4 ms·

why? Would it be reasonable to burn/censor books dealing with such matter, maybe describing some methods of suicide? Homicide? Different political views?

• vidarh 12y ago
  Suicide is a thorny issue, because while on hand there are free speech issues with it, and some people do think it through and have rational reasons for wanting to commit suicide (e.g. facing a protracted degenerative disease that causes lots of pain might be one), most people who are suicidal are most at risk as a result of temporary emotional states that they have little or no control over. Accordingly, adding very small roadblocks for people who are contemplating suicide can have substantial effects in reducing suicide (an example is the restriction on amount of paracetamol/acetaminophen that can be sold per transaction in the UK), and people who attempt suicide and fail often express relief afterwards. I'm not sure where the line ought to go, but that in any case puts it in a very different category from e.g. homicide or different political views. Censoring suicide instructions is probably by far the least objectionable part of Russian censorship.
  • pra 12y ago
    Do you really suppose that state-wide censorship machine is a justifiable and "a very small roadblock" for people contemplating suicide? Are you serious? Let's put the fact aside that these "instructions" are a joke; consider a wikipedia page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_methods http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_methods. Should this page be censored? Since when removing the definition of a word in a dictionary makes a thing disappear? Sure, suicide is an issue, sure, it's better not to have it, but to censor anything mentioning it sounds like a bad adaptation of Orwells' 1984. What's the problem with suicide prevention, suicide hotlines, destigmatisation of mental health problems? I'll tell you what's the problem - it doesn't help you instill an intellectual control system, censorship and, quite frankly, a form mind control (via media filters). A censorship by any other reason is still a tool of oppression. It is not a tool for solving problems. Also, could you please provide a reference to a single study published in a respectable peer-reviewed journal of psychology, which supports your claim that small roadblocks, and especially restriction on amount of paracetamol/acetaminophen sold per transaction helps prevent suicide. Coincidentally, paracetamol poisoning a retarded way to go - it is probably more painless to kill oneself by drinking a lot of water (6l per 3hrs is enough to kill you). Why aren't drinking water sales not limited then? In fact, why aren't we all absolved of our personal responsibilities and taken care by the state, like some kind of a nanny?
  • tomjen3 12y ago
    As long as you can get into your car, remove the seat belt and run 200 miles an hour into a bridge support the idea of censoring suicide is stupid. Of course the people who fail express relief - if they don't we might lock them up. The same goes for your blanket arguments about temporary emotional states, _when you threaten a man with prison (whatever the hell you want to call it) he is way likely to say whatever he thinks you want to get out_.