution to a temporary problem.
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
Do you really have "free choice" if you are suffering from a serious, life-threatening mental condition (depression)? I say no. And those who have been saved from the brink of death, after suicide attempts, are overwhelmingly happy to have been saved and rarely attempt it again.
ReplyDeleteThat's exactly right. That's the part that the gun apologists like to ignore.
Delete"And those who have been saved from the brink of death, after suicide attempts, are overwhelmingly happy to have been saved and rarely attempt it again."
DeleteExcept all those people who tried again and were successful the second time.
Anonymous, there are very few of them, studies show.
DeletePeople with depression don’t have “free choice”? So we could lock them up?
DeleteThat's the goal: Lock up anyone who wants to choose whatever without asking permission first.
DeleteWho's talking about locking people up? We're talking about taking their damn guns away.
DeleteAnd where does your ability to take away freedoms end? That's the point. What limit to your ability to control us is there? I don't trust anyone who wants to control me. I may tolerate such a person, if there's a good reason, but I won't trust.
DeleteIt's not "taking away freedoms," that's where you're exaggerating and using inflammatory language.
DeleteRemoving guns from UNFIT people is not an infringement on freedom or rights.
The real question is why would you not want to do that? Perhaps in your self-centered, closed world, you're afraid it will somehow affect you. So fuck all those people who perish in the meantime, those who would be saved with proper gun control laws. That's your position.
There is no correlation between suicides and gun availability. The United States has approximately 270,000,000 firearms in the hands of the civilian population with a suicide rate of 11.8 which is similar to the suicide rate of Canada, but Canada has about 1/3 of the rate of firearm ownership with only 9,950,000 firearms in civilian hands. Just so you don't have to do the math, the United States has 27 times MORE firearms than Canada with nearly the same suicide rate.
ReplyDelete"Just so you don't have to do the math, the United States has 27 times MORE firearms than Canada with nearly the same suicide rate."
DeleteDoes not matter to the gun control folks. Their argument totally falls apart if you remove suicide statistics. There is no way in hell that they would ever take the above statistic into consideration.
US vs. Canada comparisons are bogus. Compare the non-gun violent crime rate, see what you come up with.
DeleteYou're cherry picking data which supports your preconceived notion.
"US vs. Canada comparisons are bogus.
DeleteThat's certainly a departure from the beliefs previously held at this blog.
According to StatCan, Canada's violent crime rate for 2010 was 1282/100,000. According to FBI UCR, the violent crime rate for the US in 2010 was 403/100,000. Wowzer. All those violent criminals with the gun control are running amuck in Canada.
Comparing rates of violent crime with a firearm, you're not going to be happy. In the US, firearms are used, on average in 43% of violent crimes, in CA it's about 25%. Applying those rates to the violent crime rates, CA has a violent crime rate, with firearms, of 320.5/100,000 and the US's rate is 173.29/100,000. So, either CA's gun control does nothing to curb crime (or suicides) or the CA people are a very violent group. My vote is that gun control doesn't affect crime rates (or suicide) because my experience with the Canadians are that they aren't a violent group as a whole (except when it comes to hockey).
Gimmie your wallet, or I'll tell you about the gun I have in my safe back at home, eh.
DeleteBill, your cherry-picked and/or made-up stats are unconvincing, to say the least.
DeleteCanada is more violent than the US? Really?
cherry picked and made up? Nope. If it's unconvincing to you, that would just show that your have preconceived notions.
DeleteThat information came directly from the Canadian government. StatCan keeps records very similar to the FBI Uniform Crime Reports, just like the Home Office does for the UK, just like ABS does for Australia and just like all of the other countries whose crime stats I cite.
Instead of taking the convoluted information that's put out by the Joyce Foundation, I would suggest that one does his own research.
So how exactly did guns cause the serious, life-threatening mental condition (depression). You are using method as cause and that isn't the case. Depressed people will use any means available. Removing guns isn't going to reduce the number of suicides, it will only change the method. Then again Mike isn't really trying to save lives here, just ban guns.
ReplyDelete"Then again Mike isn't really trying to save lives here, just ban guns."
DeleteQuoted for the truth! This can't be said enough.
No, I really believe the absence of guns helps a suicidal person get through. It makes sense to me because I'm not a biased gun owner with his fetish object on the line.
DeleteAre you a car owner, and do you have a garage? If yes, you're a suicide risk.
DeleteSo following your logic Mike the suicide rate in the UK and Australia should have decreased after they banned ownership of guns but that isn't the case. Rate stayed the same but the method changed.
Deleteand the silence is deafening......
DeleteScott, I don't believe your claim.
DeleteThe proof that gun availability is bad news is in the comparative intentional homicide rates. The UK is 4 times higher than the States.
Mental health professionals can't stand freedom. It invalidates much of their field. Gun control advocates wish to reduce the consequences of choice so as to make choice meaningless. Then choice can be eliminated.
ReplyDeleteWhen it comes to both types, I'll go with my ancestors approach to things. Y'all are welcome to come over for some fried chicken and corn bread, but if'n you start tellin' us what to do, y'all better get your asses back down the road to the city.
Do you get it, Mikeb and Oregonian? Americans don't like to be controlled. You should write that up on a card and look at it regularly.
Now you speak for "Americans?"
DeleteI think that I have a good read on the American character. Look at our history. We're not a compliant bunch.
DeleteDo you think Americans do like to be controlled?!? If you say yes, than that may be the dumbest thing that I have ever read on this blog from you. A new personal best!
DeleteI didn't say that. Most people don't like to be controlled, yet most people in the US want stricter gun control laws.
DeleteMost people? Oh, please. If that were true, they'd vote for gun grabbing politicians, and the law would be changed. Fortunately, in most of America, the people have woken up.
DeleteGreg, you can't be that naive. In the US, unfortunately we don't have such a simple and straight-forward system. Special interests run the show. You know that.
DeleteI know that many politicians are beholden to special interests and that many people are swayed by them, but no special interest can force me to vote one way or another at the election. Besides, look at Gallup's recent poll. American gun attitudes are on my side, not yours.
DeleteGreg, only the fringiest minority of gun-rights extremists is on your side.
DeleteAverage citizens of the US consider you a nut.
Yes, “separation” is the key. You can “count” suicides all you want- the point is you should always count them separately. Look, there are four basic types of gun deaths: murder, suicide, accidents, and justifiable homicide. Each of the four are occur for very different reason, and each problem has very different solutions. That is what I am getting at.
ReplyDelete"abortion is a permanent solution to a temporary problem." Now how many of you agree with the quote?
ReplyDeletetemporary problem? Um you never stop being a parent. Might not be a good parent but that is your kid for life!
DeleteAs far as trying to make this an abortion debate..... it is a free country. Your sin isn't my sin and the religious right needs to quit trying to legislate away what they perceive as sin. Vice crimes are a great example. Thanks to the endless war on drugs we have overcrowded prisons and violent offenders being released so we can incarcerate non-violent offenders. Prohibition gave rise to organized crime yet we allow our government to repeat the same mistakes over and over.
I agree with everything you said, Scott, but to play Devil's advocate- adoption makes pregnancy a temporary problem. And that is the typical answer that comes from the pro-life side for people who are not ready to be parents.
DeleteUnfortunately, adoption isn't always such a simple thing. Many children don't get adopted; they just end up being bounced around in the foster care system until they're eighteen. Allowing gay couples to adopt is one solution to this, but good luck getting that passed in many states.
Delete