You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
An inconvenient truth ignored... (again) [Research on firearms in the home]
- Thread starter mehavey
- Start date
Exit_Wound
New member
Best summation can be.
smoking is bad for babies. therefore lets pass a law that prevents pregnant women from being anywhere cigarette smoke can be found.
I'm not sure what your point is here, but would you oppose banning smoking anywhere pregnant women are expected to/need to/like to be?
Suicides per 100,000 people...
South Korea 24.7
Hungary 21.0
Japan 19.4
Belgium 18.4
Finland 16.5
France 14.6
Austria 13.8
Poland 13.8
Czech Republic 12.7
New Zealand 11.9
Denmark 11.3
Sweden 11.1
Norway 10.9
Slovak Republic 10.9
Iceland 10.4
Germany 10.3
Canada 10.2
United States 10.1
Luxembourg 9.5
Portugal 8.7
Netherlands 7.9
Spain 6.3
Britain 6
Italy 5.5
Mexico 4.4
Greece 2.9
Guns are almost non-existent in S. Korea, which interestingly has a suicide rate nearly 2.5% higher than ours.
Thats a lot of suicides to commit using some other means.
I have little doubt that America's firearms play a significant roll in impulsive spur-of-the-moment suicides, simply because they are immediately available and the results are instant, but beyond that S. Korea and Japan's numbers show that where there is a will there is a way and firearm ownership is basically irrelevant to suicides
(Nearly no firearms in Japan, also.)
South Korea 24.7
Hungary 21.0
Japan 19.4
Belgium 18.4
Finland 16.5
France 14.6
Austria 13.8
Poland 13.8
Czech Republic 12.7
New Zealand 11.9
Denmark 11.3
Sweden 11.1
Norway 10.9
Slovak Republic 10.9
Iceland 10.4
Germany 10.3
Canada 10.2
United States 10.1
Luxembourg 9.5
Portugal 8.7
Netherlands 7.9
Spain 6.3
Britain 6
Italy 5.5
Mexico 4.4
Greece 2.9
Guns are almost non-existent in S. Korea, which interestingly has a suicide rate nearly 2.5% higher than ours.
Thats a lot of suicides to commit using some other means.
I have little doubt that America's firearms play a significant roll in impulsive spur-of-the-moment suicides, simply because they are immediately available and the results are instant, but beyond that S. Korea and Japan's numbers show that where there is a will there is a way and firearm ownership is basically irrelevant to suicides
(Nearly no firearms in Japan, also.)
Double Naught Spy
New member
Japan's numbers show that where there is a will there is a way and firearm ownership is basically irrelevant to suicides
(Nearly no firearms in Japan, also.)
Right, and we can even look at data from the opposition and see that for a country such as Japan that does have a higher suicide rate than the US, the much lower gun ownership does not appear to causative. You can no more say that high gun ownership correlates with higher suicides per capita than lower gun ownership correlates with fewer suicides per capita.
http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/japan
For example,
The estimated rate of private gun ownership (both licit and illicit) in Japan is 0.61 firearms per 100 people
In Japan, annual suicides by any means total 1997: 23,502
Rate of Suicide per 100,000 People (any method)
In Japan, the annual rate of suicide by any means per 100,000 population is
1997: 18.41
1994: 16.72
In Japan, annual firearm suicides total 1999: 47
Rate of Gun Suicide per 100,000 People
In Japan, the annual rate of firearm suicide per 100,000 population is
1999: 0.04
1994: 0.04
The data are dated, but the pattern is fairly clear. There are few guns in Japan and few guns being used for suicide, but the suicide rate is very high (compared to the US). Obviously, guns are not the issue.
For some reason US has a higher homicide rate than Greece and most of Europe.
Only if you look at it a certain way. War is homicide, and Europe has had a LOT more of that than the US.
Although it has changed some, most European nations have a much more ...consistant culture than the US. More homogenous. Areas that don't have a high level of consistency in the culture are more violent. Look at the Balkans, for one example. Multiple ethnic groups (with the added complication of different religions), have been fighting and killing there for centuries. Europe has had nearly constant warfare between someone since the days when there were no nations, only tribes.
This year marks the 100th anniversary of the start of the First World War. Which, btw, was begun in Europe...
