4 ms·

These kinds of results also point to how much of an impact guns have on suicide rates. Guns make it a lot easier to attempt suicide and achieve it. In the US,

These kinds of results also point to how much of an impact guns have on suicide rates. Guns make it a lot easier to attempt suicide and achieve it. In the US, guns are often more readily available than medical treatment. If you have a gun laying around, and you have a short bout of suicidal ideation, that can be an unfortunate combination. On top of that, people believe it will be less painful than other methods, increasing the appeal. Virtually any other method of suicide takes more effort and time. The more time an attempt takes, the less probable the patients are to go through with it, and the more likely the attempt is discovered in time.

_delirium 7y ago
Methods seem to vary a lot by country, and some of the highest-rate countries don't primarily use guns, so I'm not sure other methods can be easily dismissed as less dangerous. For example, Belgium's overall suicide rate is higher than the USA's, and the most popular method there is hanging (a majority of male suicides, and a plurality of female suicides) [1]. Of course I can't say that the rate wouldn't be even higher if Belgium had more guns, but it manages a quite high rate without them. [1] https://jech.bmj.com/content/62/6/545 https://jech.bmj.com/content/62/6/545
- bayesian_horse 7y ago
  It's misleading at best to reduce differences between countries to one thing, like gun ownership. Nobody said this was the only factor affecting suicide rates. The article you cite provides virtually no information on how the availability of guns, especially because guns are generally much less available in Europe than in the US. Still, about 30% of suicides in Switzerland are committed with guns. Virtually every country has its own culture around guns and around suicide. Very obviously in the case of Japan with high suicide rates and even ritualistic ways of suicide. Therefore it is impossible to isolate the effect of gun ownership just by looking at different countries. And "not being the primary way of suicide" is a really weak argument against tightening gun controls to save people's lives. Even if it is "just" 10% in Europe, 30% in Switzerland and about 50% in the US. Those lives are very much worth saving, and at least in Europe, it's already the norm to take away guns from people who have these problems. Gun advocates often cite Switzerland as a country with very responsible gun owners. Still, if you compare the rates of gun suicides, accidents and murder to their smaller population, it's still quite shocking. But those stories rarely make news abroad.
  - KptMarchewa 7y ago
    You were talking about "impact guns have on suicide rates". People are using method that they think is most successful, and if they own gun, it's very probable that they will use it. >And "not being the primary way of suicide" is a really weak argument against tightening gun controls to save people's lives. Even if it is "just" 10% in Europe, 30% in Switzerland and about 50% in the US. Those lives are very much worth saving, and at least in Europe, it's already the norm to take away guns from people who have these problems. This is a weak argument, because it implies that by taking guns, people won't commit suicide, when they may just do it by any other method. Which the high rates of suicide in several other countries with way less gun ownership than in US point to. By the way, using emotionally charged statements like "those lives are very much worth saving" when your interlocutor did not suggest anything otherwise is at the very least unpleasant discussion style.
    - zaarn 7y ago
      >This is a weak argument, because it implies that by taking guns, people won't commit suicide, when they may just do it by any other method. That argument is correct; a major suicide prevention measure is taking away methods. When countries switched from coal gas to natural gas, suicide rate went down for this reason. Suicide is largely a in-the-moment decision and guns make it very easy to act on it. >Which the high rates of suicide in several other countries with way less gun ownership than in US point to. I don't think that's true, they may just have a different culture that leads to more suicide. Gun ownership isn't the only difference between the USA and other countries.
    - bayesian_horse 7y ago
