Guns in the Home and Suicide

[mikeb302000]

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorialopinion/article/1077286--gun-control-keeps-suicides-down">The Star.com reports on something of interest to Americans, or at least it should be.

Suicides. Suicides dropped dramatically in Canada thanks to the federal gun registry. Not only do statistics prove as much, it stands to reason that with improved gun safety comes decreased gun fatalities; with fewer tools-of-choice for suicides available, fewer suicides occur. It just makes sense.

Here are the stats. A home where there are firearms is five times more likely to be the scene of a suicide than a home without a gun: Canada Safety Council. The Institut national de sante publique du Québec has assessed that the coming into force of the Firearms Act is associated, on average, with a reduction of 250 suicides (and 50 homicides) each year in Canada. That’s nearly one life saved per day. StatsCan figures are stark: firearm suicides have dropped 48 per cent since the enactment of the very law that the Conservatives seek to repeal.

In The States it's not quite as high as 75%, but the majority of gun deaths here are suicides as well. Do you think that fact is overlooked in gun control discussions? Whenever it does come up the pro-gun crowd comes up with one of their three standard responses. I think they must memorize these inanities.

1. People who want to kill themselves have a right to do so
2. People who want to kill themselves will find another way if no gun is around
3. What about Japan? http://mikeb302000.blogspot.com/2010/03/suicides-in-japan.html">(this one was debunked here)

What's your opinion? http://mikeb302000.blogspot.com/2011/09/interesting-academic-study-on.html">Are suicide rates even a greater reason for strict gun control laws than the traditional gun violence?

My belief, and I'm not alone, is that in most cases suicide is a permanent solution to a temporary problem. One study interviewed survivors of gun suicide attempts. Every one interviewed expressed gratitude to have failed. The absense of gun availability, as proven by the Canadian experience, ensures fewer suicides.

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
http://www.mikeb302000.blogspot.com/">(cross posted at Mikeb302000)

[cdsilv]

1. I will not own a gun because I know that I would use it. For a variety of purposes. n/t

get depressed? No better remedy than a gun.

[RSillsbee]

12. Personally I think a doob would work much better NT

[SteveM]

36. I have both, but don't generally get depressed.

:smoke:

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

2. Why not just make it a felony to to kill yourself with a gun?

Then anyone attempting to commit suicide with a gun automatically becomes disqualified for gun ownership.

That'll stop suicides! :crazy:

[TheCowsCameHome]

3. They sure make more it convenient.

[rl6214]

4. "Are suicide rates even a greater reason for strict gun control laws than the traditional gun violen

NO

"In The States it's not quite as high as 75%, but the majority of gun deaths here are suicides as well"

Where is "here"? Italy?

"as proven by the Canadian experience, "

I don't care what the "Canadian experience" is.

Unrec for the usual reasons, blind links to your blog, citing yourself as a source, citing studies but not linking to the source ("One study interviewed survivors of gun suicide attempts"), just spewing your nonsense in general.

[DissedByBush]

21. Dunno, ask the Japanese

Sky-high suicide rates, no guns.

[Ship of Fools]

5. My dad committed suicide in '82 with a gun in the home.

He wasn't even a gun advocate, per se. In his case, he probably would have found another way without
the gun -- unless we had been able pinpoint his myriad of problems years before.

Frankly, I'm torn on the whole thing. Given what he was facing, I probably would have pulled a trigger, too,
which is also why I don't own any myself.

Sad thing is, in my small community in upstate NY, there was a gun suicide a few years prior to my dad's suicide. After
dad's, there were 3 more gun suicides within the next 11 years.

[RSillsbee]

13. I know this was several years ago

but I'd still like to offer my sincere condolences

[Ship of Fools]

25. Thanks. I was hell on wheels for a decade, then I settled down.

Nasty business, that ...

[Atypical Liberal]

6. Those are quite legitimate responses

Those are quite legitimate responses.

1. People who want to kill themselves have a right to do so
2. People who want to kill themselves will find another way if no gun is around

People do have the right to kill themselves. Or at least, they should. The ultimate freedom is what we do with our own bodies. This is why drugs should be legal, and why suicide, assisted or otherwise should be legal.

And people who want to kill themselves will find another way if no gun is around. Personally, I'd never choose a gun to commit suicide unless I had no other option, and I own a lot of guns. It is far, far, far less traumatic, and messy, to simply tie a cord around your neck, loop it over a doorknob, and sit down on the floor. You'll pass out from lack of blood to the brain in less than 30 seconds. It's completely painless - I know because I had it done to me in a martial arts exercise. Failing that there is always carbon monoxide poisoning, though I find that car exhaust fumes give me a terrible headache.

