The general public recognizes the obvious danger that guns play in the commission of murders. But the more common threat from guns lies not in causing homicides but suicides. Suicides by gun account for far more deaths than homicides by gun, and many studies show that where there are higher rates of gun ownership, there tend to be higher suicide rates.
Maine and the country cannot forget the enormous toll that suicides take on families, friends and communities.
The correlation between gun ownership and suicide rates is one more reason why gun owners should take precautions to ensure the safety of their friends and family by keeping their guns locked away or stored outside the home. It’s also why health care providers should treat not only the patient’s psychological condition but work with loved ones to limit the patient’s access to lethal means.
There’s no good way for family and friends to describe the sorrow and horror they feel when their loved one is killed, whether it’s a homicide or suicide. But the reality is that suicides outnumber homicides in the United States two to one, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Suicides are rarely reported in the media unless they happen publicly — because doing so can increase the likelihood of suicide in vulnerable individuals — so people are more likely to read about homicides or murder-suicides.
But suicide is a public health problem. It is the 10th leading cause of death for people ages 10 and older, killing more than 35,000 per year, or about 12 per 100,000 people. More men than women die by suicide, and men are more likely to use a gun, according to the National Institute of Mental Health. Though firearms are used in only about 5 percent of suicide attempts, they cause more than half the deaths.
Reducing the number of attempts with a gun could save many more lives — not because the underlying impulse changes but because the lethality of the attempts is reduced. A gunshot is usually final. Other means, like cutting or overdosing, give people more time to think and call for help, and they often prove less deadly.
Some people believe that individuals truly serious about killing themselves will do it whether a gun is available or not. In some cases this is true. But many people who attempt suicide — though there may be many warning signs — commit the act in moments of despair. If only they wait, their crisis may pass and they may seek help. Most who attempt suicide do not die; for every suicide death, there are an estimated 11 nonfatal suicide attempts.
People often ask “why” in the context of suicides, but “how” is of importance, too. Many studies have examined the link between rates of household gun ownership and rates of completed suicide. A study published in 2008 in the New England Journal of Medicine looked at the relationship in every state, while controlling for poverty, urbanization, unemployment, mental illness and drug and alcohol dependence. It found that states with higher rates of gun ownership had higher rates of suicides caused by firearms, in addition to overall suicides.
For instance, Maine ranked 25th for gun prevalence and 27th in terms of the median rate of suicide deaths. Wyoming had the greatest gun prevalence and was ranked second for suicide deaths. Research shows that whether someone lives or dies in a suicide attempt depends largely on the availability of lethal means, which includes firearms.
Gun owners need to be aware of the risks and know how to store guns and ammunition — in separate areas under separate locks. Gun store owners can communicate with one another and police when a despondent customer tries to purchase a gun. Counselors can know how to ask about guns in a patient’s home and work with family to reduce access. The overall goal should be to limit lethality. In the end, what if it isn’t the gun purchaser who faces the risk of suicide but his or her teenage children?
I’m not sure what they are advocating here.
While I would hope a gun salesman would avoid selling a gun to an obviously disturbed person, one can’t expect them to be psychiatrists. Keeping guns and ammo locked separately would only help those that don’t have the key. I assume most people that commit suicide with a gun, do it with their own weapon.
Shrinks that have clients with deadly intents have an obligation to do what they can to put their client and others out of harms way (committal)…though of the reported suicides, how many actually sought out therapy? Can’t imagine it’s a high percentage.
So, I suppose examining the how might be a tiny percentage of the issue, though the why is still the overwhelmingly important question.
The focus on the “how’ of anything gives you a hammer with which to gain control, in this case the intent is control of private firearms.
you hit it on the head .it is about the profit of the gun sellers ( and manufacturers)NOT the 2nd ammendment.
“While I would hope a gun salesman would avoid selling a gun to an obviously disturbed person”
___________
The key is obvious. And unless a person has one sitting in a chair for a conversation of about a week or so, you ain’t spotting nothing. (even if you knew what to look for) There is a big difference between ‘mental illness’ and el-whack job.
Unfortunately we have mixed the two together. But having said that there is generally always a paper trail behind some of these people that a simple and better data system with a wait period could catch.
This article should not try to link those suicides that are not driven towards violence against society. Those are not suicides those are el-whack jobs venting some perceived and maybe even some real
slight against them, who knows, but they all had prior issues with coping in a society whether imagine or not.
NICS is supposed to cover this to some degree, though clearly not flawless…and obviously doesn’t cover illegal or off the book gun sales.
You hit on something way over looked,,,’gun shows’. Absolutely no control or oversight at all. And of course the private sales between neighbors ect.
I personally don’t own any fire arms, but I will defend the right to. But, something has to be done. More people are killed by guns in this country every year then some in nations at war.
Why ? Because it’s easy, and less messy and gruesome if your at about 6 feet away.
good hyperbole ” More people are killed by guns in this country every year then some in nations at war.”
well we are huge nation by geographic and by populace. So yeh we have a lot more of many things than other countries of the 3rd world. We probably have more cancer survivors, we probably have more fed, clothed, sheltered children, we probably have more people who lived passed 30.
