A Sane Discussion About Gun Violence

[rogue06]

Source: https://www.thetrace.org/2015/11/gun-suicides-mental-illness-statistics/

Suicide accounts for more than two-thirds of the 32,000 firearms deaths the United States averages every year. Or, to come at the issue a different way: Suicide is the second-leading cause of death for Americans aged 15 to 34, and more than 50 percent of cases involve guns. A big reason for the prevalence of firearms in suicides is the deadliness of guns themselves: When a firearm is used in a suicide attempt, there’s an 85 percent chance of it being successful. Whatever numbers you look at, they point to a significant public health problem.

© Copyright Original Source

I honestly don't understand why this is at all controversial on the gun rights side. There's this sort of...I don't know...bizarre meme, I suppose, that guns aren't any different than anything else for killing. It's a meme born out of a sort of desire to downplay their effectiveness. Guns are extremely good at what they do. They are so good at what they do that every military power in the world decided a loooong time ago to use them in place of things like knives, swords, axes, bows, and the like. They kill quickly and efficiently, and that's why they're generally considered more deadly than rope, poison, and even ladders!

The point is that when someone wants to commit suicide they will find a way whether or not firearms are available. Banning firearms does not appear to have any appreciable effect on this. So using this as an excuse to ban firearms is an invalid reason to do so.

[rogue06]

Wow! Thank God they don't have guns. I could only imagine how much greater the success rate of suicide would be there.

There would likely be no change

And keep in mind that the Asians living in the U.S. have access to firearms and yet they still prefer other methods

[Adrift]

The point is that when someone wants to commit suicide they will find a way whether or not firearms are available. Banning firearms does not appear to have any appreciable effect on this. So using this as an excuse to ban firearms is an invalid reason to do so.

Of course it has an appreciable effect on this. 85 percent effectiveness rate means that there's less opportunity to help, than those who survive the attempt.

[Adrift]

There would likely be no change

That's nonsense. Of course it would change. It's a lot harder to die from a hanging than from a gun shot.

And keep in mind that the Asians living in the U.S. have access to firearms and yet they still prefer other methods

Likely due the the fact that American Asians own less guns than other ethnicities in the US.

[rogue06]

Of course it has an appreciable effect on this. 85 percent effectiveness rate means that there's less opportunity to help those who survive the attempt.

While a shotgun blast to the head is the most "effective" method taking cyanide ranks right up there. And getting hit by a train and jumping from a high place are considered to be over 90% effective. Hanging is just under 90% effective.

[rogue06]

That's nonsense. Of course it would change. It's a lot harder to die from a hanging than from a gun shot.

Hanging is considered to be just under 90% effective in committing suicide. It is one of the reason it is the preferred method by many.

[Adrift]

While a shotgun blast to the head is the most "effective" method taking cyanide ranks right up there. And getting hit by a train and jumping from a high place are considered to be over 90% effective. Hanging is just under 90% effective.

As you can read above, most suicides in America happen in the home, and are done impulsively. I don't know about you, but I don't keep a bottle of cyanide in my cupboards. Getting hit by a train means that you have to leave the house, which means there's time to think the issue through. Jumping from a high place would require you to have a high place to jump from (not everyone lives in a multi-story building), and hanging also takes time. You have to have the rope, you have to tie it off so that it won't break, you have to make a noose, you have to make sure the rope is not too short or too long. And once you've jumped, how long will it take to suffocate? Throughout this entire process there is time for someone to come into the room to prevent the person from going through with the jump, and time to get them down in case they do go through with it. All this as opposed to a gun, which is often kept in a drawer or closet, that can be brought up to the head, and effective at the pull of a trigger.

Again, I just can't understand this downplay of guns. This argument that guns aren't anymore effective than anything else in the use of taking lives is a really really bad argument from the gun rights side. You're not going to get people to come to your way of thinking if that's the argument you want to go with. No one really accepts it.

[Adrift]

Hanging is considered to be just under 90% effective in committing suicide. It is one of the reason it is the preferred method by many.

This chart suggests that guns are, by far, more effective than hanging,

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/means-m...case-fatality/

"The bar graph below shows “case fatality” (the percent of people who die in a suicide attempt) for several methods of suicide. It is based on a study that used emergency department data and death certificate data from 8 U.S. states. Firearms have the highest case fatality, and drug/overdose ingestion and cutting have the lowest."