But the bottom line is this:

I'm not going to allow anyone to use suicides as an excuse to curtail my right to keep and bear arms. I'm not going to be held accountable for the actions of others.

[AtheistCrusader]

7. Quit pretending you debunked the Japan issue.

If you did, link said debunking here at DU, not in your for-profit blog.

I believe people have the right to end their own existence, if they so choose.

[beevul]

22. I find it a bit odd...

"Quit pretending you debunked the Japan issue...If you did, link said debunking here at DU, not in your for-profit blog."

This one time, I went to the blog in question (your welcome for the pennies, sparky), and it in no way debunked anything.

In fact, if one reads over the responses to the blog, all one sees is sparky and jadegold getting pwned by everyone else.

Strange that he would invite people to see it.

Maybe he really and truly thinks hes winning those arguments.

Which might actually be worth giving him a few pennies, to read over examples of.

:rofl:

[jmg257]

8. I don't think the stats about suicides are over-looked. They are mentioned quite often.

The issue really is how much one thinks the ill-usage by others should affect their own choices. How important is enjoying the right to those involved? How willing are they to suffer questionable infringements? Are there other means as or more effective? If someone is negatively obsessed with guns and gun control, they will likely see any justification for more control as plausible. If someone enjoys the benefits of owning firearms, they will likely be much less willing to accept many infringes on their rights to do so.

I think suicide rates should be much less a reason to try to justify most gun control schemes. The only control I see that might make a difference, other then out-right all-inclusive bans, would be something like a waiting period to purchase (and it's affect would be questionable) and some access controls.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[iverglas]

14. oh dear, Unca Oma

Driven to stray from the script so soon??

p.s., that one was kinda funny. I trust I will be forgiven since it wasn't the post itself that offended, it was the poster:

"I killed myself 3 times this year already....Canada does that to a person...so dark and cold."

(And there's actually a point; suicide rates are higher in Nordic countries, with no apparent explanation other than their nordicness as the common factor. Canada also has a horrific problem with northern First Nations and Innuit communities with suicide rates that would make your head explode, to go with the unsafe drinking water, crowded substandard housing, lack of sewage treatment, poor access to health and education services, widespread alcoholism and drug addiction ... and gasoline sniffing ... if those numbers were deducted from Canada's total there would probably be a significantly different rate. Not by any means that those deaths should be disregarded; they are symptomatic of the godawful living conditions that need to be addressed, but that nobody really knows how to fix, for tiny communities living on the edge of nowhere, where simply supplying groceries calls for a feat of modern transportation at the cost that can be imagined.)

[ileus]

10. What does suicide have to do with firearms?

[spin]

11. Once again it would be nice if you didn't use blind links but I actually clicked on one ...

Suicide can be accomplished by any number of methods. A quick Google search will show that. However your question as I interpret it is would making firearms unavailable reduce suicide.

Suicide methods

***snip***

Firearms

***snip***

Research published in the New England Journal of Medicine and the National Academy of Science found an association between household firearm ownership and gun suicide rates,<11><12> though a study by one researcher did not find a statistically significant association between household firearms and gun suicide rates,<13> except in the suicides of children aged 5–14.<13> During the 1980s and early 1990s, there was a strong upward trend in adolescent suicides with a gun,<14> as well as a sharp overall increase in suicides among those age 75 and over.<15>

Two separate studies, in Canada and Australia, conducted in conjunction with more restrictive firearms legislation, demonstrated that while said legislation showed a decrease in firearms suicide, other methods such as hanging increased. In Australia, the overall rate of suicide actually increased (following a trend that had been moving upwards for some time), and did not decrease until measures specifically aimed at providing support to would-be suicide victims was enacted.<16><17><18>...emphasis added

Research also indicates no association vis-à-vis safe-storage laws of guns that are owned, and gun suicide rates; and studies that attempt to link gun ownership to likely victimology often fail to account for the presence of guns owned by other people.<19><20> Researchers have shown that safe-storage laws do not appear to affect gun suicide rates or juvenile accidental gun death.<19><20>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_methods#Immolation

The article you blind linked to at http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorialopinion/article/1077286--gun-control-keeps-suicides-down disuses the impact of repealing the Canadian Firearms Registry. To draw any conclusion from a article that is obviously trying to preserve the federal gun registry in Canada proves little as the author obviously has an agenda. Without knowing other factors that might have existed during the same time frame that might have effected the suicide rate it is hard to come to a definite conclusion. For example during the same time frame that the firearms registry was passed into law in Canada an organization known as CASP was actively trying to reduce the suicide rate. My link above mentions that such efforts often are very helpful.

