6 ms·

The death toll from guns no one talks about: suicides

3 points by imitationdame 11y ago

hirundo 11y ago
Suicide is a perfectly legitimate use for guns. If someone is so miserable that they want to die do we really want to make it harder for them? In most such cases the appropriate pill would be a better option: more sure, less dangerous to others. But since we've made those so hard to get, do we really want to condemn the use of other available tools to get the job done? When my father was dying of brain cancer and his time was short, he walked up to me as angry as I'd every seen him, asking what I had done with his gun. He was prepared at that moment to use it to end his life, fully dressed when he hadn't been out of bed except for the bathroom in more than a month. I hadn't hidden his gun from him, it was misplaced for other reasons. If he had found it where it belonged, the first I'd have heard about it would have been his final gunshot. Instead he changed his mind and decided to die at the pace of his disease, as his father had. It took about another three weeks, and there was nothing positive about those weeks for him, even with plenty of pain killers at hand. He lost control over himself, his personality, and his dignity. I try not to remember that part of his life. I don't know that he made the wrong decision. But I do know that it was right that he had that decision to make. Certainly there are many cases where guns are used for suicides that are tragically misjudged. But since we can't know what those people are feeling, they're in a better place to make that judgment than we are.
- zzalpha 11y ago
  If someone is so miserable that they want to die do we really want to make it harder for them? That's such a deeply complicated question I'm not sure where to start. To begin with, suicide and euthanasia are not interchangeable concepts. We have two different words for those concepts for a reason. So let's not begin by conflating them. Now, as for suicide specifically, the question is: how many folks choose to commit suicide, and then in the absence of any easy method, don't, and then ultimately be glad they didn't? That's the real challenge of any easy method of suicide. Someone who is depressed may make a snap decision to end their life, and then do so, when, if they'd only had some time to consider their decision, they might have chosen to do otherwise. So, to answer your question, yes, I think we should make it harder for them. Hard enough that it requires a bit of second thought before the decision can be made. If someone is truly determined to end their own life, a barrier like that won't stop them. But it will prevent those snap decisions from leading to a death that may have been avoided. Lastly, regarding your father, without hearing him speak, we the reader can't know if he regretted his choice to live out his days. I'm sure it was horrible and painful and a relief when it was done, but that doesn't mean his choice was the wrong one. Going back to my central thesis, I believe euthanasia should be a conscious, thoughtful decision, and never one made on the spur of the moment. But since we can't know what those people are feeling, they're in a better place to make that judgment than we are. I actually deeply disagree with this statement. Are you telling me you believe all folks considering suicide are in a state where they can make an accurate judgment? Have you ever deeply known someone with profound depression? Trust me: someone sufficiently depressed to consider suicide is suffering from an illness, and that illness deeply compromises their ability to make a considered decision in this topic. Yes, I agree, absolutely folks should be able to make their own decision, assuming they are of sound mind. But the vast majority of suicide is not by someone of sound mind.
  - hirundo 11y ago
    > how many folks choose to commit suicide, and then in the absence of any easy method, don't, and then ultimately be glad they didn't? I'm one of them. Yet that gives no one the right to substitute their will to live for mine. I have made many, many wrong decisions in life. Suicide may well one day be my last. But a life in which I'm prevented from making those mistakes is one more worth leaving. > So, to answer your question, yes, I think we should make it harder for them. That would be unethical aggression against another person, and not a mild one. If I resolutely stood between someone and their means of suicide they would be justified in using using deadly force to veto me. > Yes, I agree, absolutely folks should be able to make their own decision, assuming they are of sound mind. But the vast majority of suicide is not by someone of sound mind. That's a Soviet approach to mental health, where having a disfavored opinion was enough to make you legally incompetent. I understand deep depression intimately, yet disagree that it's grounds to infantilize another human.
    - zzalpha 11y ago
      I understand deep depression intimately, yet disagree that it's grounds to infantilize another human. So what about other mental illnesses? Dementia? Schizophrenia? Is it your position that, regardless of the mental state of the individual, their personal decisions should be paramount, no matter the cost, including their own life? If so, then we'll have to agree to disagree. There are many many contexts in which we, as a society, determine that someone is mentally unfit to make decisions, and then treat them differently, whether that be a schizophrenic who is given a different sentence in a trial, a person delirious on pain medication unable to sign a legal contract, or a minor who is denied the right to vote. If you disagree with that basic principle, you disagree with one of the fundamental tenants of the society in which you live. Of course, you're free to feel that way, but don't be surprised if others don't share your views.
      - hirundo 11y ago
        > There are many many contexts in which we, as a society, determine that someone is mentally unfit to make decisions And in many of those contexts those determinations are routinely unjustified, and have resulted in massive institutionalized civil rights violations over generations. You can read Thomas Szasz for heartbreaking details (e.g. http://www.amazon.com/Manufacture-Madness-Comparative-Inquisition-Movement/dp/0815604610 http://www.amazon.com/Manufacture-Madness-Comparative-Inquis...). Hopefully someday we can look back on such policies with similar horror to how we now see 17th century Bedlam. Instead of using them as arguments for further authoritarianism.

