Does Gun Ownership Promote Suicide?

Noting that two-thirds of gun deaths in the United States are suicides, New York Times reporter Sabrina Tavernise ponders the relationship between having access to a firearm and killing yourself. Within the United States, she notes, higher rates of gun ownership are associated with higher rates of suicide. But that relationship may not be causal:

Some dispute the link, saying that it does not prove cause and effect, and that other factors, like alcoholism and drug abuse, may be driving the association. Gary Kleck, a professor of criminology at Florida State University in Tallahassee, contends that gun owners may have qualities that make them more susceptible to suicide. They may be more likely to see the world as a hostile place, or to blame themselves when things go wrong, a dark side of self-reliance.

A 2002 analysis by Wharton economist Mark Duggan found that gun availability may help explain the correlation between firearm ownership and suicide, but it is not the only factor:

Taken together, the results presented in this paper suggest that much of the positive relationship between firearms ownership and suicide is driven by selection—individuals with above average suicidal tendencies are more likely to own a gun and to live in areas with relatively many gun owners. But because female suicide rates are less responsive to the rate of gun ownership than are male suicide rates [which is significant because women are substantially less likely to kill themselves with guns], it does appear that instrumentality effects also play some role. And finally, while suicide rates have been declining in the U.S. in recent years, the reduction in the fraction of households who own a gun does not appear to be the force that is driving this decline.

In a 2007 review of international evidence published by the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, criminologists Don Kates and Gary Mauser concluded that "there is simply no relationship evident between the extent of suicide and the extent of gun ownership." Here are some examples they offer to illustrate that point:

Sweden, with over twice as much gun ownership as neighboring Germany and a third more gun suicide, nevertheless has the lower overall suicide rate. Greece has nearly three times more gun ownership than the Czech Republic and somewhat more gun suicide, yet the overall Czech suicide rate is over 175% higher than the Greek rate. Spain has over 12 times more gun ownership than Poland, yet the latter's overall suicide rate is more than double the former’s. Tragically, Finland has over 14 times more gun ownership than neighboring Estonia, and a great deal more gun‐related suicide. Estonia, however, turns out to have a much higher suicide rate than Finland overall.

Another frequently cited example: Japan, with a gun ownership rate of 0.6 per 100 people, compared to 88.8 in the United States, has a suicide rate nearly twice as high as high. China and South Korea likewise have much lower rates of civilian gun ownership but much higher rates of suicide. The relationship between gun ownership and suicide clearly is neither consistent nor straightforward. Yet here is how a public health expert consulted by the Times sums up the evidence:

"The literature suggests that having a gun in your home to protect your family is like bringing a time bomb into your house," said Dr. Mark Rosenberg, an epidemiologist who helped establish the C.D.C.’s National Center for Injury Prevention and Control. "Instead of protecting you, it's more likely to blow up."

Rosenberg not only assumes a cause-and-effect relationship between gun ownership and suicide; he completely discounts any countervailing self-defense benefit. When public health specialists do consider self-defense, they count only those cases where the attacker is shot. That method, as Kleck, Kates, and other criminologists have been pointing out for decades, grossly underestimates defensive gun uses, which typically involve brandishing a weapon to ward off an assailant. Comparing the likelihood that a gun owner will kill himself to the likelihood that he will kill an aggressor therefore tells us nothing about the merits of gun ownership. That sort of slippery, biased analysis exemplifies what is wrong with the pseudo-medical gun research that President Obama portrays as objective, scientific, and self-evidently worthy of taxpayer funding. Here is how Rosenberg summed up his approach to gun research in a 1994 interview with Washington Post columnist William Raspberry:

We need to revolutionize the way we look at guns, like what we did with cigarettes. It used to be that smoking was a glamour symbol—cool, sexy, macho. Now it is dirty, deadly—and banned.

Yet Obama insists that "public health research on gun violence is not advocacy."

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • SugarFree||

    A little gun control derp for you...

    Only the ADA keeps Amanda Marcotte employed at this point.

  • Way Of The Crane||

    Oh the irony of one of Reeva Steekamp's last tweets.

    Reeva Steenkamp @reevasteenkamp

    What do you have up your sleeve for your love tomorrow??? #getexcited #ValentinesDay

  • ||

    Yeah, this just flat out sucks. Feel bad for her family.

    But did you notice that not once did Marcotte give Pistorius the courtesy of reporting him as an alleged murderer? She just called him a murderer. I mean isn't that basic journalism that people accused of crimes are given the benefit of the doubt when accused of a crime?

  • SugarFree||

    Marcotte isn't a journalist, she's an outraged rash demanding to be ignored.

  • Way Of The Crane||

    I mean isn't that basic journalism that people accused of crimes are given the benefit of the doubt when accused of a crime?

    You're giving Marcotte the benefit of the doubt by associating what she does with journalism.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    As Lucy Berrington for Women's eNews points out, the ease with which abusive men can get their hands on a gun leads to dramatically more domestic homicides than we would otherwise have.

    Amanda Marcotte is clearly a misogynist. She believes that only abusive, murderous penis-wielders buy weapons for the purpose of propigating the WAR ON WIMMINZ!!

  • Zeb||

    The comments are surprisingly un-stupid.

  • SugarFree||

    Marcotte has a huge legion of anti-fans. Everything she writes is like watching a monkey on LSD try to fuck a football.

  • Brett L||

    But less entertaining.

  • ||

    Actually that sounds more scary than entertaining.

  • SugarFree||

    Properly done, you are behind 1/2" ballistic glass. Never go to a monkey sex show that isn't run on MFAA rules.

  • gaoxiaen||

    Maybe because you are football-shaped?

  • gaoxiaen||

    Maybe because you are football-shaped?

  • ||

    RANGER1965
    it's much worse than you think. Look at the symbol of the NRA carefully. You can just make out the words in the mechanism of the crossed muskets. I. L. L. U. M. I. N. A.T. I
    Tradecraft likes this.
    2 Minutes Ago from slate.com

    I like this one.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    I enjoyed Ranger1965's comments.

    This was not just an accident. This was not just a murder.

    This was a GUNNNNNN CRIiiiiiME!

    Say it slowly. Let the words roll across your mouth and tongue...GUNNNNNNNN CRIIIIIIIIME.

    Feel the pain of it. The emotion of it.

    Remember people don't kill people. GUNNNNNNs do.

    So if that's one of you, bravo.

  • wareagle||

    the stupid almost leaked through my computer screen. Because without a gun, Oscar would have never (allegedly) considered violence.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    Every single one of Ranger1965's comments was gold.

    RANGER1965
    Exactly, fsilber. Some experts say that the AR-15 is so powerful that it not only damages the target's body, but the victim's immortal soul!

  • johnl||

    Wow. An amputee with rage problems. How could that be possible? Quick, change the gun laws, if for no other reason, to cheer up amputees.

