So, what does this say about the gun owners debate?
 

If someone is intent on killing themselves, they will find a way. Instead of a gun, is it better for a person to commit suicide by crashing their vehicle into something....or someone?

In the United States we commit suicide more often then we commit homicide.

Whether we have guns or not, this is not going to change.

So what do you think should happen Enigma? Take everyone's guns away? Just curious.

Point missed....

I don't think guns should be taken away, no. I'm also aware that people will find a way to kill themselves. :doh:

The question is: What does this say about a rather high percentage of gun owners?

I own firearms of the sporting variety, and I'd prefer to keep them. I don't own fireamrs designed to kill humans, however.

True, someone with a deep seated and determinded desire to kill themselves will find a way.

But the numbers suggest is that people who have a gun are more likely to kill themselves after a sudden depression or while drunk. Many people attempt to kill themselves but don't really intend to go through with it but if you pull the triger there is no turning back and compared to other methods of killing yourself its relatively easy.

It says that the gene pool is self cleaning. Darwin was right....


They are comparing firearm deaths. Until you look at numbers like the total number of people committing suicide, and how many of them are/were gun owners, it doesn't say much of anything.

Maybe it's easier for a gun owner to commit suicide because they have the tool right there. It's not like they get to think about it while someone tries to talk them off the ledge, or a doctor pumps out all the pills they swallowed, or stitches up their wrists. Suicide by firearm seems to be an effective method with few second chances.

For guns to be used in defense it doesn't necessarily require someone to die. Suicide however requires it by definition. Apples and oranges...

I don't know what you're getting at. Please elaborate your point of view as to what it says.

Compared to what other methods? Are you saying that once you jump off that building or bridge you can change your mind? Is it somehow more difficult to open a window or step in front of a speeding train than it is to pull the trigger?

I'm having difficulty understanding what you mean here. If someone really wants to commit suicide they will do so. If someone just wants attention then they will never actually pull that trigger.

according to many documentaries i've seen US has a high rate of incidents due to firearms because of the easiness to own weapons . don't know but going to the supermarket or to a café pavement area with a 38 or a 45 in the underpants at the 21st century has something insane for me . according to what is told guys who buy weapons could have suicidal tendances it would be psycologically unstable people , quite scary

The headline reads 'Half Of Gun Deaths Are Suicides.'

It doesn't mention what percentage of all deaths are suicide. Actually the percentage is fairly low, which might give the argument some validity; but there are other interesting factors to consider, such as the leading causes of death overall, which not many people seem to want to stand up and shout about:
http://www.benbest.com/lifeext/causes.html

Or the comparative suicide rates between the United States and other countries:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...y_suicide_rate

It seems that taken in either context, guns rate pretty low as a factor.

Let's assume, for the sake of argument that Gun owners are more likely to spontaneously and successfully commit suicide than non-gun owners.

What does that indicate?

Are you advocating that I (to make it personal) should lose my desire/right/whatever to own a gun just because someone else who owns a gun might

1. Decide to commit suicide
2. Might be successful using a handgun?

That hardly seems fair to me. I am having my desire/right infringed not because of what I might do, but because what someone else might do.

Does this seem right to you?

Platapus, as I was reading your post, the following suddenly occured to me:

1) If suicide by gun is much more likely to be fatal...

2) If the only way you can commit suicide with a gun is if you have one...

3) If commiting suicide with a gun removes the gun owner from society...

Then shouldn't people who don't like guns be encouraging more gun ownership?

Its all down to opportunity.

Well take jumping off a tall building or bridge, there is a certain degree of planning and effort required to find a suitable buildng or structure, to gain entry to a suitable place to jump from etc etc. Now if you live in a penthouse apartment all these obsticles are easily overcome. But most people don't.

Jumping infront of a train, again requires a certain degree of planning and opportunity to do so.

Having an accessable gun around gives greater opportunity to kill oneself. Someone who on a momentary whim decides to end their life can do so easily. If they were forced to leave the house, travel to the nearest tall building etc they might on reflection think better of it.

What I'm trying to say is that many people who do commit suicide never really intend to do so, and if they were restrained from doing so to just a small extent then they may well decide against it.

Ah but for most people who advocate gun controls the aim is to prevent people from being killed or injured by guns, so this would rather defeat the object.