The Canadian Association for Suicide Prevention (CASP) also a national non-profit organization was incorporated in 1985 by a group of professionals who saw the need to provide information and resources to communities to reduce the suicide rate and minimize the harmful consequences of suicidal behaviour.
http://www.suicideprevention.ca/

Interestingly enough the suicide rate in Canada is HIGHER than in the United States. I mention this only as a factoid as it is futile to compare such items in nations that have far different societies with many factors influencing the results. For example why is the suicide rate in Japan so high?

Why So Many Suicides in Japan?
It's the economy, stupid. And the health-care system. And the religious beliefs. And the …

***snip***

There's no single factor, but experts point to a combination of economic woes, poor mental-health resources, lack of religious prohibition, and cultural acceptance of the practice. * The economic recession that hit in the late 1990s seemed to increase the number of suicides, which jumped by 35 percent in 1998. Japan's high-interest loan system and historically strict bankruptcy laws may have contributed to this effect. But the Japanese suicide rate remains elevated, even though the economy has since recovered. Even before the recession, the rate was already a third higher than that of the United States. (Not that Japan is setting any records: Hungary, Estonia, and Latvia, among others, have more suicides per capita than Japan.)
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2007/05/why_so_many_suicides_in_japan.html

To be fair, improving our existing laws such as the NICS background check might have a positive impact on suicides accomplished by using firearms. But setting up programs to help potential suicide victims couple with commercials promoting those organizations of TV might have far more impact.

The Brady Campaign has made efforts to improve the NICS background check to better filter out those people who have severe mental issues. In this case I fully support their effort.

POSITION: The Brady Campaign supports strengthening the Brady background check system to make it harder for criminals and other dangerous people to buy firearms. The Brady Campaign supported the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007, which provides for financial assistance to aid states in sending records to the National Instant Check System (NICS).

PROBLEM: Many states fail to supply complete records of prohibited gun buyers to the national Brady background check system or the Brady Law's National Instant Check System. That means many felons, domestic violence abusers, and those who are dangerously mentally ill can walk into a gun store and buy firearms without being stopped.

The Brady Law, which mandates that federally licensed firearms dealers do background checks on prospective gun purchasers, has prevented over 1.9 million prohibited persons from buying guns. However, a background check is only as good as the records it can search. Unfortunately, many prohibited persons are not blocked from buying guns because their records are not in the NICS, including about 80-90% of individuals with disqualifying mental health records, and one-fourth of those with felony convictions. Ten states do not provide any relevant domestic violence records that indicate prohibited purchasers.
http://www.bradycampaign.org/legislation/nics/

[iverglas]

16. and on those points ...

You can google for things you want but not things you don't want?

To draw any conclusion from a article that is obviously trying to preserve the federal gun registry in Canada proves little as the author obviously has an agenda.

Perhaps you should look in the mirror?

Without knowing other factors that might have existed during the same time frame that might have effected the suicide rate it is hard to come to a definite conclusion.

See my post 15. Without you knowing what the methodology of the study quoted, it would be hard to take your qualms seriously.

The paragraph you quote from wikipedia:

Two separate studies, in Canada and Australia, conducted in conjunction with more restrictive firearms legislation, demonstrated that while said legislation showed a decrease in firearms suicide, other methods such as hanging increased. In Australia, the overall rate of suicide actually increased (following a trend that had been moving upwards for some time), and did not decrease until measures specifically aimed at providing support to would-be suicide victims was enacted.<16><17><18>

-- did you check those footnotes? You're the one demanding substantiation; you might have checked that there was some for what you posted.

Here they are.

http://www.questia.com/googleScholar.qst?docId=5000258711

The suicide rate by firearms (see Table 1) in the eight years prior to the legislation (1969 to 1976) was increasing. For a simple linear regression, the unstandardized regression coefficient was 0.163 (p = .0003). Similarly, the suicide rate by all other methods was increasing (b = 0.097, p = .08), as were the total suicide rate (b = 0.261, p = .003) and the percentage of suicides using firearms (b = 0.608, p = .01).