  • sloopyinca||

    Jesus, John. Our gun rights have been crippled by legislation. Now you want to take the legs out from under the Second Amendment altogether?

  • ||

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    People should have as much right to end their lives, with dignity, at a time of their choosing, as they have to self-defense.

  • SugarFree||

    Yup. The argument about guns and suicide is as derpish as the discussions on synthetic marijuana.

  • ||

    Maybe...until you're not talking about adults.

  • SugarFree||

    I guess a teenager killing themselves is destroy their parent's private property.

  • ||

    I'm not sure what to make of that comment.

  • SugarFree||

    Do non-adults own themselves? If they do, they have a right to kill themselves; if they don't, then they are depriving their owners of property.

  • ||

    They do not own themselves. They are subservient to their parental overlords. If you prefer to refer to this relationship as property, then so be it.

  • SugarFree||

    Massa says killing yourself is just like stealin' money right outta his pocket.

  • ||

    I wasn't going to play this card, but now you're pissin' me off. Maybe you wouldn't be so cavalier if you had a 14 year old family member blow their brains out. I have.

  • SugarFree||

    I wasn't going to play this card

    Which is totally why you brought up suicide by minors in a thread that had nothing to do with it.

  • ||

    argument about guns and suicide is as derpish

    You made the blanket statement. I was refining and then you derped.

  • SugarFree||

    Uh huh. Sure.

  • SugarFree||

    Please outline which rights I have to give up in a futile attempt to keep minors from killing themselves.

  • ||

    Now, what if a teenager circumcises himself?

  • SugarFree||

    Who really owns that penis?

  • ||

    Now, what if a teenager circumcises himself?

    He's going to be in a lot of PX and risks infection (and will almost 100% develop), possibly costing himself, but most likely his parents or legal guardians (as well as the insurance co.) a lot of money.

  • sloopyinca||

    Who the fuck cares! What I want to know is how the fuck did you claim the "poet laureate" moniker? Everybody and their brother knows Lucy conferred that distinction upon yours truly last year.

    Jesus titty-fucking Christ! First you name my kid, now you're stealing my (unofficial-official) title. What's next? You gonna come over and give Banjos the old in-out?

  • ||

    What I want to know is how the fuck did you claim the "poet laureate" moniker?

    She typed it, imbecile. And with registration, nicole can defend her claim as, "dirty poet laureate". May I also remind you nicole grammatically femsplained the fuck out of both you and me?

    Also, ARTISINAL MAYO, Slaver!

  • sloopyinca||

    I recant my statement made some moments ago.

    /said in British PM voice

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    You gonna come over and give Banjos the old in-out?

    Well, if you're offering...

  • sloopyinca||

    I don't like the direction this subthread is going. We can all end it now or I can post another story about a cop getting away with beating an infant to death.

    It's your choice.

  • ||

    Don't be mad, bro, I am only the dirty poet laureate. And the only thing I want from Banjos is CUTE BABEH PICTURES!

  • sloopyinca||

    She's gonna send you some today. I just told her if she didn't that I'd give Warty our home address and my out of town work schedule.

  • ||

    Which also reminds me, sloopster. It occurred to me that I am the reason you and Banjos got together, as she declared a contest when we goobers were flirting with her (that's when she revealed she was short and of Mediterranean lineage), and life took me offboard and you, obviously won, and I can take total credit for being a conduit here.-)))

    So, it's just as well you helped talk me into going to Odessa for Xmas with Dr. PG, and you can take credit for that.

    I also ask that you keep my updated with Baby Reason and this doc she has, please.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    In case you missed it, the good Doctor is also claiming a belated right of prima nocta.

    Just thought I'd be helpful and point that out.

  • ||

    In case you missed it, the good Doctor is also claiming a belated right of prima nocta.

    I'm spoken for, HM.-) And she'll be here a few minutes so I can give her her V-Day goodies! YAY!

    Just thought I'd be helpful and point that out.

    You have an...unusual...definition of helpful, HM.-)))

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    I'm an unusual guy.

  • sloopyinca||

    OK, then we're (happily) even.

    As soon as we get the surgeon we're meeting's name, I'll let you know. As for Baby Reason, she's doing so well. The omph is now totally skin. I'll e-mail you some pics next time we change her. I'd like you to take a look.

    BTW, when I called her pediatrician the other day because the last bit of "shell" came off and the top of the omph was a bit "gummy" because the skin was still healing a bit, he told us her recovery is unlike anything he's ever seen IRT to skin regeneration and shrinkage of the hernia.

  • ||

    Most excellent. I don't need a name, just as long as you fired the other one.

    The pics and such I (and Dr. PG) would be honoured to assess. The "gummy" is called "ulceration" and that's totally normal. YAY!

    Yes, she is a miracle, isn't she? Well done!

  • SugarFree||

    Sounds like a lot of delicious baby skin is just being thrown away. Don't you have goats?

  • ||

    Don't you have goats?

    Piglets would gobble up that stuff but quick! Might make the meat more yummy too.

  • sloopyinca||

    Speaking of piglets! Our sow just had her first litter. Only 4 of the tasty-looking little buggers but that's a start.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Who knocked Lindy West up?

    Seriously.

  • ||

  • Sudden||

    It was a high school report on right on die legislation that really led me full course down the libertarian rabbit hole (although, I had already identified with the movement from watching Harry Browne in the CSPAN third party debates in '96).

  • Hugh Akston||

    You had a sad childhood Sudden. No wonder you became a lawyer.

  • Paul.||

    Real estate... REAL ESTATE!

  • Restoras||

    Not plastics?

  • Sudden||

    Hugh is onto me. By stating that my RE thing is a lie to cover up my lawyering, he is suggesting that much like everyone suspects Warty, Sugarfree, and Epi to all be the same person, I am also ProL and John (I only do my John when I'm drunk enough to spell incorrectly and wanna kill furrinerz).

  • mr simple||

    But if you take your own life you won't be able to travel across the River of Blood and enter Sto'Vo'kor.

  • Hugh Akston||

    That's what the Hegh'bat is for.

  • Ted S.||

    Our bodies, our choices.

  • $park¥||

    All this talk of gun control makes me want to shoot myself.

  • Hugh Akston||

    Does Gun Ownership Promote Suicide?

    And more importantly, so what if it does?

  • Virginian||

    They're making this push because if you count suicides, then there are 30,000 gun deaths a year. If you only count homicides, it's like 12,000. Kind of like how they count 17 (or even older) aged gang members as "children" when they say how many children were killed by guns.

  • Sudden||

    A lot of us liberty minded folks make the same disingenuous claims when discussing drones. The figure of ~200 children killed in drone strikes includes among it a not insignificant number of adolescents in the 15-18 range that, while they may technically be children by Western standards, might not necessarily be innocent non-combatants in the conflict.

    That doesn't take away from the arguments against drone strikes, it just hints at the darkside and outright obfuscations of emotion appeals.

