The gun violence debate we're not having

[DrDeth]

@Whack-a-Mole

While it used to be illegal to commit suicide in some states I do not think there are any states left where it is still illegal to commit suicide.

So then , why list it as some sort of illegal thing that must be stopped by banning guns?

Gun homicides are bad enough, no need to pad the number by bogus stats.

[begbert2]

@DrDeth

So then , why list it as some sort of illegal thing that must be stopped by banning guns?

Gun homicides are bad enough, no need to pad the number by bogus stats.

Since when does something have to be illegal to be undesirable enough that we take steps to stop it? That makes no sense whatsoever.

There are only three rational reasons to exclude gun suicides from the argument.

1. One believes that in the absence of guns the same number of suicides would occur anyway.
2. One thinks that people killing themselves is awesome and wants more suicides to occur.
3. One cares more about their argument than human life.
   For simplicity, I assume that reason 2 is the real reason unless given evidence otherwise.

[Bone]

Conflating firearm suicides with firearm homicides operates under the assumption that the causes and solutions to each are of similar nature. They are not of similar nature, so they should not be discussed together as if they are. A simple example illustrates this - one proposal by gun control folks is to limit magazine size, because as gun control folks may argue, this could reduce firearm homicides. Of course, when looking at suicide, magazine size is irrelevant.

There may be overlapping actions that could impact both, but the causes and potential solutions to each are different enough that grouping homicides and suicides seems to be more about inflating a number.

[rat_avatar]

@begbert2

Since when does something have to be illegal to be undesirable enough that we take steps to stop it? That makes no sense whatsoever.

There are only three rational reasons to exclude gun suicides from the argument.

1. One believes that in the absence of guns the same number of suicides would occur anyway.
2. One thinks that people killing themselves is awesome and wants more suicides to occur.
3. One cares more about their argument than human life.
   For simplicity, I assume that reason 2 is the real reason unless given evidence otherwise.

Special pleading. (argument in which the speaker deliberately ignores aspects that are unfavorable to their point of view.)

1. People who search out treatment have much lower suicide rates, and stigma is a huge part of the reason people do not seek treatment.

[

Not only does the stigmatisation of mental illness prevent people from seeking treatment, which in turn exposes them to a greater risk of suicide, but also suicide can appear to be the best solution for a stigmatised individual.

](Authors' reply | The British Journal of Psychiatry | Cambridge Core)

2. Suicides by firearms vary greatly with gender, and it is epidemic for males, who due to social stigmas are less likely to seek treatment.

[

Yet suicide is, itself, a source of stigma as anyone with suicidal ideation is considered weak, shameful, sinful and selfish, which prevents these individuals from seeking treatment early in the suicidal process.

](Authors' reply | The British Journal of Psychiatry | Cambridge Core)
[

A significantly larger percentage of male students agreed that most medical students would not want to work with a depressed medical student (49.0% vs 29.4%; 95% CI for difference, 9.51%-29.7%; P < .001) and that depressed medical students are viewed as dangerous to their patients (36.3% vs 20.1; 95% CI for difference, 6.1%-26.3%; P = .002).

](https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/186586)

3. The only reason I have commented on any of these threads is because I prioritize healthcare, and for the left to regain control of congress ASAP, which will not happen if gun control emboldens the gun voter block.

4. The US has NEVER passed a gun control law that lead to confiscation of existing firearms, and thus will not have a huge impact on the suicide rate in any reasonable time frame.

5. I have yet to see any mass shooting lead to people advocating for improving mental services, or reducing stigma. In fact most discussions talk about passing laws to restrict ownership by people who have been diagnosed. This will never as actual law because we are constitutionally restricted from limiting an individuals ‘rights’ without due-process. The courts rarely if ever actually go through with adjudication in mental illness, as anyone who has a mentally ill family member with an extreme case will attest to.

And thus I would counter that your argument is the one that “cares more about their argument than human life.”

[rat_avatar]

To bring this discussion back around to the point, and because most of the thread is hinging on suicide.

As McDonald v. City of Chicago resulted in the 2nd amendments incorporation of the Bill of Rights, to state and local gun control laws and not just federal laws. And because semi-auto rifles and high capacity handguns are not more effective for suicide:

1. What is a realistic method of passing a constitutional amendment to repeal or modify the 2nd amendment?

2. How will we managed to get it proposed, and passed Congress or a national convention of the states. As a national convention is unlikely, how do we get this through a Republican congress successfully, and if we try and fail what are the chances that it will actually tip congress more to the Right through encouraging gun owners to vote. (I may be a skeptic here, but we failed to avoid electing an actual fascist as president so I don’t think that this will be an option for years)

3. It will need to be ratified by three-fourths of the states, what 38 states would be willing to do so?

4. To effectively reduce access to legal guns we will need to have a confiscation event as the number of firearms is about 1:1 with people and they last for a very long time. I don’t think we have ever passed a law without a grandfather clause, so would we need to modify other parts of the constitution to do this?

5. As a large portion of gun violence is related to the prohibition of specific drugs, how do we ensure that underground economy doesn’t just take firearms on as a new product line. Firearms are trivial to manufacture, and they aren’t much harder to import than drugs.

I am really curious, I am sure several of you have thought these through but I am not seeing any real discussion past the (guns are good, guns are bad) stage.

[Whack-a-Mole]

@DrDeth

So then , why list it as some sort of illegal thing that must be stopped by banning guns?

Gun homicides are bad enough, no need to pad the number by bogus stats.

As begbert2 noted just because you are allowed to do a thing does not make it a good idea to do that thing.

I will presume that there are people in this world that you care a lot about. I seriously doubt if one of them said, “I’m going to go into my room and blow my head off” that you’d just sit there and let them go because you think it is their right to do that. (Assume you have every reason to believe they mean what they say.)

Choosing suicide with the input of your friends and family is one thing. Having a bad day and then sticking a gun in your mouth in a moment of depression is something else.

[DrDeth]

@begbert2

Since when does something have to be illegal to be undesirable enough that we take steps to stop it? That makes no sense whatsoever.

There are only three rational reasons to exclude gun suicides from the argument.

1. One believes that in the absence of guns the same number of suicides would occur anyway.
2. One thinks that people killing themselves is awesome and wants more suicides to occur.
3. One cares more about their argument than human life.
   For simplicity, I assume that reason 2 is the real reason unless given evidence otherwise.

1. Yes, more or less, pretty close.
2. It is their right to do so.
3. I care more about their rights as a human than their life if it is unhappy and full of terminal pain.

[Whack-a-Mole]

@DrDeth

3. I care more about their rights as a human than their life if it is unhappy and full of terminal pain.

(bolding above mine)

I am with you if the person is in terminal pain and their suicide is well considered and ideally done with the input of family members and close friends who support them in that decision. A person who has chronic, extreme pain and no end in sight for instance.

I admit I am guessing here but my sense of it is most suicides are not like the above but rather done surreptitiously.

As an example I am not sure we want to green light a teen committing suicide because she didn’t make the cheer-leading squad.