Scioly.org

A lot of people are assuming suicide is inherently a problem.

Unome wrote:A lot of people are assuming suicide is inherently a problem.

I mean, it kinda is

Unome wrote:A lot of people are assuming suicide is inherently a problem.

Sorry what?

DatSciolyBoi wrote:

Unome wrote:A lot of people are assuming suicide is inherently a problem.

I mean, it kinda is

CookiePie1 wrote:

Unome wrote:A lot of people are assuming suicide is inherently a problem.

Sorry what?

There has been a rationale put forward that guns make suicide easier, therefore this is a reason to restrict access to guns. This implies that the person making the argument is willing to forcibly prevent people from committing suicide. In my opinion, this is a problematic approach to suicide.

Unome wrote: There has been a rationale put forward that guns make suicide easier, therefore this is a reason to restrict access to guns. This implies that the person making the argument is willing to forcibly prevent people from committing suicide. In my opinion, this is a problematic approach to suicide.

And a better rationale to insure a majority of people who would commit suicide don't would be what?

TheCrazyChemist wrote:

Unome wrote: There has been a rationale put forward that guns make suicide easier, therefore this is a reason to restrict access to guns. This implies that the person making the argument is willing to forcibly prevent people from committing suicide. In my opinion, this is a problematic approach to suicide.

And a better rationale to insure a majority of people who would commit suicide don't would be what?

I'm not arguing for a better rationale, I'm arguing against forcibly preventing them from doing so.

Things2do wrote:On that logic, why ain't pencils illegal?

I mean, it's way easier to cause harm using a gun than using a pencil. Plus, the intended purpose of guns is to cause damage, while the intended purpose of pencils is to write. I would say it fits that logic.

TheCrazyChemist wrote:

Unome wrote: There has been a rationale put forward that guns make suicide easier, therefore this is a reason to restrict access to guns. This implies that the person making the argument is willing to forcibly prevent people from committing suicide. In my opinion, this is a problematic approach to suicide.

And a better rationale to insure a majority of people who would commit suicide don't would be what?

Sometimes, people who want to commit suicide really badly would do like "public displays" , like building jumping. Think of the hundreds who witnessed it and how traumatized they would be.

DatSciolyBoi wrote:

TheCrazyChemist wrote:

Unome wrote: There has been a rationale put forward that guns make suicide easier, therefore this is a reason to restrict access to guns. This implies that the person making the argument is willing to forcibly prevent people from committing suicide. In my opinion, this is a problematic approach to suicide.

And a better rationale to insure a majority of people who would commit suicide don't would be what?

Sometimes, people who want to commit suicide really badly would do like "public displays" , like building jumping. Think of the hundreds who witnessed it and how traumatized they would be.

Those people assume that risk by venturing publically, much the same as one assumes the risk of potentially viewing objectionable content on television or in a movie.

I tried to find statistics on public suicides but was unsuccessful. I suspect public suicide is very uncommon - consider that most of the suicides we hear about are done privately.

Unome wrote: There has been a rationale put forward that guns make suicide easier, therefore this is a reason to restrict access to guns. This implies that the person making the argument is willing to forcibly prevent people from committing suicide. In my opinion, this is a problematic approach to suicide.

It doesn't imply anything of the sort. Not selling someone a gun, or making it hard for people to buy guns, does not in any sense equate to forcibly preventing someone from suicide, any more than not selling chocolate in schools is the same as hospitalizing kids and placing them on a forced diet.

Here, by the way, are some conclusions from a study on the effect of the Brady Act cool-off period on suicide:

From https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/f ... cle/192946

"Based on the assumption that the greatest reductions in fatal violence would be within states that were required to institute waiting periods and background checks, implementation of the Brady Act appears to have been associated with reductions in the firearm suicide rate for persons aged 55 years or older but not with reductions in homicide rates or overall suicide rates."

"We find some signs of an offsetting increase in nongun suicides to those aged 55 years or older, which makes the reduction in the total suicide rate smaller than the reduction in gun suicides. Neither the increase in nongun suicides nor the decrease in suicides from all causes are statistically significant at the conventional 95% level, though the overall pattern of findings is consistent with theories of "weapon substitution."