Gun Industry's Killing in Killing

[GSOgymrat]

Just curious, Do you know how many of this majority had access to a gun? or is this something you don't ask about.  I mean pretty much everyone I know has access to a gun and I could borrow one at any time under the guise of " damn woodchuck needs to die..." scenario.

I don't know the exact statistics for my area, although now that I think about it I could run a report from our medical records. I am required to ask every patient if they have access to firearms or other weapons. I would guess about twenty percent of the people I talk to have access to a firearm. NC statute 14-404 states no person may obtain a permit to purchase a handgun if he or she has been adjudicated mentally incompetent or been committed to a mental institution, so some people I see cannot legally own a gun. I inform patients who need psychiatric hospitalization and are reluctant to voluntarily participate that if involuntary commitment is completed they will lose their right to own a firearm and their involuntary commitment will be a matter of public record. I don't see that many people use a gun to kill themselves because their dead, although I recently saw a patient who is paralyzed from the neck down from a failed suicide attempt by gunshot.

[drunkenshoe]

Just curious, Do you know how many of this majority had access to a gun? or is this something you don't ask about.  I mean pretty much everyone I know has access to a gun and I could borrow one at any time under the guise of " damn woodchuck needs to die..." scenario.

According to the post you 'liked', you don't even know the difference between assisted suicide and someone commiting suicide. I am curious where will you go with this.

[drunkenshoe]

I don't know the exact statistics for my area, although now that I think about it I could run a report from our medical records. I am required to ask every patient if they have access to firearms or other weapons. I would guess about twenty percent of the people I talk to have access to a firearm. NC statute 14-404 states no person may obtain a permit to purchase a handgun if he or she has been adjudicated mentally incompetent or been committed to a mental institution, so some people I see cannot legally own a gun. I inform patients who need psychiatric hospitalization and are reluctant to voluntarily participate that if involuntary commitment is completed they will lose their right to own a firearm and their involuntary commitment will be a matter of public record. I don't see that many people use a gun to kill themselves because their dead, although I recently saw a patient who is paralyzed from the neck down from a failed suicide attempt by gunshot.

We know that suicide rate is way higher in males. It's also often said that that males mostly use guns to kill themselves. Do you think there is a connection there if we think males are more likley to own a gun than females?

May be a traditional approach, but I am curios, because I thought this could be.

[chill98]

I don't know the exact statistics for my area, although now that I think about it I could run a report from our medical records. I am required to ask every patient if they have access to firearms or other weapons. I would guess about twenty percent of the people I talk to have access to a firearm. NC statute 14-404 states no person may obtain a permit to purchase a handgun if he or she has been adjudicated mentally incompetent or been committed to a mental institution, so some people I see cannot legally own a gun. I inform patients who need psychiatric hospitalization and are reluctant to voluntarily participate that if involuntary commitment is completed they will lose their right to own a firearm and their involuntary commitment will be a matter of public record. I don't see that many people use a gun to kill themselves because their dead, although I recently saw a patient who is paralyzed from the neck down from a failed suicide attempt by gunshot.

Sorry, my question was about the people who had attempted suicide and if you knew how many of that particular group who chose a different method in their attempt also had access to a gun. 

For me, if I go to see a doctor they always ask whether I have access to a gun and I lie and tell them No.  I clarify by admitting I can borrow a gun if needed but none in the home.   I see no reason to give this info on a visit for a cold.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

It's not a false equivalence, why should a manufacturer be sued over a product that worked as it was designed to work, lawsuits are reasonable when the product fails to work as intended.

You didn't read my post, I see.

[GSOgymrat]

We know that suicide rate is way higher in males. It's also often said that that males mostly use guns to kill themselves. Do you think there is a connection there if we think males are more likley to own a gun than females?

May be a traditional approach, but I am curios, because I thought this could be.

In 2015 a gallop poll reported 37% of males owned guns and 31% of women owned guns, compared to 2004 when 45% of men owned guns and 11% of women. If these statistic are accurate then then gender gap in gun ownership is closing. There is what some have called the "gender paradox of suicidal behavior" with women reporting suicidal ideation and non-fatal suicidal behavior more frequently but men completing suicide three to five times more frequently. In a lecture I recently attended the presenter addressed the gender paradox of suicide as "women talk and men do" and proposed that women communicating their feelings of depression and anxiety is a preventative factor in completing suicide. Men are more likely to use lethal means for suicide, including guns. Gender roles and societal expectations obviously play a role here. The presenter also discussed how suicides are becoming more common under age 25 and over age 55 and that whites and native Americans are twice as likely to commit suicide as blacks or Hispanics.