  • Hugh Akston||

    There is no rational argument that murdering people from the sky is wrong.

  • Paul.||

    You had to bring God into it, didn't you?

  • gaoxiaen||

    Seems like he was a little angry with Russia the other day.

  • Virginian||

    It's not the same though.

    A 16 year old gang member who engages in gun fights is not on the same moral level as a 16 year old Pakistani who gets blown up while he's asleep.

    I mean, I see a slight distinction between living a lifestyle that includes drive by shootings and turf wars versus "I lived next door to a guy who was on the disposition matrix."

  • Sudden||

    I don't disagree with that. However, some of the adolescents that were killed in drone strikes might have been the actual targets. A sixteen year old here might be a nondescript high school student, while in Pakistan, he might be in training with radicals. Counting him as a civilian casualty simply on account of his youth would therefore be in error. Now, that doesn't mean that every 16 year old that is cited as a innocent child victim of the drone war is actually a jihadist, but some might be.

    That doesn't in my mind condone the ongoing drone wars across the region, but I'm just trying to add some perspective that some of the "kids" killed in the drone war might have been killed based on targeted strikes directed at them or their activities, rather than just being collateral damage as the implication is made.

  • Killazontherun||

    The undercount is ridiculously low. One figure put out by the murderphiles was 14 for one year. I believe it was from the Atlantic that I read a take down where the number reported for a single incident in the local media in Pakistan was twice that with well documented interviews from the survivors. One of those strikes was conducted against a jirga that had the official sanction of the Pakistani government backing it. It was undercounted by our officials as well as barely reported in our media.

  • ||

    And more importantly, so what if it does?

    Gun manufacturers may not like how the customers use their product, and it's not the intended use and makes for bad publicity.

    Which gives ammo (hurr!) for the gun grabbers and HazelMeade's ridiculous "gun insurance" scheme.

  • Killazontherun||

    Rube Goldberg schemes for social organization tends to be one of the charges critics of libertarians throw at us. Hazel often doesn't help us in that department.

  • Night Elf Mohawk||

    How many guns were owned specifically for suicide as opposed just to being handy implements?

    Plus, my body, my choice.

  • Way Of The Crane||

    Another frequently cited example: Japan, with a gun ownership rate of 0.6 per 100 people, compared to 88.8 in the United States, has a suicide rate nearly twice as high as high. China and South Korea likewise have much lower rates of civilian gun ownership but much higher rates of suicide.

    Obviously there need to be laws against suicide if we hope to one day stop this epidemic. I'm sure the death penalty for such crimes would serve as an excellent deterrent.

  • Bardas Phocas||

    We're falling behind the orientals in everything.

  • Way Of The Crane||

    I bet the Asians even manage to kill themselves faster and more efficiently that Americans.

  • Brandon||

    Japan has an entire forest dedicated to suicide. Obviously forests should be outlawed.

  • SugarFree||

    No one needs more than 10 trees.

  • Almanian!||

    OMG! ASSAULT FORESTS!

  • Almanian!||

    ...and then I thought, "Assault Forest? STEVE SMITH LIVE IN ASSAULT FOREST!"

    heh heh

  • SugarFree||

    STEVE SMITH NO MIND YOU BRING GUN! STEVE SMITH SUPPORT YOUR RIGHT TO BE RAPED BY OWN GUN!

  • LTC(ret) John||

    +12 gauge

  • TANSTaaFL||

    +1001

  • ||

    I did the finger gun, shoot-me-in-the-head motion in front of a class of Korean middle schoolers and the room went dead silent while they stared wide-eyed and slack-jawed at me. They take their suicide references REALLY seriously. Also everyone has a friend who has jumped in front of a subway car in South Korea.

  • Brandon||

    I'm having trouble thinking of a scenario where you would do that in front of middle schoolers anyway...

  • ||

    I dunno, pointing a finger at one's temple and cocking the thumb is a common way to silently register frustration. Middle schoolers are frustration given human form. I wouldn't normally have done it but I slipped out of habit and the kids were horrified.

    To be fair, the American middle schoolers I worked with did that sort of thing all the time. Of course American middle schoolers are hooligans one and all.

  • Paul.||

    I'm having trouble thinking of why jesse.in.mb was allowed to be around middle schoolers.

  • sloopyinca||

    I'm guessing Catholic School?

  • ||

    Pft, I did no lasting damage. Although I'm pretty sure one of the Korean kindergartner's parents punished him for being left handed, which he thought was ok because I'm left handed.

    I was a long term sub here (at an evangelical school no less!) and taught English for a year in Korea.

  • Ice Nine||

    I'm down with the Japs; seppuku is so much cooler than a shotgun in the mouth.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    The Japanese have a cultural excuse. They are a society in which murder shames a person's entire family, but suicide has been romanticized as an honorable way of dealing shame or adversity.

  • Proprietist||

    Japan's low violent crime rate is also a function of their vast grey market where cops generally leave the yakuza alone to operate their gambling, prostitution and money laundering schemes in peace. Yakuza, in return, avoid victimizing civilians as not only would it be severely dishonorable, but would hurt their obscenely profitable operations. They also act as enforcers against other violent criminals and gangs who might inadvertantly result in police attention on them.

    The intricacies of Japanese cultural values are very interesting but also make it very difficult to compare them statistically at face value to the United States or other countries.

  • R C Dean||

    Obviously there need to be laws against suicide if we hope to one day stop this epidemic.

    True fact: Its not actually illegal to commit suicide.*

    Attempted suicide, though, is a crime. I believe its the only "attempt" crime where what is attempted is not itself a crime.

    *In most states, there may be exceptions.

  • Paul.||

    Then what's needed here is suicide equality.

  • Sam Grove||

    Another frequently cited example: Japan, with a gun ownership rate of 0.6 per 100 people, compared to 88.8 in the United States, has a suicide rate nearly twice as high as high.

    Edit!

  • ||

    and japanese americans ALSO have a high suicide rate, but also tend to use guns a lot in the US, since they are available.

    guns don't cause suicide, but they are an easy means to commit it, so they will be used if available.

  • Proprietist||

    I don't know if Japan is a legitimate comparison. There is a long history in Japan of suicide being a humble and honorable act, something cultural and redeemed by Shinto views on the afterlife. Also, in Japan, seeking mental health resources is considered shameful for the sufferer and the family.

  • Jordan||

    Then there are 33 other countries still ahead of the U.S.

  • Proprietist||

    All of which have different cultures, economic and political situations, etc. Many have far less treatment options, support groups, suicide hotlines, etc.

    Again, guns don't cause people to commit suicide. They just increase the success rate for those who truly want to do so. This success rate does indicate a positive correlation between rate of gun ownership and overall suicide rates within the US states.

  • Paul.||

    If you're going to compare the rates of suicide with the rates of gun ownership, unless you're going county by county, you're going to have to comare to other countries.