      People are quite particular about their methods of suicide. They usually don't want to have any pain, but prefer to die instantly. No method checks as many of these boxes as using a gun. I got the previous argument as saying exactly that the main method of suicide in Europe is hanging, and not shooting, and therefor taking guns away from most people who don't have a positive need to be armed or with doubts about their reliability wouldn't affect suicides in a significant manner. Otherwise citing that article makes no sense to me, since it actually points to guns being a major factor. It's impossible to infer the effect of gun ownership on suicide rates by looking at countries. Too many confounding factors, too little number of countries. Same goes for states in the US. Suicide is a very culturally shaped topic, and on top of that it is affected by the health system, economy and various other factors.
- DanBC 7y ago
  How do they define a death by suicide in Belgium? Is that comparable to how they define it in the US?
  - bayesian_horse 7y ago
    One confounding factor would be the "Suicide by Cop" thing.
chrischen 7y ago
I'd be interested to read any research on how drugs impact suicide rates (particularly if it prevents people who would have otherwise committed suicide). As easy it is to get guns, I think drugs actually a bit easier to obtain despite being the thing that's illegal (due to gun purchase wait period).
- DanBC 7y ago
  This is a good question for several reasons. We know that alcohol and drug misuse is a risk factor for death by suicide, and that providing drug and alcohol services is a useful suicide prevention measure. See page 17 of this UK document: https://documents.manchester.ac.uk/display.aspx?DocID=40697 https://documents.manchester.ac.uk/display.aspx?DocID=40697 (which also links to their evidence) We know restricting access to means and methods is an important suicide prevention measure. We know this from some natural experiments. When the UK moved from coal gas to natural gas in the home one very common method was removed and we saw a reduction in suicide rates. We again saw a reduction when we introduced catalytic convertors in cars. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWPEVhrWZS0&t=415s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWPEVhrWZS0&t=415s It touches on how we define a death by suicide? What is counted? What is not counted? In the US a death by suicide should be defined as: (page 21) https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/self-directed-violence-a.pdf https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/self-directed-vio... > Suicide -- Death caused by self-directed injurious behavior with any intent to die as a result of the behavior. The US data is complex and confusing because: (page 12) https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/self-directed-violence-a.pdf https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/self-directed-vio... > Despite the large volume of data on certain types of SDV, the utility and reproducibility of the resulting information is sometimes questionable. Mortality data are problematic for several reasons: geographical differences in the definition of suicide and how equivocal cases are classified; jurisdictional differences in the requirements for the office of coroner or medical examiner affecting the standard of proof required to classify a death as a suicide; and differences in terms of the extent to which potential suicides are investigated to accurately determine cause of death.18 The quality of the data on nonfatal suicidal behavior is even more problematic than that of suicides. The concerns about discrepancies in nomenclature19-23 and accurate reporting11,24 apply here even more than with suicides. Also, except for rare exceptions there is neither systematic nor mandatory reporting of nonfatal suicidal behavior in the United States at the state or local level, nor is there routine systematic collection of non-suicidal intentional self harm data. So it's really hard to compare one state with another state.
belorn 7y ago
Suicide by car accident seem close in both effort and time, but maybe the reason we don't hear about it is that determining suicide in those cases is quite hard.
- bayesian_horse 7y ago
  There are multiple reasons why that isn't so much a thing. And it really doesn't seem to be very "popular". For example it's less effective. A lot of things have to go right, and the consequences of failure are severe, on all levels. Also there is a good chance of surviving in a very painful state. And on top of that it can be extended suicide, meaning you'll harm or kill other people. Some want that. Most absolutely don't.