[drunkenshoe]

In 2015 a gallop poll reported 37% of males owned guns and 31% of women owned guns, compared to 2004 when 45% of men owned guns and 11% of women. If these statistic are accurate then then gender gap in gun ownership is closing. There is what some have called the "gender paradox of suicidal behavior" with women reporting suicidal ideation and non-fatal suicidal behavior more frequently but men completing suicide three to five times more frequently. In a lecture I recently attended the presenter addressed the gender paradox of suicide as "women talk and men do" and proposed that women communicating their feelings of depression and anxiety is a preventative factor in completing suicide. Men are more likely to use lethal means for suicide, including guns. Gender roles and societal expectations obviously play a role here.

Thanks. This all makes sense. I bet this is related to a lot of mess males have to deal starting from when they are little boys 'you don't cry, you don't get cold, you don't get emotional...be a man' bullshit. We are mostly free to give emotional reactions, even cry in public if we really need the feel to. Though women are changing and new generation females are acting more stoic I guess. Showing emotion has become a 'no-no'. Same with people not touching each other anymore.

The presenter also discussed how suicides are becoming more common under age 25 and over age 55 and that whites and native Americans are twice as likely to commit suicide as blacks or Hispanics.

I think I get the youngesters and the elders thing, but whites and native Americans bit is quite interesting. Because they are pretty different groups.

[stromboli]

Not too many people commit suicide with a bolt action rifle. A bolt action rifle is primarily a hunting weapon. I've never seen a ban on bolt action rifles. An AR-15 or AK-47 is classified as an assault rifle. It is meant to kill humans. a weapon whose primary function is to kill humans in my opinion should be regulated as to who is allowed to buy them. There should be a process for vetting people that wish to buy said weapon and justification for their purchase.

Pistols- I grew up with them, I have some training (Federal Protective Service; I hired on as a firefighter but ended up packing a weapon) and I am comfortable with them. None of my family but my wife even knows I have them. (A .45 ACP and a .357 revolver) but pistols in untrained hands are just as likely to kill a bystander as a perpetrator. My personal belief is that anyone purchasing a pistol should be vetted and show training in the use of the weapon. I plan to get a concealed carry permit in the near future.

When I buy a weapon- I currently have 3 with one more being considered- my driver's license is submitted for any negative record I might have against it. A former coworker (now deceased) was a gun dealer. He was adamant he would never deliberately sell a weapon to anyone deemed a nut case. I suspect if you queried gun dealers most if not all would agree to that. You can sign a form that allows electronic processing of your history and wait 2 weeks for results. 2 weeks eliminated people wanting guns for immediate use and could identify unstable people with mental issues.

There is nothing against gun rights or 2nd amendment rights to qualify people who own weapons as to their psychological makeup or their intentions with owning a weapon or what kind. Simple common sense.

[Hydra009]

There is nothing against gun rights or 2nd amendment rights to qualify people who own weapons as to their psychological makeup or their intentions with owning a weapon or what kind. Simple common sense.

I agree.  And I've seen this exact argument play out a Dunken Peasants episode with a conservative-leaning avid gun fan.  He rejected any sort of psychological screening or training requirement as tantamount to gun-grabbing since some people would be rejected.  He argues that any restrictions on gun ownership whatsoever violate the second amendment.  His exact words: "registration leads to confiscation".

This is the sort of ideological divide we have in this country.  I just don't see any sort of common ground to be had.

[Shiranu]

He argues that any restrictions on gun ownership whatsoever violate the second amendment.

I guess "well-regulated" are two words too big for him.

[Hydra009]

I guess "well-regulated" are two words too big for him.

Conservatives tend to gloss over those words as well as ignore the intended goal of the amendment ("necessary to the security of a free State", presumably from a foreign aggressor, which was a plausible threat at the time).  Though he did recognize the necessity of militias for overthrowing a tyrannical federal government, so he's got that going for him.

We have two deeply entrenched sides with differing values and visions for day-to-day life who literally can't even read the same sentence and get the same thing out of it.  I don't see how we can possibly bridge that ideological chasm.