    Yes, other countries have different cultures.

    That's irrelevant. The OP suggested a correlation between gun ownership and suicide. It's not true on its face.

  • Proprietist||

    There's a positive correlation within the boundaries of the United States, where people ostensibly have comparable values and access to mental health resources. Comparing the US suicide rate per capita to Cuba or Japan does not really tell us much of anything except that such cultures are more prone to suicide than we are.

    Guns don't inherently cause more people to attempt suicide (where the OP was wrong), they just improve the chances for someone who wants to finish the job, which leads to higher suicide rates. Within the US, increased firearm access and availability correlates with more people successfully committing suicide. You'd have to run regional comparisons based on variable gun ownership rates within each individual country listed to disprove the correlation.

  • sarcasmic||

    Aw, come on! Guns are magic! All sensible people know this! Guns force people to do things! Only people who have been specially trained by the government are able to resist the spell! This is why only the government should have guns! Duh!

  • $park¥||

    They certainly are prone to "go off" and "discharge." They'll shoot ya just as soon as look at ya.

  • sarcasmic||

    No, no, no! They have the power of enticement! That's why people kill themselves with guns! The gun calls to them "Use me! Use me!" and these poor people are unable to resist because they haven't had government training! Same with the mass shootings! It's the gun's fault! Guns make people do things! Really!

  • Proprietist||

    This is probably the only valid point that the gun banners make - easier access to legal guns means a more effective means of killing oneself. Unlike with violent crime rates, there is definitely a positive correlation between suicide rates and gun ownership. That said, individuals should have the right to commit suicide, and euthanasia should be legalized to make it as painless as possible.

  • John||

    If that is true, how high would the suicide rates be if Japan had widespread gun ownership? A hundred percent?

  • Proprietist||

    Again, Japan has a long cultural history of finding honor in suicide well before firearms were ever invented. Also, seeking mental health resources is shameful, and in death Japanese believe all the sins of life are forgiven and they will be honored.

    I'm not saying guns cause people to commit suicide. I'm saying they improve the effectiveness of people who want to do so.

  • sarcasmic||

    Cultural differences cannot be quantified and measured with statistics, so they are ignored! Besides, it's racist to point out that there are differences between cultures! Why are you racist?

  • Proprietist||

    I know you're being snarky, but just clarifying that I don't believe guns tempt anyone into committing suicide. If anything, just the opposite - those who kill themselves with guns are obviously dead serious about doing so, while using many other, less successful methods are more often cries for help with a gamble that you'll die. The finality of guns as well as the mess they leave behind is probably a deterrent in many, many cases.

    That said, those who are serious can be much more effective at doing so with a gun nearby. In Japan, one of the most common methods is jumping in front of a train, which is also a pretty damn serious method. If you're serious, you'll find a way.

  • BakedPenguin||

    Yeah, this. Also, a lot of people who fail at suicide are going to lead fucked up lives due to injuring themselves, but in the binary calculation of these people, someone with brain damage from a botched hanging is 100% better than someone who was successful.

  • ||

    I've seen a patient or two that would definitely disagree with that binary calculation.

    The worst one I saw, and will never forget, is the fella with the poor aim (he tried to blow his head of with a 12 gauge long barrel by pushing the trigger with his toe), slipped, and ended up blowing off most of his face and a small part of his frontal bone and lobe, missing critical brain stem.

  • Way Of The Crane||

    If that is true, how high would the suicide rates be if Japan had widespread gun ownership? A hundred percent?M

    Naw... probably just 99.9% kind of like their conviction rate.

  • Virginian||

    Unlike with violent crime rates, there is definitely a positive correlation between suicide rates and gun ownership

    I'd really like to see some numbers on that. The USA has more guns then anyone, and comes in at 34. The 33 ahead of us include countries like Cuba, China, Japan, Russia, South Africa, Belgium, and South Korea, none of which have a laissez faire attitude towards guns.

  • Proprietist||

    From the article above:
    http://www.nytimes.com/interac.....icide.html

    I don't like to compare across cultures with vastly different economic and political situations and religious and cultural views on suicide and mental health issues. One could argue that blue states and red states are different, but I think Americans in general are pretty open about mental health issues and can find the resources if they want it.

  • R C Dean||

    Americans in general are pretty open about mental health issues and can find the resources if they want it.

    Trust me, this is wrong on both counts.

  • Proprietist||

    Compared to the impoverished third world countries listed above and East Asian cultures that look down on mental health/psychiatric treatment, America is quite open about mental health issues and can get treatment, anti-depressants, support groups, suicide hotlines, advice columnists, infinite beaucoups of self-help guides, chatrooms, etc. Many countries stick the suicide and crazies in the madhouse and wash their hands of them.

  • R C Dean||

    Many countries stick the suicide and crazies in the madhouse and wash their hands of them.

    For the hardcore, that's pretty much what we do.

    Until the mental hospitals fill up. Which they pretty much have. Which is why I say she's wrong on the second count.

  • gaoxiaen||

    And in many countries, anti-depressants are OTC.

  • SIV||

    That said, individuals should have the right to commit suicide, and euthanasia should be legalized to make it as painless as possible.

    Euthanasia is not suicide

  • sarcasmic||

    Assisted suicide is still suicide.

  • Zeb||

    It is not the same thing as suicide. But it can be suicide.

  • R C Dean||

    Assisted suicide is a subcategory of euthanasia, depending on whether the subject wants to be dead.

  • ||

    Euthanasia is not suicide.

    'Fraid not, SIV. I knock up someone with a lethal cocktail of something with the express intention of ending their life, either with or without their consent, to prison I go.

    One ending his or her life autonomously is suicide.

    Me injecting something into them with their consent to end their life is assisted suicide (and statutorily, murder).

    Me injecting something into them without their consent is murder.

    What Dr. Jack Kevorkian did was design a device that was totally under the control of the patient, and they decided whether or not to push the lever, therefore assisted with setting up the appliance and placing the IV, therefore assisted. It's the involving another person bit that people seem to overlook.

    Does this clear this up now?

  • SIV||

    I was more concise.

  • ||

    And wrong.

  • Hugh Akston||

    If there is a correlation I would say it's a good thing. Using a gun increases the chances of success and decreases the pain and time involved with taking your own life. If you do it right, that is.

  • Vapourwear||

    To my knowledge, there is a correlation between gun ownership and suicide with guns.

    But that's like saying rates of death by car accidents go up with rates of automobile ownership.

  • Proprietist||

    No, there is a correlation between gun ownership and overall suicide rate. There is NOT a clear correlation between gun ownership and overall violent crime rate.

  • Jordan||

    Unlike with violent crime rates, there is definitely a positive correlation between suicide rates and gun ownership.

    No there's not.

  • Proprietist||

    Again, have to clarify, that applies to a society with similar views on suicide, mental health issues and death but differing rates of gun ownership.