Here are more results from a paper on the subject,

"Firearms are the most lethal suicide method. Episodes involving firearms are 2.6 times (95% CI 2.1 to 3.1) more lethal than those involving suffocation—the second most lethal suicide method. Preventing access to firearms can reduce the proportion of fatal firearms related suicides by 32% among minors, and 6.5% among adults."

There's really no good argument that suicide by hanging is more efficient than suicide by gun. It just isn't true.

[Cow Poke]

While a shotgun blast to the head is the most "effective" method taking cyanide ranks right up there. And getting hit by a train and jumping from a high place are considered to be over 90% effective. Hanging is just under 90% effective.

So, when it's a suicide by cop, should we use that to take guns from cops, too?

[Adrift]

So, when it's a suicide by cop, should we use that to take guns from cops, too?

If you've read my cites in this thread on the subject, you know that the effectiveness of guns in suicide come by way of the fact that suicide attempts are committed impulsively in the home, often under the influence of alcohol. There's nothing particularly impulsive about suicide by cop. It requires the attempter to bring in a third party (which, in of itself takes time for them to respond) who can assess the situation, and then reason with the individual. I imagine that suicide by cop is far less effective than suicide by one's own hand on the trigger.

At any rate, successful suicide by cop is usually committed by those that the police have reason to believe are themselves holding a deadly weapon. It stands to reason that a gun ban would likely bring down the number of suicide by cop attempts.

[Mountain Man]

Source: https://www.thetrace.org/2015/11/gun-suicides-mental-illness-statistics/

Suicide accounts for more than two-thirds of the 32,000 firearms deaths the United States averages every year. Or, to come at the issue a different way: Suicide is the second-leading cause of death for Americans aged 15 to 34, and more than 50 percent of cases involve guns. A big reason for the prevalence of firearms in suicides is the deadliness of guns themselves: When a firearm is used in a suicide attempt, there’s an 85 percent chance of it being successful. Whatever numbers you look at, they point to a significant public health problem.

© Copyright Original Source

I honestly don't understand why this is at all controversial on the gun rights side. There's this sort of...I don't know...bizarre meme, I suppose, that guns aren't any different than anything else for killing. It's a meme born out of a sort of desire to downplay their effectiveness. Guns are extremely good at what they do. They are so good at what they do that every military power in the world decided a loooong time ago to use them in place of things like knives, swords, axes, bows, and the like. They kill quickly and efficiently, and that's why they're generally considered more deadly than rope, poison, and even ladders!

Yes, guns are effective at killing. Nobody is disputing. Except that anti-Constitutionalists take this fact and disingenuously argue as if guns are the ONLY effective method of killing. In this case, the problem is not that people are committing suicide with guns but that people are committing suicide, period.

[Cow Poke]

If you've read my cites in this thread on the subject, you know that the effectiveness of guns in suicide come by way of the fact that suicide attempts are committed impulsively in the home, often under the influence of alcohol. There's nothing particularly impulsive about suicide by cop. It requires the attempter to bring in a third party (which, in of itself takes time for them to respond) who can assess the situation, and then reason with the individual. I imagine that suicide by cop is far less effective than suicide by one's own hand on the trigger.

At any rate, successful suicide by cop is usually committed by those that the police have reason to believe are themselves holding a deadly weapon. It stands to reason that a gun ban would likely bring down the number of suicide by cop attempts.

So, lemme get this straight... you can "stand to reason", but I have to have cites.

On a more serious note, I'm astounded by the frequency with which one of the "side effects" of a drug advertised on TV is "thoughts of suicide".

[Adrift]

Yes, guns are effective at killing. Nobody is disputing.

I don't know. Seems like a lot of people like to dispute that fact.

Except that anti-Constitutionalists take this fact and disingenuously argue as if guns are the ONLY effective method of killing.

Who? I'd love to see the names of those persons who have argued that guns are the ONLY effective method of killing.

In this case, the problem is not that people are committing suicide with guns but that people are committing suicide, period.

Just as in the gun debate at large, the answer is a multi-pronged response. We should be looking at both the cause and effect. I'm not suggesting we only take away guns. I'm suggesting we both take away guns and deal with the issues that cause people to use them to harm self and others.

[Adrift]

So, lemme get this straight... you can "stand to reason", but I have to have cites.

Um...what?

On a more serious note, I'm astounded by the frequency with which one of the "side effects" of a drug advertised on TV is "thoughts of suicide".

I'd be fine with banning drug commercials too.

[Cow Poke]

I don't know. Seems like a lot of people like to dispute that fact.

Who? I'd love to see the names of those persons who have disputed that guns are effective at killing.