Europe is currently experiencing what I think is its longest continuous period of "peace" in centuries. (no, please don't mention ethnic cleansing in the Balkans..they don't want to count that against their peace) I hope it lasts a long, long time, but history argues against it.
the US is often referred to as a melting pot, and in many ways, it is true. The pot bubbles and roils, its not a calm simmer all the time. And if you look at the ideas put forth by many of our "leaders", it does seem true that the dross floats to the top....
Homicide for personal reasons, by individuals, the US has more than Europe, currently at any rate. Homicide for political reasons, by groups? Europe has a really good lock on that, the US can't even come close.
Europe is currently experiencing what I think is its longest continuous period of "peace" in centuries.
Europe experienced a 5 decade "Pax Americana" ..... which was really not a "peace", but a cold war, between the United States and it's proxies, and the Soviet Union, and it's proxies. Europe stopped warring with itself because a giant eagle and a huge bear divided them up into two piles and sat on them, glowering and trading polite insults at each other for half a century.
Almost as soon as the two superpowers ceased their staring contest, and wandered away to other pursuits, the most unstable part of Europe (the Balkans) started fighting again ..... with various nations taking sides, almost exactly like they did before the Great War .... only this time, they let their proxies fight it out .....
only this time, they let their proxies fight it out .....
so far....
Ah.. I miss the good ol days.a giant eagle and a huge bear divided them up into two piles and sat on them, glowering and trading polite insults at each other for half a century.
Our current leaders have also reduced us from Eagle status to buzzard status.
Ah.. I miss the good ol days.
Ah, Nostalgia ...... the whole thing turned out well, but I also remember the fatalism I viewed life with in the Army in 1987 ..... It appeared to me the bear was dying and would lash out before keeeling over .... and my life expectancy in any war would be measured in hours, not days ..... the question was how many Warsaw Pact soldiers could I kill before they got me ..... that chemical weapons would be used was a given, and tactical nukes (including the ones our 8" GS Field Artillery Bn trained to use) were likely ..... oh, I remember the ugly side of things, as well .... WWIII in western Europe would have had all the worst aspects of WWI and II, and some that were newly invented .....
Double Naught Spy
New member
Very good, jimbob86, in providing an example of how nostalgia for the good old days often provides blinders of ignorance about what really once was and how bad things actually were or could of been, much like how information (inconvenient truths) are ignored today.
johnwilliamson062
Moderator
The only statistic/number I have ever seen presented which is at all convincing of the danger of gun in home argument is increased success of suicide attempts using firearms.
I think most psychiatrists will agree there are two types of attempted suicides. One is a call for help and the other is an actual attempt to end ones life.
What method a person chooses in their attempt is influenced most by their intent. Jumping off of buildings higher than 5 stories has an alarmingly high success rate. No one is arguing to limit construction of tall buildings. So does jumping off of high bridges over dry valleys or cold water. A firearm is reputed to be a near sure thing although I think success rates are lower than many imagine. I think the "success" rate of committing suicide when that is the intent is probably lower with firearms than with many other methods employed as such, but of course it is higher when compared to ?accidental success? rates with with "cry for help methods."
Of course, as a classical liberal I don't think any government expenditure or restriction on rights is a reasonable measure to protect people from themselves.
I think most psychiatrists will agree there are two types of attempted suicides. One is a call for help and the other is an actual attempt to end ones life.
What method a person chooses in their attempt is influenced most by their intent. Jumping off of buildings higher than 5 stories has an alarmingly high success rate. No one is arguing to limit construction of tall buildings. So does jumping off of high bridges over dry valleys or cold water. A firearm is reputed to be a near sure thing although I think success rates are lower than many imagine. I think the "success" rate of committing suicide when that is the intent is probably lower with firearms than with many other methods employed as such, but of course it is higher when compared to ?accidental success? rates with with "cry for help methods."
Of course, as a classical liberal I don't think any government expenditure or restriction on rights is a reasonable measure to protect people from themselves.
Double Naught Spy
New member
Right, folks may be more successful with firearms. That being said, a person bent on suicide is going to suicide regardless. As noted with the Japan and Korean examples, it may not be with guns, but they will accomplish the task.