_delirium 7y ago

Methods seem to vary a lot by country, and some of the highest-rate countries don't primarily use guns, so I'm not sure other methods can be easily dismissed as less dangerous. For example, Belgium's overall suicide rate is higher than the USA's, and the most popular method there is hanging (a majority of male suicides, and a plurality of female suicides) [1]. Of course I can't say that the rate wouldn't be even higher if Belgium had more guns, but it manages a quite high rate without them. [1] https://jech.bmj.com/content/62/6/545 https://jech.bmj.com/content/62/6/545

bayesian_horse 7y ago
It's misleading at best to reduce differences between countries to one thing, like gun ownership. Nobody said this was the only factor affecting suicide rates. The article you cite provides virtually no information on how the availability of guns, especially because guns are generally much less available in Europe than in the US. Still, about 30% of suicides in Switzerland are committed with guns. Virtually every country has its own culture around guns and around suicide. Very obviously in the case of Japan with high suicide rates and even ritualistic ways of suicide. Therefore it is impossible to isolate the effect of gun ownership just by looking at different countries. And "not being the primary way of suicide" is a really weak argument against tightening gun controls to save people's lives. Even if it is "just" 10% in Europe, 30% in Switzerland and about 50% in the US. Those lives are very much worth saving, and at least in Europe, it's already the norm to take away guns from people who have these problems. Gun advocates often cite Switzerland as a country with very responsible gun owners. Still, if you compare the rates of gun suicides, accidents and murder to their smaller population, it's still quite shocking. But those stories rarely make news abroad.
- KptMarchewa 7y ago
  You were talking about "impact guns have on suicide rates". People are using method that they think is most successful, and if they own gun, it's very probable that they will use it. >And "not being the primary way of suicide" is a really weak argument against tightening gun controls to save people's lives. Even if it is "just" 10% in Europe, 30% in Switzerland and about 50% in the US. Those lives are very much worth saving, and at least in Europe, it's already the norm to take away guns from people who have these problems. This is a weak argument, because it implies that by taking guns, people won't commit suicide, when they may just do it by any other method. Which the high rates of suicide in several other countries with way less gun ownership than in US point to. By the way, using emotionally charged statements like "those lives are very much worth saving" when your interlocutor did not suggest anything otherwise is at the very least unpleasant discussion style.
  - zaarn 7y ago
    >This is a weak argument, because it implies that by taking guns, people won't commit suicide, when they may just do it by any other method. That argument is correct; a major suicide prevention measure is taking away methods. When countries switched from coal gas to natural gas, suicide rate went down for this reason. Suicide is largely a in-the-moment decision and guns make it very easy to act on it. >Which the high rates of suicide in several other countries with way less gun ownership than in US point to. I don't think that's true, they may just have a different culture that leads to more suicide. Gun ownership isn't the only difference between the USA and other countries.
  - bayesian_horse 7y ago
    People are quite particular about their methods of suicide. They usually don't want to have any pain, but prefer to die instantly. No method checks as many of these boxes as using a gun. I got the previous argument as saying exactly that the main method of suicide in Europe is hanging, and not shooting, and therefor taking guns away from most people who don't have a positive need to be armed or with doubts about their reliability wouldn't affect suicides in a significant manner. Otherwise citing that article makes no sense to me, since it actually points to guns being a major factor. It's impossible to infer the effect of gun ownership on suicide rates by looking at countries. Too many confounding factors, too little number of countries. Same goes for states in the US. Suicide is a very culturally shaped topic, and on top of that it is affected by the health system, economy and various other factors.
DanBC 7y ago
How do they define a death by suicide in Belgium? Is that comparable to how they define it in the US?
- bayesian_horse 7y ago
  One confounding factor would be the "Suicide by Cop" thing.

chrischen 7y ago

I'd be interested to read any research on how drugs impact suicide rates (particularly if it prevents people who would have otherwise committed suicide). As easy it is to get guns, I think drugs actually a bit easier to obtain despite being the thing that's illegal (due to gun purchase wait period).

DanBC 7y ago
This is a good question for several reasons. We know that alcohol and drug misuse is a risk factor for death by suicide, and that providing drug and alcohol services is a useful suicide prevention measure. See page 17 of this UK document: https://documents.manchester.ac.uk/display.aspx?DocID=40697 https://documents.manchester.ac.uk/display.aspx?DocID=40697 (which also links to their evidence) We know restricting access to means and methods is an important suicide prevention measure. We know this from some natural experiments. When the UK moved from coal gas to natural gas in the home one very common method was removed and we saw a reduction in suicide rates. We again saw a reduction when we introduced catalytic convertors in cars. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWPEVhrWZS0&t=415s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWPEVhrWZS0&t=415s It touches on how we define a death by suicide? What is counted? What is not counted? In the US a death by suicide should be defined as: (page 21) https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/self-directed-violence-a.pdf https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/self-directed-vio... > Suicide -- Death caused by self-directed injurious behavior with any intent to die as a result of the behavior. The US data is complex and confusing because: (page 12) https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/self-directed-violence-a.pdf https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/self-directed-vio... > Despite the large volume of data on certain types of SDV, the utility and reproducibility of the resulting information is sometimes questionable. Mortality data are problematic for several reasons: geographical differences in the definition of suicide and how equivocal cases are classified; jurisdictional differences in the requirements for the office of coroner or medical examiner affecting the standard of proof required to classify a death as a suicide; and differences in terms of the extent to which potential suicides are investigated to accurately determine cause of death.18 The quality of the data on nonfatal suicidal behavior is even more problematic than that of suicides. The concerns about discrepancies in nomenclature19-23 and accurate reporting11,24 apply here even more than with suicides. Also, except for rare exceptions there is neither systematic nor mandatory reporting of nonfatal suicidal behavior in the United States at the state or local level, nor is there routine systematic collection of non-suicidal intentional self harm data. So it's really hard to compare one state with another state.

belorn 7y ago

Suicide by car accident seem close in both effort and time, but maybe the reason we don't hear about it is that determining suicide in those cases is quite hard.

bayesian_horse 7y ago
There are multiple reasons why that isn't so much a thing. And it really doesn't seem to be very "popular". For example it's less effective. A lot of things have to go right, and the consequences of failure are severe, on all levels. Also there is a good chance of surviving in a very painful state. And on top of that it can be extended suicide, meaning you'll harm or kill other people. Some want that. Most absolutely don't.