3 points by imitationdame 11y ago

Suicide is a perfectly legitimate use for guns. If someone is so miserable that they want to die do we really want to make it harder for them? In most such cases the appropriate pill would be a better option: more sure, less dangerous to others. But since we've made those so hard to get, do we really want to condemn the use of other available tools to get the job done? When my father was dying of brain cancer and his time was short, he walked up to me as angry as I'd every seen him, asking what I had done with his gun. He was prepared at that moment to use it to end his life, fully dressed when he hadn't been out of bed except for the bathroom in more than a month. I hadn't hidden his gun from him, it was misplaced for other reasons. If he had found it where it belonged, the first I'd have heard about it would have been his final gunshot. Instead he changed his mind and decided to die at the pace of his disease, as his father had. It took about another three weeks, and there was nothing positive about those weeks for him, even with plenty of pain killers at hand. He lost control over himself, his personality, and his dignity. I try not to remember that part of his life. I don't know that he made the wrong decision. But I do know that it was right that he had that decision to make. Certainly there are many cases where guns are used for suicides that are tragically misjudged. But since we can't know what those people are feeling, they're in a better place to make that judgment than we are.

zzalpha 11y ago
If someone is so miserable that they want to die do we really want to make it harder for them? That's such a deeply complicated question I'm not sure where to start. To begin with, suicide and euthanasia are not interchangeable concepts. We have two different words for those concepts for a reason. So let's not begin by conflating them. Now, as for suicide specifically, the question is: how many folks choose to commit suicide, and then in the absence of any easy method, don't, and then ultimately be glad they didn't? That's the real challenge of any easy method of suicide. Someone who is depressed may make a snap decision to end their life, and then do so, when, if they'd only had some time to consider their decision, they might have chosen to do otherwise. So, to answer your question, yes, I think we should make it harder for them. Hard enough that it requires a bit of second thought before the decision can be made. If someone is truly determined to end their own life, a barrier like that won't stop them. But it will prevent those snap decisions from leading to a death that may have been avoided. Lastly, regarding your father, without hearing him speak, we the reader can't know if he regretted his choice to live out his days. I'm sure it was horrible and painful and a relief when it was done, but that doesn't mean his choice was the wrong one. Going back to my central thesis, I believe euthanasia should be a conscious, thoughtful decision, and never one made on the spur of the moment. But since we can't know what those people are feeling, they're in a better place to make that judgment than we are. I actually deeply disagree with this statement. Are you telling me you believe all folks considering suicide are in a state where they can make an accurate judgment? Have you ever deeply known someone with profound depression? Trust me: someone sufficiently depressed to consider suicide is suffering from an illness, and that illness deeply compromises their ability to make a considered decision in this topic. Yes, I agree, absolutely folks should be able to make their own decision, assuming they are of sound mind. But the vast majority of suicide is not by someone of sound mind.
- hirundo 11y ago
  > how many folks choose to commit suicide, and then in the absence of any easy method, don't, and then ultimately be glad they didn't? I'm one of them. Yet that gives no one the right to substitute their will to live for mine. I have made many, many wrong decisions in life. Suicide may well one day be my last. But a life in which I'm prevented from making those mistakes is one more worth leaving. > So, to answer your question, yes, I think we should make it harder for them. That would be unethical aggression against another person, and not a mild one. If I resolutely stood between someone and their means of suicide they would be justified in using using deadly force to veto me. > Yes, I agree, absolutely folks should be able to make their own decision, assuming they are of sound mind. But the vast majority of suicide is not by someone of sound mind. That's a Soviet approach to mental health, where having a disfavored opinion was enough to make you legally incompetent. I understand deep depression intimately, yet disagree that it's grounds to infantilize another human.
  - zzalpha 11y ago
    I understand deep depression intimately, yet disagree that it's grounds to infantilize another human. So what about other mental illnesses? Dementia? Schizophrenia? Is it your position that, regardless of the mental state of the individual, their personal decisions should be paramount, no matter the cost, including their own life? If so, then we'll have to agree to disagree. There are many many contexts in which we, as a society, determine that someone is mentally unfit to make decisions, and then treat them differently, whether that be a schizophrenic who is given a different sentence in a trial, a person delirious on pain medication unable to sign a legal contract, or a minor who is denied the right to vote. If you disagree with that basic principle, you disagree with one of the fundamental tenants of the society in which you live. Of course, you're free to feel that way, but don't be surprised if others don't share your views.
    - hirundo 11y ago
      > There are many many contexts in which we, as a society, determine that someone is mentally unfit to make decisions And in many of those contexts those determinations are routinely unjustified, and have resulted in massive institutionalized civil rights violations over generations. You can read Thomas Szasz for heartbreaking details (e.g. http://www.amazon.com/Manufacture-Madness-Comparative-Inquisition-Movement/dp/0815604610 http://www.amazon.com/Manufacture-Madness-Comparative-Inquis...). Hopefully someday we can look back on such policies with similar horror to how we now see 17th century Bedlam. Instead of using them as arguments for further authoritarianism.