🇺🇸 Discussion: Guns, The Second Amendment, NRA - Part II

[ComicBookNerd]

Great... it's not as likely to be lethal... and what exactly does that matter?

I can kill a person with a tree branch, does that mean we shouldn't ban AR-15s? Obviously not.

Just because other methods aren’t as lethal doesn’t mean they aren’t lethal. Keep in mind that we’re talking about people who are determined to kill themselces.

 

[Donner]

Just a little perspective and why it's important to think critically every time someone claims that a statistic is fact.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/actors-gun-facts/?utm_medium=social&utm_source=socialflow

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/actors-gun-facts-2/

 

[MaceB]

Just because other methods aren’t as lethal doesn’t mean they aren’t lethal. Keep in mind that we’re talking about people who are determined to kill themselces.

That's my point. The argument that you don't have to use a gun is one of the gun industries biggest talking points. Hey, why ban Ar-15s? It's not like a hand gun can't do a lot of deaths anyway.
Why take away their guns? They are just going to kill themselves anyway.

Again and again and again, there's no perfect solution. Arguing that folks could just use other ways to kill themselves is a distraction. Of course they could. So? Stopping people who have depression from having guns would undoubtedly save lives... even if it doesn't save them all.

And we aren't necessarily talking about people intent on killing themselves. We're talking about people who think about killing themselves... some might do it if they have a gun. Some might not.

 

[MaceB]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/5095170/Millionaire-businessman-Christopher-Foster-killed-wife-and-daughter-to-avoid-degrading-change-in-lifestyle.html

https://nypost.com/2017/12/03/golden-krust-ceo-killed-himself-over-tax-debt-fears-of-probe/

https://www.insideedition.com/headlines/25180-wealthy-businessman-murders-wife-and-teen-daughter-before-killing-himself

Three anecdotes is not proof in anyway shape or form. It happens, yes. But is it common? No. Is it likely or dependable? No. Is it reason to stop those who are mentally ill from getting a gun? No.
Show me evidence that by and large, many mass shootings are caused by regular people in bad circumstances. Three stories is not enough.

 

[ComicBookNerd]

That's my point. The argument that you don't have to use a gun is one of the gun industries biggest talking points. Hey, why ban Ar-15s? It's not like a hand gun can't do a lot of deaths anyway.
Why take away their guns? They are just going to kill themselves anyway.

Again and again and again, there's no perfect solution. Arguing that folks could just use other ways to kill themselves is a distraction. Of course they could. So? Stopping people who have depression from having guns would undoubtedly save lives... even if it doesn't save them all.

And we aren't necessarily talking about people intent on killing themselves. We're talking about people who think about killing themselves... some might do it if they have a gun. Some might not.

I think if you’re going to take away people’s rights, you have to go by what they’ve actually done, not what they might do.

 

[MaceB]

I think if you’re going to take away people’s rights, you have to go by what they’ve actually done, not what they might do.

I guess if you are just going to cycle back to your original point without addressing any of mine, then this isn't so worth while anymore. Best wishes.

 

[MaceB]

The typical gun violence perpetrator: withdrawn, prone to anger, prone to threats, isolated...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...deo-games-or-religion/?utm_term=.6a3a7b87e395

 

[ComicBookNerd]

I guess if you are just going to cycle back to your original point without addressing any of mine, then this isn't so worth while anymore. Best wishes.

Well that’s just how the justice system works, it’s reactive, not proactive.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Just because other methods aren’t as lethal doesn’t mean they aren’t lethal. Keep in mind that we’re talking about people who are determined to kill themselces.

That is not how it works. At all.

 

[ComicBookNerd]

That is not how it works. At all.

People who commit suicide aren’t determined to kill themselves? Really? Please explain.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

People who commit suicide aren’t determined to kill themselves? Really? Please explain.

http://www.mdmag.com/conference-coverage/apa-2017/guns-mental-illness-and-suicide-a-close-look

Access to firearms is a key component of suicide rates. According to Maldonado, “The strongest single factor predictive of suicide is a prior history of attempted suicide, and the strongest predictor of how likely a person is to die from suicide is access to a gun.” It is the combination of lethality and accessibility that makes firearms the most common mode of suicide in the US.