For the eight-year period after the passage of the firearms legislation (1978 to 1985), the suicide rate by firearms decreased (b = -0.131, p = .04). Mundt suggested that, even if the suicide rate by firearms were to decrease, people might switch to other methods for suicide. This was not the case, since the suicide rate by all other methods did not change during this period (b = -0.019, p = .78) and neither did the total suicide rate (b = -0.150, p = .17). However, the percentage of suicides using firearms did decrease (b = -0.574, p = .03).

Thus, at least as far as suicide is concerned, the firearms legislation in Canada in 1977 was followed by a decreasing rate of suicide by firearms and a decreasing percentage of suicides using firearms without there being any increase in suicide by all other methods.

How exactly does that support the statement that "other methods such as hanging increased"?

The other two sources:

http://guilfordjournals.com/loi/suli
- no longer available

http://bases.bireme.br/cgi-bin/wxislind.exe/iah/online/?IsisScript=iah/iah.xis&src=google&base=ADOLEC&lang=p&nextAction=lnk&exprSearch=12882416&indexSearch=ID
- Australia: you feel free to tell us what that one is actually saying; it does appear to have controlled for any other factors the way the study I quoted in post 15 did.

[spin]

19. Questions. Why are the suicide rates for Canada and the United States roughly the same ...

if the stronger gun laws in Canada led to a decrease in suicide?





It would seem logical that if firearms promoted suicide the rate in the United States would be extremely high as we have comparatively easy access to such weapons compared to Canada. Also handguns are very common in the United States and relativity rare in Canada. Handguns are the easiest firearms to use in a suicide attempt.

And why is the United States rate of suicide not the highest in the world as we have more firearms per capita than any other nation?

U.S. most armed country with 90 guns per 100 people
GENEVA | Tue Aug 28, 2007 1:57pm EDT

(Reuters) - The United States has 90 guns for every 100 citizens, making it the most heavily armed society in the world, a report released on Tuesday said.

U.S. citizens own 270 million of the world's 875 million known firearms, according to the Small Arms Survey 2007 by the Geneva-based Graduate Institute of International Studies.

About 4.5 million of the 8 million new guns manufactured worldwide each year are purchased in the United States, it said.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2007/08/28/us-world-firearms-idUSL2834893820070828

Why has the United States rate of suicide remained fairly constant from 1960 through 2005 despite the loosening of gun control laws and the proliferation of firearms in civilian hands?

[Common Sense Party]

39. Good hell! Why doesn't Canada outlaw rope NOW? n/t

[AtheistCrusader]

40. WOW.

We're surprisingly consistent.

[one-eyed fat man]

17. Absolute bullshit

The Brady Law, which mandates that federally licensed firearms dealers do background checks on prospective gun purchasers, has prevented over 1.9 million prohibited persons from buying guns.

What a deceitful statement. Not a single one of those 1.9 million prohibited persons was stopped from doing anything. They were politely turned down by a clerk in a gun store. Nothing else happened, ever.

They were not arrested for the felony of a prohibited person attempting to buy a gun. They were not held for the police. The FBI did not call the local cops and ask them to make an arrest.

The only thing that happened when the crook was denied he was pretty certain that he was in the database. He was only barely inconvenienced by the denial. He was completely free to walk out of the gun store and use any alternative method he could think of to obtain a gun.

Who is stupid enough to think that any number of those 1.9 million prohibited persons, upon being "stopped" by Brady and leaving the gun store empty handed, were imbued by remorse, gave up their life of crime, joined a commune, and dedicated their lives to raising free range barking moonbats?

[iverglas]

18. absolutely

Unless something is done to address the supply of firearms from other sources accessible to such people ... well, nobody's really trying.

... dedicated their lives to raising free range barking moonbats?

I've noticed this term being used here a little lately.

I must say I'm a bit surprised.

[spin]

20. So you disbelieve the Brandy Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence ...

Interesting.

While your are probably correct that not all 1.9 million prohibited persons were deterred in their quest to get a firearm, I'm sure a significant percentage are. Expanding the NICS background check to include all private sales might help increase that percentage.

Would you suggest we scrap the system?

[hack89]

23. Since all they have to do is open the newspaper classifieds

or go online to find a gun available for private sale, as far as I can see there is absolutely no deterrent for a criminal to arm himself.

NICS is a beneficial system but it will not stop a determined person from getting a gun.

[spin]

26. That's why I favor requiring the NICS check to be used for all private sales ...

as long as the cost was reasonable and no further registration of the firearms involved was required beyond that which would happen if the firearm were purchased from a dealer.

I currently have my own rules about selling my firearms.

1) I have to personally know the buyer.

2) The buyer has to have a valid concealed weapons permit.

The last time I sold any of my firearms was five years ago. A co-worker I often shot with at the range bought several of my handguns and both he and his wife had carry permits.

[hack89]

27. The problem is that private sales are a state issue

which means state money to implement, run and enforce. Because you know that Congress will not spend a dime for it. Which means there will not be uniform enforcement which will severely undermine the effectiveness of it. And as a practical matter, just how will the state be aware of a private sale? It is not like buying a gun from a FFL dealer who has federally mandated reporting requirement.

The states have more important things to spend money on like education, health care and social services.

[spin]

29. It would be very difficult to implement my idea ...

if not impossible. I admit that.

[one-eyed fat man]

31. The difficulty is Congress has

absolutely no authority to regulate purely intrastate commerce. The Federal nexus imposed by Federal licensing of gun dealers is enough to make them use the Federal system and suffer penalties if they do not.

There is a Constitutional obstacle that makes it unlikely that Congress can regulate the private sale of personal property between two individuals where something or someone doesn't cross a state line in the transaction.

States can compel their residents to conduct all transfers through an FFL, Congress cannot.

[spin]

32. Perhaps the best idea is to try to work to get the states to require ...

a background check for private sales of firearms.

That could be a significant challenge.

[one-eyed fat man]

33. Printz v. United States, 521 U.S. 898 (1997)

Congress tried using that club once. As part of the original Brady waiting period, they decided to force sheriffs to ascertain within 5 business days whether receipt or possession would be in violation of the law, including research in any State and local record keeping systems.

Oddly, the political poles have changed since that decision which was roundly condemned by liberals.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Printz_v._United_States#Effects_of_the_decision

Where Printz protected conservative local authorities from liberal federal power, it also now protects liberal local authorities from conservative federal power. Professor Ann Althouse has suggested, retained in its strong form, the anti-commandeering doctrine announced in Printz "can work as a safeguard for the rights of the people";"the federal government might go too far in prosecuting the war on terrorism," Printz provides a circuit-breaker that might allow local and state officials to refuse to enforce regulations curbing individual rights. Moreover, "by denying the means of commandeering to the federal government, the courts have created an incentive (for Congress) to adopt policies that inspire (rather than demand) compliance, thus preserving a beneficial structural safeguard for individual rights," and "state and local government autonomy can exert pressure on the federal government to moderate its efforts and take care not to offend constitutional rights."

Congress has not been above extortion. Another favored tactic has been to withhold Federal money from states that did not pass laws that Congress demanded. That led to things like withholding highway funds from states that did not change speed limits or minimum drinking age to meet Congress' demands.
Call it incentive or bribery it is still too close to "the end justifying the means."

As pointed out previously, it is the height of folly to give government a club just because you approve of whose head is being bashed. No succeeding government has ever relinquished a power, and you best consider how that club will feel when the jack-booted thugs swinging it aren't yours.

[one-eyed fat man]

24. I would suggest

that we arrest people who are committing felonies. It is a crime for someone who knows they are a "prohibited person" to attempt to buy a gun. Of course, as Janet Reno testified decades ago, the law is merely symbolic, it was never intended they actually arrest people who fail a NICS check no matter what kind of deranged mass-murderer, escaped convict or criminal they are.

Charles Manson could escape San Quentin, walk into the nearest gun store, try to buy a gun using his real name and social security number and when the store calls the FBI in Martinsburg, WV all the FBI will say, "Deny the sale."

The FBI will not call the local cops or San Quentin and tell them Manson is in the gun store right now. They will not tell the clerk why the sale is denied. They certainly don't tell the store an escaped convict is standing there, please stall him, police are on their way.

The odds of any felon being arrested for failing a Brady check are only slightly longer than winning the Powerball lottery.

It is possible that someone might have given up on their quest to buy a gun after they had been turned down as a result of a NICS check, but for most of the disqualifications you would pretty much already know. Maybe a bank robber with Alzheimer's would fail to remember a felony conviction and be foiled because he forgot why he was buying a gun in the first place.

It is a toothless law that accomplishes little beyond employing a cadre of clerks in West Virginia to answer calls from FFLs, mildly inconvenience people who are not felons, and placate vapid idiots.

[spin]

28. I agree and would like to see the penalties ...

for straw purchasing a firearm increased significantly.

I would also like to see the penalties for any person who has been convicted for a violent crime and is caught carrying a firearm increased to the point that it discourages violent felons from carrying.

[AtheistCrusader]

41. No. NICS should be opened to broad access for private transfers.

And denials for cause ought to trigger a goddamn police investigation.

[SteveM]

37. "...free range barking moonbats." LOL...

:spray: :smoke: :silly:

[iverglas]

15. the brief referred to, for info

It was submitted in the previous Parliament in relation to the Conservatives' failed effort to abolish the long-gun registry that time around. The translation is mainly reasonable.

http://www.inspq.qc.ca/pdf/publications/1090_MemoireProjetLoiC391ArmesFeu_VA.pdf

A study was conducted recently to assess the impact on homicides and suicides in Canada of the measures implemented following the adoption of Bill C-68. The study specifications make it possible to take into account the downward trend observed since 1974 in homicide and suicide rates and the concomitant impact of other factors, i.e. annual per capita alcohol consumption, the proportion of men between 15 and 24 years of age, the proportion of population growth attributable to immigration, the unemployment rate, and the proportion of the population made up of Aboriginal peoples (Gagné, 2008). The findings reveal that the annual firearm-related homicide rate declined 0.17 per 100 000 inhabitants after the coming into force of Bill C-68. This reduction occurred primarily in respect of homicides involving rifles and shotguns. Bill C-68 has not affected homicides committed with restricted or prohibited firearms. As for the annual firearm-related suicide rate, it has fallen by 0.81 per 100 000 inhabitants. The findings of this study also show that no substitution effect has occurred following the adoption of Bill C-68, i.e. lower firearm-related suicide and homicide rates have not been offset by an increase in suicides and homicides committed by other means.

The changes that Gagné (2008) observed in homicide and suicide rates have been transposed in terms of a reduction in the numbers of homicides and suicides Between 1998 and 2004, the coming into force of Bill C-68 is associated,on average, with a reduction of 50 firearm-related homicides and 250 firearm-related suicides per year in Canada.

I would have to find the original French to know what that second-last sentence means; it seems to be a bad translation.

Those who think that my former beau's depressed, disabled 13-yr-old son had a right to kill himself (just before 1974) with his father's hunting rifle and it would be wrong wrong wrong to try to avert events like that, and the family breakdown and descent into alcoholism on the part of two family members that followed, need not feel obliged to comment.

[S_B_Jackson]

30. Suicides decreasing by 250 per annum is statistically not very significant...

and is probably more due to the increased public awareness of the issue of depression and suicide than it has to do with a lack of guns.

All that has really changed is the manner that depressed individuals choose to commit suicide. So tell us, Mikey, is someone who hangs themself, who takes an overdose of medication, who leaps from a bridge, or who deliberately drives their automobile into a tree or bridge abutment LESS DEAD than if they'd used a gun?

[chrisa]

34. Guns in the home ARE dangerous, but it's everyone's right to own a gun.

[SteveM]

38. Potential dangers can be mitigated with lock boxes...

and proper training of children who might live in the household. Folks who are clinically depressed may be advised not to have firearms if a depressed person has a tendency toward or a record of attempted suicides.

[Common Sense Party]

43. Cleaning chemicals, poisons and gasoline in the home (or garage)

are dangerous, too.

But reasonable people take steps to reduce or mitigate the risks.

[aikoaiko]

35. What you call "debunking" is really just denial and handwaving.

keep trying

[Glassunion]

42. A gun in the home increases your chance

of a firearms accident by like a thousand percent or something.

If you don't have a gun in your home, your chances of having an accident with it are like below zero percent.

[Common Sense Party]

44. And having poisons or dangerous chemicals in the home increases

"your chance" of a chemical or poison ingestion accident by a thousand percent, too.

So what?

[Glassunion]

45. 2 words...

Czar Chasm.

[benEzra]

46. The U.S. suicide rate is *lower* than that of a lot of European countries with laws you like.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_rate

And according to that page, the overall U.S. rate is lower than the overall Canada rate, though the difference is so small as to probably be statistically insignificant. Data is from the World Health Organization, if I read it correctly.

And this is despite the fact that Americans have lousy access to mental health care, and work the longest hours with the least time off of any First World nation, including Japan.

Americans tend to use different methods than in Europe, but the overall rate here is quite comparable to Europe's.

Added on edit: Here's a map of suicide rates worldwide. There isn't much variance by gun availability, but there is a *lot* of variance by culture and socioeconomic conditions.



The key correlating colors with per-capita rates is here. Light yellow is lowest, red is highest.