    Within the US, the data certainly indicates a correlation.

  • Calidissident||

    Are there not cultural differences within the US? Did you even read the article?

  • Anonymous Coward||

    Rope is cheaper than a gun and just as effective.

  • Brandon||

    If you're killing yourself, are you really worried about the cost?

  • Anonymous Coward||

    Some might. Especially if you're one of these "cry for help" suicide-types, instead of "stop the world, I want to get off."

    Suicide can get expensive if you make a habit of it.

  • Proprietist||

    Probably not quite as effective or painless, to be honest.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    I argue it's as effective. If you don't break your neck, the asphyxiation will off you in about 30 seconds or less. As to painless...I have to plead ignorance as I have no basis for comparison when it comes to eating a bullet or being hanged.

  • gaoxiaen||

    I guess you don't consider autoerotic asphyxiation. Suicide might be fun if your not too depressed to get it up.

  • Paul.||

    This is probably the only valid point that the gun banners make - easier access to legal guns means a more effective means of killing oneself.

    Except women almost universally avoid the gun in suicide... now you've got another complicating factor.

    Let's put it this way, yes, there's a correlation between the number of bullets fired in a given demographic and gun ownership.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    I thought it was only me who hears his Glock whisper to him at night how comforting that cool plastic would feel against his temple.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Tuesday at bar trivia I was the only person to get a question where the answer was Glock. Take that, gun grabbing Massholes! I just won a $20 gift card because of guns!

  • Virginian||

    I'll take "Stupid Sound Effects in Movies" for 500 Alex.

    Here's the clue: This brand of firearm is constantly shown in films with the audible click of a thumb safety being flipped or a hammer being cocked, despite the fact that the weapon has neither.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    I usually secretly make the noise with my mouth just because everyone expects it.

  • Brett L||

    Conversation from my first time handling a Mosin-Nagant:
    Me: "Does this thing have a safety?"
    Owner: "Don't point it at anything you don't want holes through."
    Me: "Roger that. Just checkin'."

  • R C Dean||

    Me: "Does this thing have a safety?"

    "Yeah. You."

  • Paul.||

    I have to get me one of those.

    My understanding is it fires the 7.62 54 which is an imported round? From Russia? Meaning that it's got the old-school sulpher content in the power, meaning you gotta clean it early and often, like in the car on the way home?

  • Paul.||

  • Sheriff of Fistingham||

    "My understanding is it fires the 7.62 54 which is an imported round? From Russia? Meaning that it's got the old-school sulpher sulfur content in the power, meaning you gotta clean it early and often, like in the car on the way home?"

    Perchlorates +/- mercury compounds in the primers of older surplus ammo cause rusty bores, clean it same day with Hoppes 9, or Windex _ other powder solvent = just fine.

    "Hmm...(Herter's 7.62x54R Ammunition)"

    Stick with Russian/Warsaw pact produced ammo for best results
    U.S. produced ammo = .308 bullet X(
    Russian/Warsaw pact = .311-.312 bullet :)

    "Auric Demonocles|2.14.13 @ 3:29PM|#


    He didn't answer your question."

    Pull cocking piece on bolt back + twist to left, if I remember correctly

    /This has been a public service announcement from The Sherriff of Fistingham™

  • Brett L||

    Eh. I'm pretty sure you could bury it in a field for 10 years, run some water through it, and fire away. It's not quite the AK-47, but it was still designed for illiterate Russian peasants to slog through Eastern Europe or Western Asia with.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    He didn't answer your question.

  • Zeb||

    You're holding the wrong end.

  • Sam Grove||

    OT: Kock Brothers confirmed behind Astro-turfed Tea Party.
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....63125.html

  • ||

    derp

  • CE||

    Because millions of people would never spontaneously get upset with the government bailing out reckless banks to the tune of 800 billion taxpayer dollars, and reckless politicians then setting up the new budget equation:

    Old Annual Budget + One Time Stimulus = New Annual Budget

  • ||

    They're really invested in this narrative where everyone who doesn't like the government is being duped by corporations. It's vaguely sinister.

  • Brandon||

    Vaguely?

  • ||

    You're vaguely sinister.

  • LTC(ret) John||

    You are sinisterly vague...

  • sarcasmic||

    Why do you lick the rich corporate boots that are holding you down?!? Don't you realize that profit is theft? It is theft from the worker who produces more than they earn, and theft from the customer who pays more than the seller paid! It's theft I tell you! Theft! That's why everything should be done by government! Government doesn't waste resources on profits for the rich!

  • R C Dean||

    Why do you lick the rich corporate government boots that are holding you down?!? Don't you realize that profit taxation is theft? It is theft from the worker who produces more than they earn pays income tax, and theft from the customer who pays more than the seller paid sales tax! It's theft I tell you! Theft! That's why everything should be done by government is based on theft!

    Yet, oddly, one rant is considered lunatic, and the other respectable.

  • brlfq||

    Hilarious. Next they'll be saying that the Koch Bros. are behind the stunning success of the Libertarian party.

  • ||

    Even if it were true, the fact that the Kochs have been allegedly planing this for DECADES impresses me to the point where they would be more competent overlords than the scum we have in government right now.

    And I also love how liberals swoon over the sacred truth of a study conducted by the anti-tobacco lobby. The science of history is settled!

  • John||

    I love how they threw the tobacco industry in there. You know the tobacco industry. That industry that got in bed with government and entered into a consent degree that insulated them from ever having any competition.

    And get this

    The study, funded by the National Cancer Institute of the National Institute of Health, traces the roots of the Tea Party's anti-tax movement back to the early 1980s when tobacco companies began to invest in third party groups to fight excise taxes on cigarettes, as well as health studies finding a link between cancer and secondhand cigarette smoke.

    WTF is the National Cancer Institute funding anything other than scientific research on the treatment of cancer? It further proves my point that Leftists corrupt and destroy any organization they become involved in. Hiring a liberal is like letting a virus into your body.

  • Ron||

    "traces the roots of the Tea Party's anti-tax movement back to the early 1980s"

    How is that possible when MSNBC keeps saying the tea party just popped up because they hate the Black man in office

  • John||

    So when the Kochs fund political action against taxes, that is sinister astro turfing. But when liberal groups like the Sierra Club and the Annenberg Foundation spend decades doing nothing but promoting liberal causes, that is just public service.

    These people are so fucking stupid it is frightening.

  • ||

    I once stumped a guy who gets all his information from Maddow by asking him why George Soros is okay but the Kochs are evil. Poor 'lil' feller.

  • sarcasmic||

    They're not stupid. They're dishonest.

  • John||

    They are totalitarian. They don't just want to control the government. They want to control people's thoughts. They can't stand the idea that someone out there is thinking and doing things they disagree with.

  • sarcasmic||

    Well, duh. But they'll never admit it because that would be honest.

  • Brandon||

    They're both.