“The presence of a gun in the home increases the likelihood of suicide, regardless of the method of storage, type of gun, or the number of guns in the home,” explained Maldonado. According to the data, if a gun is not available in the home, a gun is rarely used as the method of suicide.

Maldonado added that firearm suicide rate in states that do not require a waiting period for gun sales has been twice as high as the rate in states that do require a waiting period. Furthermore, while some suicide attempts are carefully planned, most are impulsive. Some studies of survivors of suicide have revealed that as many as two-thirds of the attempters did not plan their attempt, with about a quarter attempting suicide within 5 minutes of having suicidal thoughts, about half within 20 minutes, and nearly three-quarters within an hour of suicidal ideation.

Immediate stressors often trigger suicidal crises, with most survivors reported having made their attempt within 24 hours of a crisis. However, the urge to act is short-lived, typically lasting a few minutes to a few hours.

Maldonado said, “Intervention during the time of acute risk is key to saving lives. Most people who attempt suicide don’t really want to die, they are just so overwhelmed by their emotions that they feel unable to cope. A systematic review of 70 studies following patients after a non-fatal attempt found that on average only 7% eventually died by suicide, whereas 70% did not reattempt.”

 

[MaceB]

Well that’s just how the justice system works, it’s reactive, not proactive.

Sigh, this isn't responsive to my post at all.

 

[ComicBookNerd]

http://www.mdmag.com/conference-coverage/apa-2017/guns-mental-illness-and-suicide-a-close-look

So in other words, they’ll go for the most convenient way to kill themselves. If not firearms, suffocation, poison, or some other method.

 

[MaceB]

So in other words, they’ll go for the most convenient way to kill themselves. If not firearms, suffocation, poison, or some other method.

"Immediate stressors often trigger suicidal crises, with most survivors reported having made their attempt within 24 hours of a crisis. However, the urge to act is short-lived, typically lasting a few minutes to a few hours."

 

[ComicBookNerd]

Sigh, this isn't responsive to my post at all.

You main premise is that we should take rights away based on what someone might do, not what they’ve actually done. If we’re going to do that, it will have to be done through a legal procedure which will likely be contested. In which case, you need evidence beyond a psychological profile.

 

[ComicBookNerd]

"Immediate stressors often trigger suicidal crises, with most survivors reported having made their attempt within 24 hours of a crisis. However, the urge to act is short-lived, typically lasting a few minutes to a few hours."

Weren’t you saying earlier that a 72 hour cooling period was worthless?

 

[MaceB]

You main premise is that we should take rights away based on what someone might do, not what they’ve actually done. If we’re going to do that, it will have to be done through a legal procedure which will likely be contested. In which case, you need evidence beyond a psychological profile.

The point I was making at the time was how the argument that one can still kill themselves, even without a gun, is short sighted, and it's the go-to argument of the gun industry. Apparently, those details weren't worth exploring.
Arguing with someone who just repeats their initial point and ignores nuance is not much fun on a public forum evolving around talking to each other.

 

[MaceB]

Weren’t you saying earlier that a 72 hour cooling period was worthless?

Sigh, again... you just aren't one for context in your posts, are you? I was addressing your summation of the article, which was incorrect.
In regards to wait periods, you're right... I probably wasn't being open enough to that. I think that giving folks cool off periods is good... although likely not to fix the problem with depression or other mental illness. I don't think it's mutually exclusive with taking away their gun (for a time!) at all though.

 

[ComicBookNerd]

The point I was making at the time was how the argument that one can still kill themselves, even without a gun, is short sighted, and it's the go-to argument of the gun industry. Apparently, those details weren't worth exploring.
Argument with someone who just repeats their initial point and ignores nuance is not much fun on a public forum evolving around talking to each other.