Well, we can either be ‘pro-active’ to and of the issue or wait for the draconian that’s coming if the NRA doesn’t graduate to the 21st century.
Your choice, and in the end your fault as a legal gun owner. The government is not your threat, your drunken unstable neighbor is, the one who beats his dog with a carpet tack strip.
That neighbor who leaves 10 guns laying around to be stolen. Every criminal out there either stole a gun or bought one, legally or otherwise. Every nut-job did the same thing.
so I should sacrifice my rights? thats your solution that is like requiring everyone to have a Breathalyzer in their car because one person gets an OUI.
How is it my fault? explain that to me.
what would you like to pro-actively do?
You don’t have to sacrifice your rights if you indeed should have the right to own and bare arms.
The Constitution gives us no rights ! That is a BIG miss conception. We have nothing more then a ‘set of privileges’ subject to be taken away at anytime.
Here is what Thomas Jefferson had to say about rights and laws, and Constitutions.
_____
“I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions, but laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times”
______
You have made several comments from a base of desperation looking and hiding behind excuses and failed understandings. You have become your own worst enemy.
As to your question, it’s rather simple. Let’s keep guns in the hands of responsible people by making it responsible to own a fire arm. As an example, how many would be less incline to walk into a gun store to purchase a fire arm like they can now as if it was a bag of chips or soda at the corner market if we attached a training stipulation at a cost ?
I predict a good many would think twice, those who saw the benefit would be those I would feel more comfortable being around if they own guns.
The other BIG miss conception out there is, there are a good many without criminal backgrounds or a history of mental illness, who should still not be around fire arms.
The average law abiding gun owner is just as dangerous with a gun as the common thug or nut-job.
We have nothing more then a ‘set of privileges’ subject to be taken away at anytime.
Yup, just ask Obama…..typical liberal BS.
He can’t take anything away, no President can. Congress set’s the agenda and writes the laws. Basic junior high knowledge. (and I even flunked kindergarten)
So, do I really feel or should I feel comfortable with someone such as yourself owning a fire arm ? Who’s libel to forget that round in the chamber while cleaning it and put a hole in his leg or my dry wall next store.
And if when the commies ever do come ashore you sound like the last person in the world I’m looking towards to defend my freedom.
Thanks but no thanks..
Agreed. Some of these gun owners are hard to reason with. They get overly emotional about the issue. They become paranoid when there is no real reason to. It is if they are looking for trouble. Not good.
No one wants to take guns away from responsible stable gun owners.
Purple Heart…..Bronze Star in Nam. How about yourself….CAPTAIN????
I think we disagree on some key fundamentals. If the bill of rights is privileges that can be taken away at any time by what I presume you mean the federal government than as free and sovereign individuals we might as well rise and revolt now.
Here is a TJ quote for you: “The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it.”
I don’t take issue with the idea of knowledgeable and responsible gun ownership. However that is a slippery slope as well. “training” is a broad word. I think a general knowledge of safe firearms handling in the laws of your state are all that should be required by law if anything. Because if you expect some people to be able to mag swap and double tap like JJ Racaza then you might as well ban guns out right for 99% of the populace. I’d rather go into a gun fight with 100 good intentioned but poorly trained guys than 1 of the most elite highly trained shooters out there.
The second amendment is to allow the common person to have the ability to effectively be a modern (what ever era) militia fighter. 100 years ago that was the lever action rifle. today it is a semi automatic intermediate cartridge rifle. A weapons “danger” to Innocent life correlates to the hands it in. If the average joe gun owner were as dangerous as you proclaim there would be millions of gun injuries and deaths. There are millions of hunters, shooters, and CCW/CCP in the U.S. 1 in 4 people own at least 1 gun. Also hunters in maine and most other states to my knowledge have to take hunters safety and if they are under 16 they have to hunt with someone who has. CCW holders have to have a safety course to carry. That probably covers a wide number of gun owners right there so your idea is already in effect.
As I have said, I will defend the right/privilege to own and keep fire arms. But I will not remain silent as to the underlying reasons we find ourselves in much debate in this country.
Correlations between how easy it is to purchase and or steal a gun cannot be so easily justified with a slight of hand mentality. It really adds no credibility to the argument and deepens the divide.
Those who speak out the loudest on forums like this to miss perceptions and or lack of any real understanding to all the numerous implications should be a wake up call to damage control.
In other words they are not helping the situation any. Like a pedophile being a spokes person against child abuse, I mean seriously. A good many of these gun owners should not be allowed to even own pet much less a gun.
“The average law abiding gun owner is just as dangerous with a gun as the common thug or nut-job.”
Really? I’ve never heard of a law abiding citizen robbing a house or jacking someone’s car. Maine has much higher rate of firearm ownership than, say, Chicago or D.C. I’d say your statement has been put to the test and failed. Every time.
Well, there’s dumb and then there’s dumber.