  • Zeb||

    I tend to think it is a mixture of the two, with significant overlap.

  • sarcasmic||

    I don't think it's as much stupidity as allowing their emotions to control them. They may be quite smart, but instead of starting with premises and arriving at conclusions, they start with an emotional reaction and work backwards.
    That's one reason why they are so hostile to libertarians. They view libertarians are cold and rational creature, incapable of any feelings or empathy. When in fact we are human beings and they are just animals that would be killed by the gom jabbar.

  • Zeb||

    In all seriousness, I think that this is really it. It is... well, stupid to assume that people who disagree with you or make arguments that appear ridiculous are stupid. No one is really as rational as they like to believe (even libertarians and probably even me). People like to believe arguments that support what they feel emotionally.

    I'd say willful self delusion is more at play than ordinary stupidity. There are smart people and stupid people that believe all sorts of things.

  • John||

    I know plenty of liberals who are very knowledgeable and intelligent in fields not related to politics.

    Smart people sometimes believe insane things. A lot of very smart people were believing Nazis and Communists.

  • ||

    Liberals love to use the "Ed Witten is a liberal Democrat, so liberalism must be the right answer!" argument. Ed Witten probably gets a good chunk of his living from the taxpayer teat, so it's only logical for him to go with the politics that is most likely to ensure his continued employment.

  • John||

    Liberals love to use the "Ed Witten is a liberal Democrat,

    And Warner Heisenberg, who is the Witten in physics what Babe Ruth is to Mark Texiera in baseball was a Nazi.

  • ||

    I don't know WTF that means :-P , but yes, Heisenberg, along with many other Kraut physicists, was a dedicated Nazi.

  • sarcasmic||

    No one is really as rational as they like to believe

    Some do not even pretend to be rational. They are passionate and proud of it.

    I'd say willful self delusion is more at play than ordinary stupidity.

    There's no way some rational argument will fool them! They know what they feel and goddammit that's how it is!

  • Brandon||

    I just finished reading Dune. The consensus here was that the second one is worth reading, but the rest are not, correct?

  • SugarFree||

    The consensus here was that the second one is worth reading, but the rest are not, correct?

    If you must, the second and third one are OK, but you could skip them and not really miss anything. They don't exactly ruin the first book, but they come close and don't add much anyway.

  • Brandon||

    In that case I will skip them. The first book was excellent.

  • John||

    Brandon,

    The first two are the best. But the third one is still good. I am told God Emperor of Dune sucks, although some disagree with that. But I think everyone agrees the first three are worth reading. I think the second one might be the best book of them all.

  • Brandon||

    Well dammit. Couldn't you all have discussed this before answering? I WANT CONSENSUS!

  • SugarFree||

    Well dammit. Couldn't you all have discussed this before answering? I WANT CONSENSUS!

    I've read all six, more than a few times. 2 and 3 play out the rest of the story of Paul. 4 jumps 4,500 years into the future, and 5 and 6 continue from there.

    Even if you read all six, please stay away from the book his kid "wrote." They are the equivalent of Star Wars 1-3.

  • sarcasmic||

    I've read all six, more than a few times. 2 and 3 play out the rest of the story of Paul. 4 jumps 4,500 years into the future, and 5 and 6 continue from there.

    That is a very good summary of about ten thousand pages of science fiction.

  • SugarFree||

    That is a very good summary of about ten thousand pages of science fiction.

    I'm the best at what I do and what I do ain't pretty.

  • Zeb||

    I like God Emperor a lot. After that, they get less compelling and harder to get through, but still interesting, I thought.

  • ||

    The first two are the best. But the third one is still good. I am told God Emperor of Dune sucks, although some disagree with that. But I think everyone agrees the first three are worth reading. I think the second one might be the best book of them all.

    I wholeheartedly endorse this statement, like I bestrode a colossus across the Lanstraad.

  • sarcasmic||

    I read all six and don't regret it.

  • John||

    Sarcasmic,

    I have heard so many bad things about God Emperor, I have never read it. I need to at some point I guess.

  • sarcasmic||

    It's been years and years since I read them. Heck, I even read Chapterhouse.
    The later books delved deeply into the politics, religion and history of the Dune universe. I found it to be fascinating for the same reasons why I'm sure many people would find it to be boring.

  • John||

    Thanks Sarcasmic,

    That makes me think I would like them.

  • Zeb||

    "I have heard so many bad things about God Emperor"

    I'm surprised. I liked it a lot. Right up there with the first three.

  • gaoxiaen||

    Never read any of them and don't regret it.

  • LTC(ret) John||

    I would do the next two and consider stopping. I think Chapterhouse: Dune was good, but stay far away from the one his kid churned out - awful. Frank should have had him tested with the gom jabbar, he would have failed.

  • R C Dean||

    I don't think it's as much stupidity as allowing their emotions to control them.

    Honestly, the distinction eludes me. If the smart part of your brain isn't driving the bus, you're stupid.

  • John||

    But RC, take someone like Aaron Sorkin. Now there is a stupid liberal if there ever was one. Yet, at the same time, he is intelligent enough to write movie and TV scripts and produce TV shows. So it is not like he lacks intellect. I wouldn't call him stupid overall. He is a smart person who has allowed his smugness and emotions to cause him to believe really stupid things.

  • R C Dean||

    John, how about this:

    His smugness and emotion cause him to believe really stupid things, even though he has a certain knack for entertainment.

    Smart person, or stupid person?

    In some ways, the capacity to be smart makes ensuing stupidity even worse.

  • John||

    It is the paradox of smart people believing insane things RC. There is no way to explain it.

  • sarcasmic||

    It is the paradox of smart people believing insane things RC. There is no way to explain it.

    Dude, they feel it. I mean, they FEEL it! How can it be wrong? They FEEL it!

  • sarcasmic||

    In some ways, the capacity to be smart makes ensuing stupidity even worse.

    What happens is a person who could be otherwise smart uses their intellect to reverse engineer "rational" excuses for their emotional reactions.

  • Zeb||

    "What happens is a person who could be otherwise smart uses their intellect to reverse engineer "rational" excuses for their emotional reactions."

    In a way those people are the smartest (sort of, maybe not really). Anyone can follow something to its logical conclusion. It takes real wit and creativity to justify some of the more ridiculous beliefs some people carry around.

  • Zeb||

    I think it is a mistake to think of intelligence as a single characteristic that a person has. Different people are good at different things.

    Also, any moral philosophy requires some unproven assumptions. A perfectly intelligent person starting from principles other than self ownership and non-aggression would come to some conclusions that might seem quite repugnant to me or you, but that doesn't necessarily make their reasoning wrong.

  • sarcasmic||

    Honestly, the distinction eludes me. If the smart part of your brain isn't driving the bus, you're stupid.

    Some don't have a smart part of the brain to drive the bus, so they have an excuse.