Well, if we’re going to discuss a legitimate solution, we have to come up with something that works with the system. Otherwise, we’re just talking fantasy land. Fact is that if you’re going to take someone guns away for whatever reason, you have to go through a legal procedure which requires the presentation of evidence.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

So in other words, they’ll go for the most convenient way to kill themselves. If not firearms, suffocation, poison, or some other method.

Did you read that at all? This is such obvious troll behavior, I honestly don't know what to say to it. But I will try one more time.

It shows suicide the majority of the time is impulsive. Why having guns around, which are 90% effective in these attempts as opposed to 3% by anything else, and that only 7% eventually die after trying again and only 30% even try again, is a very bad idea.

 

[Marvolo]

That is not how it works. At all.

Non premeditated suicide is not the same thing as not wanting to kill oneself. Not everyone that tries actually wants to kill themself, but some certainly are determined to end their life regardless of whether they planned well in advance or just said , "**** it.", and grabbed a gun and put a bullet through their brain five minutes after the suicidal thought.

 

[MaceB]

Well, if we’re going to discuss a legitimate solution, we have to come up with something that works with the system. Otherwise, we’re just talking fantasy land. Fact is that if you’re going to take someone guns away for whatever reason, you have to go through a legal procedure which requires the presentation of evidence.

And again, you close off the idea of incremental change in favor of an all-or-nothing strategy. This is what we've been fighting over for a page or two, but you don't seem to want to get it.
We could easily make a bill that sets our sights on things like violence, threats, and personal history to make a gun court or something. And in that court, that material could be shown as evidence. There are lots of options if you are looking for them.

And it's worth noting, that you ignored my point again about the false comparison. The idea that we shouldn't enact gun legislation because some folks are dead set on getting a gun to kill themselves or others is missing the forest for the trees.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Non premeditated suicide is not the same thing as not wanting to kill oneself. Not everyone that tries actually wants to kill themself, but some certainly are determined to end their life regardless of whether they planned well in advance or just said , "**** it.", and grabbed a gun and put a bullet through their brain five minutes after the suicidal thought.

Read the article. The doctor says most who attempt suicide don't really want to die. Which is exactly why for those who survive another attempt is low as is actual death in the end. Now this all changes when you involve a gun because of how effective it is at ending life.

 

[Marvolo]

Read the article. The doctor says most who attempt suicide don't really want to die. Which is exactly why for those who survive another attempt is low as is actual death in the end. Now this all changes when you involve a gun because of how effective it is at ending life.

They probably did at the time and just changed their minds.

We definitely need to look for a history of chronic depression and repeated suicide attempts and violence when issuing gun permits. That being said, I don't think all people should be forbidden from owning guns because they dealt with depression or tried to kill themselves in their past. I don't think a other persons potentially committing suicide and succeeding should have any bearing on whether another person should own a gun. And the government probably isnt capable of handling it all on a case by case basis which means a lot of people would probably lose their ability to own guns because the government would just cast a blanket over a large swath of people and decide they cant own guns because they dealt with depression at one point in their life.

I guess what I'm saying is I don't trust the government to operate with the sort of nuance required to determine whether depressed people should own guns. And considering I've been taking anti depression medicine for 4 years and own guns you can see why I have actual skin in this.

 

[ComicBookNerd]

And again, you close off the idea of incremental change in favor of an all-or-nothing strategy. This is what we've been fighting over for a page or two, but you don't seem to want to get it.
We could easily make a bill that sets our sights on things like violence, threats, and personal history to make a gun court or something. And in that court, that material could be shown as evidence. There are lots of options if you are looking for them.

And it's worth noting, that you ignored my point again about the false comparison. The idea that we shouldn't enact gun legislation because some folks are dead set on getting a gun to kill themselves or others is missing the forest for the trees.

I’m fine with your proposals in theory, but I don’t think they’re at all realistic in America. They completely overlook the 2nd amendment, 4th amendment, & 6th amendment. As far as getting a bill passed, you would still have to face the same hurdles if you’re going to take someone’s guns away.