(beam me up Scotty)
No one is advocating taking guns out of the hands of responsible owners/people. However, one cannot help but notice that this was an article about the horrible tragedy of suicide and perhaps some thinking on how to minimize the incidence of suicide. But no, the first thing most of these posters jump to is how someone is going to come to their doors and take away their guns. Me, me, me. Can they ever stop and think about someone else and the need to do something to cut down on domestic violence tragedies,etc. It is not good enough to always say, well, they would have found another way to commit the murder or suicide; or that they would have found another means or weapon. Sure , that is mostly true but it should not stop there. That is a cop-out. Responsible people would want to try and look at some ways to prevent some of these tragedies, not just worry about their guns (which are not going anywhere.)
Some of these tragedies very well could have been prevented if given a little more time. Sometimes if we wait a while before reacting when we are angry or upset, the outcome is much better. Reason begins to take over and we don’t act on something which could have turned into some kind of tragedy. We calm down and don’t lash out in anger or revenge. This is not true always of course, but if one tragedy can be averted it is better than none.
go back to who started the debates concerning guns. It is always some bleeding heart agreeing with the op-ed piece and then the NRA zealots come out. Yeh gun owners get paranoid and exercise their right to free speech because personal protection be it from a home invader or a tyrannical government is important to them.
as far as talking about getting over emotional, it is typically the progressive liberals that lean on the rhetorical device of pathos. While people like myself constantly give consistent arguments about firearms, there purpose, and their responsible ownership.
These debates only arise after tragedy because like I have told people before… and I am pretty sure I mentioned this in a reply to you on the Jovan Belcher article… It take the knee jerk emotional reaction of the populace for anti-gun arguments to gain traction.
the 363 days out of the year there is no major media covered gun related death no one is paying attention to the brady campaign. The further we get from a media covered/hyped event the more people will regain control of their emotional reaction and use logic to sift through vast amounts of rhetoric and propaganda and see that 99% of the arguments presented like groups like the brady campaign are false, misleading, or downright silly.
It covered it to a great degree. If someone mentally ill was adjudicated as such… for example if I a judge blue papers someone for self injury and they are committed to Acadia they are now a prohibited person and because of the COURT record of that it will be tracked by NICS.
Whereas someone who voluntarily commits themselves for sucidial idealization to Acadia is protected under HIPPA/doctor patient confidentiality.
Both of these. individuals may have the same problems but only one will be flagged.
Maybe physicians can and law makers can come to an agreement on HIPPA and that reporting potentially dangerous people whom have mental illness benefits public and patient health.
It screens on what’s in the database. Though it goes without saying that not everyone who is cleared, should be – HIPPA covered or otherwise – even if those self-committals are added to the reject list, there will still be holes.
A present day evaluation at the time of sale would truly be the only way to filter out near all the potential problems (people who are perfectly grounded their entire lives sometimes *snap* overnight as an example), though the logistics, legal and otherwise of making this happen would be ridiculous. :
yeh agreed. NICS isn’t perfect but it is typically very current. I also don’t think that protection/restraining orders are always reported to that list so that is a hole for sure. lying on a 4473 is a federal offense though and carriers some stiff penalties.
False. A person who is “blue papered” has not been committed and is therefore not prohibited from owning or possessing a firearm. See United States of America v. Nathan Lawrence Rehlander/United States of America v. Benjamin J. Small, in which the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned convictions for possession of a firearm by a person committed to a mental institution.
The court ruled that Maine’s emergency hospitalization procedure (“blue papers”) does not constitute committment because the patients are held without a hearing and, therefore, are denied rights to due process insofar as possessing a firearm.
Furthermore, it’s unfortunate that it will take awhile, but the Brady Law’s prohibition on people committed to a mental hospital possessing a firearm is unconstitutional, under both the U.S. and state of Maine constitutions. The truth of the matter is people with a mental illness are no more likely than the general population to commit violent acts. The law violates the Second Amendment, the Fourth Amendment, the Eighth Amendment, and the 14th Amendment.
thanks for the info ryan. I know that the blue papers had to be ordered by a judge like a warrant and made the mistake of assuming this was condition for being adjudicated a threat to yourself or others by a court (judge), board, commission, or other lawful authority.
where it’s late I am not going to read those cases briefs so I will take you at word on it : ) so if that is really what they found and maines emergency hospitalization procedure is lawful than it should constitute a prohibited person.
I don’t know if I would say it is truth that someone with a mental illness is no less likely to commit a violent act. I here all too often that crime in bangor area is driven by addicts and mentally ill because both of those groups of people are drawn here because its a meca of social services. It also seems that people who go on rampages and killing sprees have an underlying mental illness or develop one in silence and it goes untreated and they “snap”. I can’t think of any mass shooting type situations of the top of my head where a well adjusted adult makes a conscience decision to murder a hundred people. Dunno tho, if you have some statistics to support that claim I would love to read em.
“where it’s late I am not going to read those cases briefs so I will take you at word on it : ) so if that is really what they found and maines emergency hospitalization procedure is lawful than it should constitute a prohibited person.”
I don’t know whether it’s because you’re tired, but I don’t understand “if that is really what they found and Maine’s emergency hospitalization procedure is lawful, then it should constitute a prohibited person.”
The emergency hospitalization procedure is lawful. However, it does not constitute a commitment. That’s because the patient is not able to challenge the emergency hospitalization. The 1st U.S. Circuit refers to the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller in Rehlander and Smith. The Heller case involved the District of Columbia prohibiting handguns. In Heller, the Supreme Court said the city couldn’t summarily ban handguns because of the Second Amendment. Before a constitutional right can be denied, the government has to provide due process — the one whose rights are being denied has the right to contest the government’s action.
Because emergency hospitalization in Maine does not allow for a patient to contest being hospitalized, he has not been afforded due process insofar as losing the right to possess a firearm.
In overturning the illegal possession of firearms, the 1st Circuit said: [T]he right to possess arms (among those not properly disqualified) is no longer something that can be withdrawn by government on a permanent and irrevocable basis without due
process. Ordinarily, to work a permanent or prolonged loss of a constitutional liberty or property interest, an adjudicatory hearing, including a right to offer and test evidence if facts are in dispute, is required.”
The court further explained that emergency hospitalization cannot qualify as a commitment because there is no factual finding declaring the patient dangerous to himself or others. When there is a hearing for actual commitment, the patient is allowed a lawyer, can challenge evidence, and can introduce evidence.
Incidentally, both cases originated in Maine Federal District Court.
As for whether pepole with a mental illness are more violent than the general population, of course we’re going to hear of the sensational cases of killing sprees and assaults. We hear about them because they’re not the norm — they’re news. We don’t hear about the millions of people suffering from depression or anxiety who keep to themselves. Those stories aren’t very interesting, because few people know.
To quote my term paper for my journalism ethics class several years ago:
“[T]he MacArthur Foundation study found that people with a mental illness who abuse drugs or alcohol are the ones more likely to be violent. And even then, people without a mental illness who abuse drugs or alcohol are three times more likely than the rest of the population to be violent.
“Even deeper in the story was information from a psychiatrist affiliated with the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill, who pointed out that the study also found that violence was reduced 50 percent in people treated at a mental hospital and by 54 percent in people treated in a hospital for both mental illness and substance abuse.”
Beautiful ! A clear and concise difference.
Unfortunately the media has tried to lump everything under a ‘mental illness’. (and even some in the psych industry looking for a new meal ticket)
Anyway, listen up out there people, there are distinctions between a ‘mental illness’ and your common every day nut-job. In fact I would venture to say on any given day that the supposed law abiding gun owner after a few snorts, puff’s and drink are only one pull away from being certifiably a nut-job.
And we haven’t even cover the indoctrination of growing up under violent video games and within a society who proclaims as it’s motto that “pimping ain’t easy”
Ted Kaczynski was not crazy .
He was certifiably ‘insane’. He just never allowed himself to be examine. Because he want’s to believe and have the public believe he’s rational and was justified.
Not saying he is well adjusted . I do not advocate his calls for violence. But were the people who worked in concentration camp normal and well adjusted? The issue he was right on the make with was humans were never ment for the lifestyles we have today. Even though we have less security we have the perception of having more . t is probably not safer to own guns but you have the perception of being safer that is more important than the reality .
But were the people who worked in concentration camp normal and well adjusted?
_______
How about following orders, some even believing in their side etc., etc., etc. There is a difference. You can follow ‘ole Ted’s life and see along the way he’s developing ‘issues’.
He burns out at 23 at Stanford and goes into being a recluse. Not good, not healthy.
Right he is not “normal” . I agree . I am far from being normal myself . I have issues with things that do not seem to bother a lot of people. Could have something to do with my MBTI type. But I would not want to be what people consider normal. I might be wrong as much or more than I am right but at least I know it. The way I see it Ted only killed 3 people for a cause he believed in . Lets look at that last few presidents and see how many they had killed for causes they believe in. I would much rather sit down and have a beer with old Ted than a man who ran the gas chambers at one or those camps even if they were just following orders.
Who is normal..
Presidents don’t kill for causes they believe in. (it’s generally to protect ones country)
Now your buddy Ted, he does. And yes I would agree about having that beer with him rather then the gas chamber operator who like a robot/trained dog follow orders. No doubt young and idealistic, perhaps scared, what ever.
I do not see how the war in Iraq was protecting this country . In GWs own words. people want to be free.
At heart I really believe ‘W’ a good person. The people around him had other motives. (and no I did not vote for him)
I hear ya Bobby, it will forever be discuss. And the next involvement, and the next one after that. Politicians are only there to give you the idea you have freedom of choice,,,you don’t !
We have ‘owners’, they own everything. Including you and me.
I do not believe the man GW is a bad person Or Obama I do believe they do some things that could be looked at as being bad from a more world view. I do not believe most of what i here or half of what I see. It dose not make me very popular sometimes . Things are way more complicated than must people can understand.Myself included . It is not as simple as dem or republican.
Spot on ! And those who do view or perceive America in bad light, are even more spoon fed and brainwashed then we Americans are.
Its not a perfect world . I see much room for improvement . Too bad we only have 2 real choices in politics. I can not understand why both parties can not work together. We almost all want what is best. Just different Ideas how to get there . They way I see it the real issue is most want something for nothing. Are greedy and selfish . The Liberals want higher taxes but they do not volenteer to pay more. The conservatives want people to depend on government but do not hire people with thier extra money. If you kicked everyone off welfare where are the jobs? The capitalistic system would work great if we had continued growth . Lets not raise taxes but not allow companies to spend more on lobbiest that they pay in taxes . Money is power .
We need ‘revenue’, a.k.a. tax’s Nobody likes ’em, but without them we can’t run a country. And there are less people on welfare today then 20 years ago. It’s a political myth.
The new capital venture in America over the last several years has become homeless shelters and soup kitchens.
We are the youngest country in the world among industrialized nations, and we are heading toward the abyss from decades of greed and miss management. You must have a combination of economic and political ideologies.
One cannot survive without the other, as we are discovering.
We should call it CAPSO..
dump w/e party you are in and register as libertarian.
“Even deeper in the story was information from a psychiatrist affiliated
with the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill, who pointed out that
the study also found that violence was reduced 50 percent in people
treated at a mental hospital and by 54 percent in people treated in a
hospital for both mental illness and substance abuse.”
seems logical ? receiver treatment > get better > not flip out.
As far as the blue papering goes. You know on the form 4473 question 11.f It is not ONLY commitment is adjudicated mentally ill OR committed. In order for someone to be blue papered a judge has to sign off on the papers like a warrant. I guess per the 1st circuit court that doesn’t consitute Adjudication because there isn’t a chance to contest it. However, you can have the record of “blue papers” removed from the record later in an appeal.
Gun control really is to progressives what ‘the abortion issue’ is to the religious right! Conclusion first, reasons as they come to mind….
I would say gay marriage.
dunno y I got vote down. I just think gay marriage is much more based in homophobia and misunderstanding like firearmphobia. Abortion there is a lot of moral gray area there. I guess for bible pounders there is a morality issue with gay marriage but it isnt about; “are we or aren’t we murdering babies”. meh same premise I guess.
funny all the areas with low suicide rates have high homicide rates.
I had noticed the exact same thing.
not really funny but I had a sociologically professor who taught my criminology and homicide classes at unh who said it is fairly common for the two to have an inverse relationship.
I think it’s because where gun ownership is highest, there is a strong tradition of hunting. We grow up with firearms around us and are taught at an early age to respect them as tools for sport. We tend not to use them against others impulsively because we respect the tools. I have taught my nephew that he is to treat a BB gun with the same respect as a firearm: do not point it at buildings, do not point it at animals, do not point it at yourself or others; do not have your finger inside the trigger guard until you are ready to shoot; do not take the safety off until you are about to shoot; verify your target; verify what’s behind your target, etc.
maybe but I don’t think that a strong tradition of hunting has anything to do with the inverse relationship between suicide and homicide. That relationship tends to relate even in states/countries with low firearm ownership.
I am a member of the general public and I do not recognize any obvious dangers of guns in murders no more than lights in arson or spoons in childhood obesity.
I recognize we have a society desensitized to violence from a decade long war and sensationalist media coverage and a violent culture in general.
The context of how has far less to do with suicide than why. If people want to kill themselves there is plenty of over the counter medication available that will help them down that path. Or a toaster in the tub. w/e people who want to hurt themselves find ways just like people who want to hurt others find ways.
“Though firearms are used in only about 5 percent of suicide attempts, they cause more than half the deaths.” I’m not really sure how you can say how doesn’t matter.
typical liberal counter argument… When did I say ” It doesn’t matter” ?!?! I said “the context of how has far less to do with suicide than WHY.
Firearms actually do account for like 45% of suicide deaths so of course it matters but what matters more is why do those 10,000 or 50,000 or w/e number of people want to end their lives?
I believe strongly in responsible firearms ownership by competent adults. This includes limiting unsupervised access by children and at risk groups like the mentally ill, mentally handicap, substance abusers, etc.
the study they cite is over 10 years old btw which lends itself to the validity of this article in general. CDC keeps fairly good statistics on deaths from their website I linked to someone else on here gun suicide is around 48% so by that we can deduce gun suicide is on the decline!
Because a suicidal person usually thinks of several plans. If not a gun, then jumping off a bridge or driving one’s car into a bridge abutment or into a tractor-trailer.
Focusing on “how” people commit suicide does absolutely nothing to get at the real problem: Why people feel the need to commit suicide, and why they either feel they can’t get help or really can’t get help despite seeking it.
I am wondering if this “study” includes illegal ownership of guns as well?
seems they are using research over a decade old maybe they should do their own work.
1-800-273-8255, National Suicide Prevention Lifeline
or
https://www.imalive.org/
This sounds a lot like a lead to bring up gun control ………….. now if this had included suicide by overdose, suicide by cutting, suicide by gun as well as suicide by other means would have showed the “how” better.
http://www.cdc.gov/ViolencePrevention/suicide/statistics/mechanism01.html
chicks are more likely to use other methods probably because its less violent. Men primarily use guns, it is easy and a masculine way to go out I suppose. But guns only account for less than %50 of suicide so yeh probably worth mentioning in this article other things.
That ain’t masculine. Now jumping out a plane without a parachute, that’s masculine. :D
agreed. Or fighting a grizzy in hand to hand combat.
Don’t go over the paranoia cliff. No one is going to come take your guns away!
You man like what DIDN’T happen in New Orleans in the aftermath of Katrina?
I think gun sellers, manufacturers and their mouth piece, the NRA, primarily care about selling guns and making sure someone’s second amendment rights are not constrained. Whether they’re buying that gun to kill themselves or someone else is not their concern.
I find that whole thing a little bizarre. If I owned a bar and served a drunk who then went out and killed someone, I’d probably get in trouble but gun sellers can sell a gun to anyone and if that person goes out and kills themselves or someone else, oh, well. I sometimes wonder how the person who sold James Holmes his guns sleeps at night.
I agree with your first paragraph. While the NRA began as a non-political entity, evolving into 2nd amendment rights group – they’ve essentially become a lobbyist for gun manufacturers these days as their primary function. Corrupted by power and money, their fear campaigns have driven record gun sales, to what end?
Dangerously mentally ill can often pass for perfectly sane and normal, just as a practiced alcoholic can feign sobriety. It’s hard to pass on responsibility to the bartenders and gun salesman if they can’t in good faith tell their customer is a danger.
All that said, when it comes to weapons sales (illegal and otherwise), that have wreaked havoc around the world (profits over lives), the US government, not it’s citizens, takes the cake.
Especially when that same government is arming Mexican cartels and jihadists.
“Do as we say, not as we do” – politician motto
Have you ever heard of the 1968 gun control act? so you can’t just sell a gun to “anyone”. Private citizens and firearms dealers are liable if they sell a weapon to a prohibited person and that person commits a crime with the weapon they sold them just like a bar tender who continually sells a patron alcohol after they are clearly intoxicated and then watch them get behind the wheel, which in actuality is a much more direct accessory to crime.
I bet the guy who sold that rifle to James holmes has sold thousands of other weapons to people who have used them lawfully for enjoyment or protection. but yeh I am sure he wished he had a physic x-men ability to predict the outcome of the sale.
Well, maybe if the NRA used some of their money touting people who kept a gun out of someone’s hands instead of telling us that Obama’s coming to get our guns, so stock up. The reality is that in the last 4 years, gun rights have been expanded including a law in Montana that allows a property owner to shoot a trespasser, even if the trespasser poses no threat.
And just so we’re clear, I actively support second amendment rights, if you know what I mean. I just think it is a little out of control. I like cars too but I don’t have fifty.
Can you afford fifty cars?
Many of the people who commit suicide are weak defective individuals and know it. Bob Carlson? Homosexuals?
why would you go there. you are a week defective individual if you think think homosexuality inherently leads to weakness.
Or suicide?
Wow, are you ever an uneducated person. Someone with a gun to you,in your narrow mindedness, would be strong , most likely……(many very weak individuals own guns for your information). And then you equate homosexuals with defects and weakness! You are the one who comes across weak and defective in understanding. Some of the best , most intelligent people I know are homosexual. They put you to shame.
thats the great thing about guns they are an equalizer they can make the weakest person strong. speaking in physical terms obviously if you are of weak mind knowledge is what will make you strong and tacrecon882 should look for it.
Why did Carlson commit suicide? Because he was defective, knew it, and knew he was going to be exposed?
Why are there support groups specifically for homosexual suicide prevention? Because it never happens or because it happens more often?
Why do people commit suicide? Because they don’t have the strength to go on? Guilt? Weakness?
If mentioning that homosexuals are more likely to commit suicide is incorrect, then let’s not have anymore support or awareness groups specifically aimed at that.
What did I say that was incorrect?
Saying homosexuals are more likely to commit suicide is one thing if backed by some quanitiative research but you made a blanketing bigoted statement implying all homosexuals were weak and or defective.
Homosexuals are often cast out by friends and family and/or shunned by segments of society. I am assuming you do not like homosexuals or approve of gay marriage. That constant bombardment of disapproval, disavowment, and pure bigoted hate contributes to depression especially in the already vulnerable 10-24 age range.
They have support groups for all kinds of different groups and problems and I am sure the whole gambit of different people who utilize them would be a lot worse of without them.
Cars are far more expensive than guns. I have a beater car and a nice car together they are probably worth about 5 times my firearms inventory.
However, to say you support the second amendment but then say in the same breath those who actively utilize that right are out of countrol for have 50 guns means you don’t support the second amendment.
So yeh I know what you mean you support limiting constitutional freedoms, which will lead to the eventual loss of them.
That’s the problem with liberals, it’s always someone else’s fault, no personal responsibility for your actions. What if someone kills a person with a bat or a knife…are you going after Dick’s Sporting Goods for selling a bat or Walmart for selling a knife?
I’m sure the firearms dealer sleeps just fine.
The difference is a knife or bat has a purpose other than killing. The only purpose a gun has it to kill. And the only purpose of a fifty round clip is to kill lots of people at the same time.
Interesting way you put that. So the shooter should have personal responsibility but the gun dealer has no personal responsibility to make sure he is selling the gun to someone who means no harm.
Does a liquor salesman know if that bottle of rum he sold is going to a responsible drinker or to someone that in an hour will be driving drunk, running a stop sign and killing a family of four?
Oh, “the only purpose a gun has is to kill”? You watch too much TV.
Yes, people who break the law are personally responsible for their actions. So are the drug addicts, drunks, pharmacy robbers, and on and on.
If you run over someone with your car, who are you going to blame? Chevrolet? Quirk Auto? Your phone?
You are trying to reason with unreasonable people.
I don’t know I laid out some sound logic. logic of course being based in rational thinking… I.E. Reason.
but math and logic makes no sense to liberals. Just knee jerk emotional reactions.
I don’t agree. I see a lot of illogic from conservatives. You responded above to TacRecon. (oh yeah, he calls to mind a previous poster with that Recon thing….no wonder.) Anyway….you don’t think you were responding to a liberal when you responded to TacRecon about homosexuals,do you ! If you think he is a liberal, think again.
I think he is an ignorant bigot. Probably one of the racist teapartiers that have highjacked the libertarian movement.
that is not the only purpose of the gun. it can be used for USPSA competitions, the Olympics, and other very large shooting competitions. It can be used to harvest game for sustenance or control animal populations to protect the environment. It can be used to protect yourself. It can be used as family entertainment shooting coke cans in the back yard.
Some knifes are developed expressly for combat should they be treated differently than knifes for cooking?
And AGAIN firearms dealers do have responsibility to make sure their sales are legal and above board. I also have seen FFL’s refuse to sell to people for various reasons, some for looking finicky or sketchy. However after a legal sale is complete it is no longer their responsibility.
If you knew jack about fire arms and practical shooting 1.) you would know they are called magazines 2.) the average reload time for an AR15 by a seasons user is 2 seconds or less 4 for a novice. No one makes a 50 rnd for the AR platform Holmes was using a 90rnd c-mag which jammed on him because they are junk. though surefire has started making a 60 round mag not sure on them yet. The typical GI mag is 30 rounds and what most experienced guys will run with.
Now say all the grandfathering concerning mag laws didn’t exist, and say all the 10+ round mags disappeared. So now instead of 1 reload every thirty rounds of fire you have 3. say you can squeeze the trigger twice every second that gives you 120rpm and with 10 round mags that is 12 reloads for a total of 24 seconds subtract that out of ur base fire rate for 96rnds in a minute. 4 reloads in 1 minute = 8 seconds that gives you 112 rounds in a minute.
Banning “high cap” mags is 18 rounds of difference per minute. less than a 15% shift in base fire rate. High cap mags making a big difference in a weapons killing power is a myth.
A 12 gauge shotgun loaded with 6 rounds of #1 buck will dispense 60 .30 projectiles with lethality out to 100 yards. potentially very lethal.
In the end the killing power of a weapon lies in the end user. I know some guys who are practitioners of Iaido. I would not want to go up against them armed with only my glock.
“The difference is a knife or bat has a purpose other than killing. The only purpose a gun has it to kill. And the only purpose of a fifty round clip is to kill lots of people at the same time.”
A gun has more than a single purpose. Many people myself included target practice with them. Some people collect them and never use them. Others shoot skeet or clay pigeons with them. Others compete in competitions.
~~~~~
“Interesting way you put that. So the shooter should have personal
responsibility but the gun dealer has no personal responsibility to make sure he is selling the gun to someone who means no harm.”
Again, a gun dealer cannot sell a gun to just any Tom, Dick or Jane.
“The only purpose a gun has it to kill.”
That’s odd. What’s with all of these shooting ranges and competitions?
That would be a bit like holding Ford or GM responsible for drunk drivers.
The problem with your “gun sellers can sell a gun to anyone” premise is it’s wrong.
A gun seller cannot sell a gun to just “anyone”. But why let facts get in the way of rhetoric?
How come this propaganda piece didnt mention global warming? All the others do! You’re slackin liberals!
There’s an epidemic of people who commit suicide by global warming???
This is an Opinion piece.
Once again, those who choose to misrepresent the existing issues jump into Alice’s hole and try to pull those with well intentioned heartstrings along for the ride. The statistical facts involving the propensity of firearms used to defer crime, offer protection to entire families and provide a safety net against those who originate barbaric behaviors are swept behind the curtain and only tragic events get pounded into the public’s view. “Gun Control” has been magically morphed into “Common Sense Gun Laws”, hunting rifles are now called “Sniper Rifles”, hanguns (other than .22 caliber) are now presented as “High Power Hand Guns”, and firearms whose asthetics are contemporary are now “Assault Weapons”, all in a never ending attempt to erode perhaps the freedom most relevant in securing one’s rightful ability to survive in today’s ever increasingly hostile environment, by using skewed and dishonest information. Orwell will be ever so proud of their efforts. The ever expanding numbers of individuals purchasing firearms for the first time, supporting the legislative actions of the National Rifle Association, and involving themselves with others who have committed to firearm relevancy are increasing at an expansive rate, as are the sales figures for additionally purchased firearms. Despite all that the dishonest ones can project, the citizens of this country know better and are acting accordingly. Please take the time to view the research and discover how the recent expansion of gun rights, reduced violent crimes, and the potential for increased safety are re-shaping this republic. Ken Fogelman
Funny how the same government that says you don’t need those nasty “assault weapons” (except if you’re a jihadist, cartel member, or on a politicians security detail) is the same government who now says that they can spy on you without a warrant and arrest and imprison you for life without a trial or due process, hmmmmmm.
Wait a minute…The NRA says that guns don’t kill..
They don’t.
It takes a conscious individual to apply pressure to a trigger, engaging the hammer until the trigger “brakes” and the hammer moves forward until the firing pin strikes a primer igniting the powder which result in a projectile going “down range”.
Now if you can find a firearm that can do all of the above without a human making the initial decision to apply pressure to a trigger I would love to hear about it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyAjzowYP1o
And in what gun shop can one purchase an “auto cannon”?
I dunno I hope maine military gets one soon!
I was just being comedicly factious though…
When was the last time a person in the United States use an “auto cannon” to commit suicide?
“…It found that states with higher rates of gun ownership had higher rates
of suicides caused by firearms, in addition to overall suicides”
This proves nothing except that these statistics favor logic. Its pretty safe to assume if there are more guns per person in a given state that the state would also have a higher chance of gun related suicides. How is that an alarming or even an interesting fact? Its like saying the sky is blue or water is wet. No kidding that if there are more guns around, then there will be more gun related incidents. Last month we got to hear about how bad conservatives were on a daily basis, December’s flavor of the month is guns. What is January’s topic of choice going to be?
more cars = more car accidents.
suicide rates are actually in decline overall according to CDC
<A href=http://www.afsp.org/index.cfm?page_id=04ea1254-bd31-1fa3-c549d77e6ca6aa37the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention says the national suicide rate in 2010 was 0.0124%
~
A 2010 National Institutes of Health says data compiled up to 2004 shows the suicide rate for people with schizophrenia at approximately 5%
~
Friedman: Does anything else accompany the voices?
Wilson: Yes, I get intense fear, too. It comes and goes. You get the feeling and it goes away.
Friedman: Do you remember any of the intense fears you’ve had?
Wilson: No, not really—they are so bad that I’ve blocked them out. I try very hard not to remember them. But I do know they’ve raised my stress level and made me feel depressed a lot. I have to take medication to treat the depression.
– Brian Wilson’s interview with ABILITY Magazine’s editor-in-chief Chet Cooper and senior health editor Gillian Friedman, MD,
~
Desperation may not be as it seems.
Where’s the Righteous outcry for the loss of life like in Benghazi ?
Benghazi = 4
USA = 35000 / this year ???
They better keep high bridges away from people too. This article is stupid. If they can’t find a gun I’m sure they can get the pills to doit with a lot less mess. GUNS don’t cause suicide. Don’t act sad when U go to buy a gun or the cops wilol be called. What can they do? NADA…… “Hello Sir, you look sad so you can’t buy a gun today”……stupid…..Jeeez. Wake up BDN…..BDN sensor coming!
Suicide is a personal choice for many. I strongly believe that in a free society people should be allowed to make choices about how to end their own lives.
Many folks have no idea of what life is like when one is under extreme pain (emotional or physical) and now-a-days physicians are loath to prescribe pain-killers because of fear that they will get into the wrong hands.
As a person who has worked with those under extreme clinical depression, I find there is no cure from this malady, currently. What “treatment” seems to accomplish is that the patient learns how to “deal with his/her level of depression so it does not make those close by uncomfortable.
Sometimes, life is not worth living. Like “stupid” there is no fixing that. I think that an .0124% rate of suicides is an acceptable number, and not a danger to our society or our way of life.
How about this an unnecessary operation is much more likely to kill someone than drunk driving. Why are we not outraged. A drunk driver does it because he is not thinking a doctor operates for greed. Charge all doctors with murder if someone they operated dies if the operation was unnecessary .
The why is mental illness and the stigma that goes along with it, which forces people who are already fragile to hide their symptoms and not to get help. Damned if you do and damned if you don’t.
70% of us are mentally ill . Its the ones that are not that I am afraid of.
The article is written well, but the attached CDC graph shows that half to two-thirds of the country shown is “unreleased data” (all the white). Removing the white areas shows me that the entire country has a high suicide rate. I think it is hard to come to a conclusion with only a third of the country’s scope known.