  • Alan||

    They're dishonest and stupid. Mostly they're greedy, envious little fucks with god complexes and the wits of a dizzy chihuahua.

  • mr simple||

    But I thought the tea party was a racist reaction to Obama being elected? They promised me that no one ever did anything like this before he was elected. It's so hard to keep the progressive narrative straight when you think about it.

  • Brandon||

    Notice that this is under the Green section, not under Science. Although it really should be under Politics.

  • Brandon||

    The moderators are going really heavy on this one. No dissenting comments that might point out the flaws in this "study."

  • ||

    Well, I certainly hope so. The roads are too damn crowded as it is.

  • ||

    we (LEO's) respond to a metric assload of suicidal and parasuicidal incidents.

    what is interesting to m e is that females "attempt" suicide far far far far more often than men, but men COMMIT it far more often than women.

    when i get the pills/butter knife to wrist/ineffective method suicide calls, it is almost always a female and it's usually relatively easy to intervene either medically, or by disarming them of the knife, etc.

    with guys, way more likely to be effective methods like firearm/hanging.

    i firmly believe in the right to suicide, but the reality is in these incidents we respond to, they are usually a cry for help, not a bona fide attempt. in a REAL attempt, you don't send out facebook m essage to all your friends that you are killing yourself right before using an ineffective method, thus ensuring a police response.

    if you actually want to do it, you go to a private place (like the woods) and use an effective method.

  • Raston Bot||

    and they say we can't commit.

  • gaoxiaen||

    I guess that I'm a commitment-phobe.

  • sloopyinca||

    How many of those people, who have committed no crime against another's property or person, do you arrest and/or forcibly place into a mental health facility?

  • wareagle||

    damn...there is nothing that cannot be politicized any more, not even suicide. Someone willing to kill him or herself is not going to make the decision based on having a weapon or not. And suicides occur by plenty of other methods. Wrapping this into the gun control debate is like blaming the salad dressing an obese person used.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    We need high area control!

  • sarcasmic||

    No, no, no! It's not the salad dressing that makes people fat! It's the spoons! Only people with government training should be allowed to own spoons!

  • Auric Demonocles||

    You know, I've never seen a fat person that doesn't use a spoon sometimes...

  • sarcasmic||

    See! I told you so! Guns cause suicide, spoons cause obesity, and swimming pools cause drowning! They should all be banned! Think of the children!

  • Pro Libertate||

    Clearly, what needs to be banned is freewill.

  • $park¥||

    I have this nice little neck piece for you to try on.

  • sarcasmic||

    It's only a matter of time before freedom ceases to mean "free to do anything that is not explicitly prohibited" and becomes "free to do only that which is explicitly allowed or mandated."

  • Zeb||

    Just ask Rudy Giuliani.

  • Paul.||

    Clearly, what needs to be banned is freewill.

    We want citizens to use informed freewillz.

  • Proprietist||

    I think they're pointing out, correctly, that the problem in gun-saturated areas is how successful suicide attempts with guns are compared to alternative methods like ODing on sleeping pills or slitting one's wrists that occur when a gun is not easily accessible. I wonder if there is any official data on total suicide attempts - I'd bet they are relatively balanced irrespective of gun ownership, and the states with lower suicide rates merely have a lower success rate for their attempts.

  • Pro Libertate||

    They need to ban bridges, too.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Beat you to it.

  • Pro Libertate||

    You've already banned bridges?

  • Auric Demonocles||

    I'm an ideas man. I've already thought of the idea of banning bridges, and didn't stop there.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Bridges aren't always high. For instance, what about a bridge over a canyon?

  • ||

    The UK had a problem with people ODing on paracetamol (tylenol here). The problem was it generally didn't kill them, it just kicked the shit out of their liver. They lived but it was unpleasant. So the Brits put their paracetamol in blister packs and the attempted suicide rate by paracetamol dropped dramatically.

  • Brett L||

    So the Brits put their paracetamol in blister packs and the attempted suicide rate by paracetamol dropped dramatically.

    I mean, I understand that being suicidal comes with a certain sense of ennui, but fuck me. You can't be arsed to open 40 blister packs?

  • Zeb||

    Probably gives you that much more time to think. Suicidal thoughts are usually pretty transitory.

  • ||

    Correct, and an APAP lethal OD will kill you if you don't get the antidote in time. Most unpleasantly.

  • R C Dean||

    Plus, citation?

  • ||

  • ||

    People usually don't know the difference b'twixt "overdose" (which is more than the RX'd dose or "take as directed" listed on the package) and "L.D. 50" or "lethal dose".

    As per your little humour this afternoon (tylenol is called "paracetmetol" in UKR).

  • JW||

    So the Brits put their paracetamol in blister packs and the attempted suicide rate by paracetamol dropped dramatically.

    Right. They switched a more convenient form of suicide.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    By the way Jake, good work with your alt-text. You're really coming along.

  • Paul.||

    Big culture of gun ownership in South Korea, China and Japan? Who knew?

  • Proprietist||

    Because those cultures are exactly the same as ours?

  • Paul.||

    Irrelevant irrelevant irrelevant.

    If guns aren't the issue and culture is, as you keep hammering, then guns aren't the issue. Culture is.

  • John||

    http://cdn.rollcall.com/news/a.....gination=1

    Abortion rights, the movement of old white women. I wonder if TNR is going to do a story about this?

  • Zeb||

    I would think that young people who aren't anti abortion probably take it for granted at this point. It's normal now, rather than a moral crusade. Of course for those opposed to legal abortion, it still is a moral crusade, so it makes sense that they are more vocal about it.

  • John||

    I think young people are more attuned to technology. They are actually having kids unlike the old bittys in the abortion movement. Seeing an ultrasound of your developing baby tends to take some of the edge off of your support for abortion.

  • Vapourwear||

    Its almost like that's a human in there.

  • Zeb||

    That could be part of it too. But ultrasounds have been around for a while. And most of the old NARAL supporting bitties I know have children.
    And who looks at an ultrasound when they want to have an abortion (unless some dick legislature makes them)? Maybe they are getting better at avoiding unwanted pregnancies.
    I still think it is mostly because it is normal and you don't need to go out and be all activist about things that are normal unless you think that needs to change. If young people were getting all "pro-life", why did they largely fall for the "war on women" crap and vote for Obama?

  • John||

    Zeb,

    Most women don't have abortions. And sure the old bittys once had kids. But not in today's environment when premmies routinely live and everyone gets an ultrasound.

  • Zeb||

    AH, I think I see what you mean a bit better now. Who knows?

    Do you know if younger people are having abortions at lower rates than in the past (particularly as a proportion of pregnancies)? That would be a helpful piece of information here.

  • Alan||

    Also, people who support abortion rights have been having abortions for years, whereas people who oppose abortions have been having children for years.

    If children generally take on their parents' political views, we can posit that the abortion opponents will increase in number until they manage to make abortion illegal, at which point the number of abortion proponents will increase until they can make it legal again, and this cycle will continue forever.