[FaithIsFilth]

Question: "Well, we can't say we want to ban guns. Can we do that? We gotta, like, hide that."
A: "No, right. You got to say you want common sense gun legislation."

"You have to take that sort of moderate, we just wanna have common sense legislation so our children are safe. You say shit like that, and then people will buy into it."

- Mary Bayer, alternate Hillary Clinton delegate.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Conservatives tend to gloss over those words as well as ignore the intended goal of the amendment ("necessary to the security of a free State", presumably from a foreign aggressor, which was a plausible threat at the time).  Though he did recognize the necessity of militias for overthrowing a tyrannical federal government, so he's got that going for him.

They have to be cafeteria Constitutionalists or they have to ignore the Constitution.

[Flanker1Six]

Real men shoot this:  :)   Perfect for daily carry and/or pesky marmots! 

http://www.anzioironworks.com/MAG-FED-20MM-RIFLE.htm

If you don't like guns; don't own 'em.  Your call.   

Kinda glad I spotted this thread; reminded me I needed to swap out the mags for my 10mm (I do that once per week to let one mag rest--prevents any chance of spring sack).   

I'm not sure what the bid deal about suicide is.  If they're tired of life and determined to do it............it's like any other life" decision--they'll do it.  Whether I (or anyone else for that matter) thinks they're right is irrelevant--it's not our call to make (with in circumstances).  If they're just bullshitters looking for attention it's unlikely they'll choose a gun anyway. 

I've prevented five suicides (both in prison).  One hanger (one of the bigger surprises in my life as I walked by his cell and saw him hanging).  I yelled for help (one other CO on the floor--he had the radio); then reached between the cell door bars, grabbed the makeshift rope (twisted blanket) lifted up as much as I could (not much--no leverage), and cut the rope with my pocket knife.   

One cutter; I ordered the CO (who was supposed to be watching the guy) to call for help; I had to wrestle the fucker down while he waving the razor blade around.  Got blood all over my hands (his from previous attempt)--cost me a year of HIV prophylaxis). 

Three times I talked my manic depressive ex out of shooting herself (and me).  You can imagine the fondness of my recollection. 

I assisted on a jumper; teen aged girl on bridge rail, two other guys trying to talk her down.  As I walked by she pushed off.  We all snatched and grabbed her, and pulled her back (she was a fightin'!).  The local police came screamin' up right then, and we stuffed her into the back seat of the cruiser.  Who ever the other two guys were; they jumped in on either side of her to control her and away they went! 

I have two former friends who committed suicide; one with a gun the other with pills.  I still miss both.

Hey!  If any of you BIG PENISED anti gun whiners have some spare change; I'm accepting donations for an assault rifle! 

My first choice:  Just a pic (this one has already been sold) so you know what you're helping me with

http://www.impactguns.com/fn-fs2000-tactical-semi-auto-rifle-223-30-rd-green-3830000000-818513002899.aspx

Second choice: 

https://www.cheaperthandirt.com/product/bushmaster-acr-enhanced-semi-auto-rifle-223-rem-556-nato-165-hammer-forged-barrel-30-round-side-folding-stock-quad-rail-forend-magpul-buis-black-604206119933.do

Just send to Flanker's Firearms Fund.  Thanks! 

[chill98]

Conservatives tend to gloss over those words as well as ignore the intended goal of the amendment ("necessary to the security of a free State", presumably from a foreign aggressor, which was a plausible threat at the time).  Though he did recognize the necessity of militias for overthrowing a tyrannical federal government, so he's got that going for him.

We have two deeply entrenched sides with differing values and visions for day-to-day life who literally can't even read the same sentence and get the same thing out of it.  I don't see how we can possibly bridge that ideological chasm.

Thats because you are reading it wrong.  Reflect on the 1st ammendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Now the 2nd:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Militia's worked on behalf of the state, therefore needed regulation to ensure the constitutional rights were not violated by a subset of state rules.  Police forces within state boundries could be considered an evolution of 'militia' as well as the national guard.  ie they are working/volunteering for the state.

But to ensure the individual right the caveat of "the right of [we] the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" is not any different from "Congress shall make no law .... or abridging the freedom of speech".

So while you 'gloss over' -the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed-  to focus on "a well regulated militia" when you know full well the militia was a weapon of the state, a separate power from congress, look within to see why there is such a divide.