    Right?

  • SugarFree||

    whereas people who oppose abortions have been having children abortions and not talking about it for years.

    Anyway... people are more likely to rebel against their parents beliefs than adopt them wholly.

    And less and less people are religious, and as much as the people against abortion on the board want to howl about it, being against abortion is an unreflected upon religious belief for most people.

  • Paul.||

    Hasn't the abortion rights movement largely become a reproductive privileges organization?

    Ie, lobbying for "free" birth control, etc?

  • John||

    That and making sure poor people and minorities have fewer children.

  • Zeb||

    As a fervent supporter of legal abortion, I fucking hate those people. Take what should be an individual rights issue and turn it into fucking social engineering. Fuck them.

  • Zeb||

    "The literature suggests that having a gun in your home to protect your family is like bringing a time bomb into your house,"

    What a silly statement. Time bombs usually go off after a certain amount of time (I suppose they don't if you don;t turn on the timer, but I don't think that is what he meant). 99.99% of guns will never be used for suicide or hurting anyone at all.

  • Emmerson Biggins||

    It's not necessary. It's not sufficient.Therefore it is not a cause.

    Sorry I had to mansplain it so harshly.

  • Jordan||

    "The literature suggests that having a gun in your home to protect your family is like bringing a time bomb into your house," said Dr. Mark Rosenberg, an epidemiologist who helped establish the C.D.C.’s National Center for Injury Prevention and Control. "Instead of protecting you, it's more likely to blow up."

    This is exactly why the CDC cannot be trusted to gather gun-related statistics.

  • Raston Bot||

    Blaming yourself and not others when bad shit happens to you is a darkside of self-reliance?

    The other darksides are:

    1. feeding yourself
    2. disdain for "authority"
    3. buying insurance for your private property
    4. raising your dependents
    5. gainfully employed

  • John||

    I will take that darkside over the dark side of blaming others, namely gas chambers and gulags.

  • Raston Bot||

    Also, is that picture from The Deer Hunter?

  • Pro Libertate||

    Yes, but it's not the Walken.

  • John||

    That is one of t he most kick ass scenes ever.

  • Brandon||

    Duh and/or hello.

  • ||

    They need to ban Metro because of that dude yesterday who offed himself at Gallery Place. In fact, they should just ban commuting altogether.

  • John||

    That is right. Every day that ledge just calls out to the troubled people among us.

  • LTC(ret) John||

    I am good with that - I can work from home every day! Of course, my wife might not be so good with that...

  • The Late P Brooks||

    blame themselves when things go wrong, a dark side of self-reliance.

    Wow.

    Would this mean it's okay to blame Jesus the President, if you have surrendered your life to Him?

  • The Late P Brooks||

    Assisted suicide is a subcategory of euthanasia, depending on whether the subject wants to be dead.

    You bigorati are always dragging the police into the discussion!

  • ||

    snark, but as is common, the police ACTUALLY deal with this issue vs. the ivory tower peeps who know everything about everything... except they have no personal experience with same.

    that being said, if you want to kill yourself, neither law enforcement nor anybody else can stop you, if you have even the slightest common sense.

  • sloopyinca||

    Does Gun Ownership Promote Suicide?

    I don't know and I don't care because it's not addressed in the Second Amendment.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    it's not addressed in the Second Amendment.

    But the Commerce Clause clearly states all the fruits of your labor belong to the State; killing yourself is exactly the same as looting the Treasury.

  • Pro Libertate||

    No, this is clearly illegal under the Commerce Clause, as the government lacks the authority.

    However, under its tax power, the government can ban guns, because suicide lowers the number of taxpayers.

  • Gilbert Martin||

    Yeah.

    That's pretty much the mindset of the left:

    We should all consider ourselves Borglike cogs in the national machine and our only purpose is to further the COMMMON GOOD - the definition of which has already been helpfully decided for us by our self-appointedd betters.

  • Agammamon||

    ". . .contends that gun owners may have qualities that make them more susceptible to suicide. They may be more likely to see the world as a hostile place, or to blame themselves when things go wrong, a dark side of self-reliance."

    Or, you know, having a gun may make it easier to succeed when you try to kill yourself.

    Also, 'dark side of self-reliance', really?

  • The Late P Brooks||

    However, under its tax power, the government can ban guns, because suicide lowers the number of taxpayers.

    I defer to your superior knowledge of the inner convolution of the Legal Mind.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Trust me, that's how it works. Also, under the Preamble, the government owns us like property. It's right there!

  • R C Dean||

    Trust me, they are working on punitive gun and ammo taxes as we speak.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    "Would it make you feel any better if they'd all been pushed jumped outta windows?"

  • John||

    No. the correct quote is

    "Would it make you fell any better little girl if they had been pushed outta windows?"

  • Alice Bowie||

    Gun ownership clearly promotes suicide.

    A gun makes it real quick and give little time for one to change their minds.

    However, not all gun owners commit suicide.

    Plus, most gun owners don't care about the increase probability of suicide. They "don't think it can happen to them".

    Not to mention that anti-gun people probably don't care that gun owners commit suicide.

    So, I guess the suicide thing is neither here nor there.

  • The Sherriff of Fistingham™||

    "They don't think it can happen to them".

    Well...If they are not prone to suicidal thoughts, severe manic depression, or some extreme bi-polar syndrome,. No, I don't suppose they would believe "it can happen to them". Maybe I'm wrong, but suicide isn’t something that just happens, like a heart attack, or car crash...it is very much intentional, the polar opposite of an accident that "can happen to them", and a gun is simply an effective(clinically proven) means to an end. I for one just do not believe that my gun is plotting against me, call me naive.

    Disclaimer: If it was sarc, then kindly disregard this message.

  • SteveC||

    My American cousin committed suicide with a gun, my Russian colleague jumped off a tall building, and in Germany someone jumped in front of a train right outside my office window (for the next couple hours I got to watch a crew pick up the pieces). The human body being fragile, and modern life being full of technology, opportunities for suicide abound. In Russia no one is talking about limiting the height of buildings, and in Germany no one is talking about eliminating trains.

    The US does not have a very high suicide rate, nor does it have a high rate of mass murder (about 80 deaths per year), a high rate of lightning deaths (51/year), a high rate of murders by rifle, or a high rate of murder in the suburbs. What the US does have is a high rate of murder among young urban black males involved with drug gangs using handguns to murder their peers. This is reminiscent of Prohibition-era Chicago: 83 years ago today Al Capone's gang used Tommy guns to execute five members of a rival Irish gang in the infamous St. Valentine's Day Massacre. Prohibition ended soon thereafter. It is time now to end Drug Prohibition.

  • SteveC||

    FBI homicide statistics summary:
    http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cj.....micidemain

    St. Valentine's Day Massacre:
    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0062301/

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement