Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Just wanting to point out that the CDC numbers are from 2013 while Norway's are from 2014.
This chart which is for 2013 has the US at 12.1/100,000(not the 12.6/100,000 that the CDC posts) and Norway at 9.1/100,000 for the same reporting period.

As of this point in time, the CDC still has not published numbers for 2014 as far as I'm aware.
And for an interesting note, the AFSP shows that 51% of suicides within the US used a firearm

 Kanluwen wrote:

Spoiler:

Relapse wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Da Boss wrote:
I feel like I should point out that Norway is dark for a huge amount of the year which brings with it problems such as a higher suicide rate etc etc.

*shrug*
...

A better argument would be to point out that what Relapse said is not factually correct. The USA's suicide rate is over 30% higher than Norway's.

The government statistics for both countries back my claim:

In the U.S., a little over 12 suicides per 100,000

http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/suicide-datasheet-a.pdf


In Norway, which has more restrictive gun laws, 21 per 100,000

http://www.fhi.no/eway/default.aspx?pid=240&trg=MainContent_6894&Main_6664=6894:0:25,7583:1:0:0:::0:0&MainContent_6894=6706:0:25,7588:1:0:0:::0:0&List_6673=6674:0:25,7599:1:0:0:::0:0

Just wanting to point out that the CDC numbers are from 2013 while Norway's are from 2014.
This chart which is for 2013 has the US at 12.1/100,000(not the 12.6/100,000 that the CDC posts) and Norway at 9.1/100,000 for the same reporting period.

As of this point in time, the CDC still has not published numbers for 2014 as far as I'm aware.
And for an interesting note, the AFSP shows that 51% of suicides within the US used a firearm

Could you show the government statistics from Norway. I was using the latest figures I could find. As far as firearms go, as I said before, and it looks like I'll have to bring up the statistics I saw to prove it, as I should have from the first, an equivealent population from adding the different Europeons countries together to equal that of the U.S. shows a higher suicide per capita. My point with using Europeons suicide statistics shows if most people want to kill themselves, they will, gun or no gun.

By the way, I notice my government department charts from both countries are newer than your Wikipedia chart, which is actually from 2012.

Why are we taking about the one compatible country with close numbers and ignoring the rest of Europe with much lower numbers?

 d-usa wrote:
Why are we taking about the one compatible country with close numbers and ignoring the rest of Europe with much lower numbers?

I was looking at countries with stricter gun laws than the U.S. France also beats the U.S. In per capita suicide, while in Asia, Japan, with extremely strict gun laws has one of the highest suicide rates in the world:

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2014/09/04/national/japans-suicide-rate-exceeds-world-average-who-report/#.VnzOC3pHarV

Japan's suicide rate may be more related to their extreme focus on performance in studies and the like.

 Ashiraya wrote:
Japan's suicide rate may be more related to their extreme focus on performance in studies and the like.

Right - comparing across countries is silly because there are at least thousands of variables that influence the trends you see beyond the one currently being vilified by some posters in this thread.

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
Japan's suicide rate may be more related to their extreme focus on performance in studies and the like.

Right - comparing across countries is silly because there are at least thousands of variables that influence the trends you see beyond the one currently being vilified by some posters in this thread.

Just to be clear, who is vilifying stuff and what exactly is being villified?

 d-usa wrote:

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
Japan's suicide rate may be more related to their extreme focus on performance in studies and the like.

Right - comparing across countries is silly because there are at least thousands of variables that influence the trends you see beyond the one currently being vilified by some posters in this thread.

Just to be clear, who is vilifying stuff and what exactly is being villified?

I'll wait for you to answer my previous question before I answer yours.

 Ashiraya wrote:
Japan's suicide rate may be more related to their extreme focus on performance in studies and the like.

The point is, though, that these people have largely turned to other means than guns to kill themselves.

Your assumption makes no sense, there is your answer.

Feel free to stop arguing against imaginary points or try to point out what exactly is being villified. Maybe even make an actual constructive post while you are it. If it's going to stay tiny "op has an agenda" or "guns are villified" posts them maybe it's better to follow the moderators suggestion.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Relapse wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
Japan's suicide rate may be more related to their extreme focus on performance in studies and the like.

The point is, though, that these people have largely turned to other means than guns to kill themselves.

Comparing other countries it is pretty clear that there are many different reasons for suicide, and the majority of our peer countries had lower rates of suicide.

Comparing just our own rates it is pretty significant that suicide by firearm has increased even as firearm ownership has decreased. Now, unless we have fewer people owning guns while being more irresponsible with storing them it makes it appear that there are additional factors besides "gun in house" that are influencing those numbers.

You're obviously playing cute here, and I'm not going to entertain it. When you stop dancing around the issue, we can have that conversation.

Do I think a sample size of 1 warrants a discussion regarding peoples' rights to defend their homes with firearms? Absolutely not. The fact that you do is very telling.

You clicked the reply button quite a few times for someone not interested in a discussion. And I'm not dancing around the issue, my discussion has nothing to do with the issue you think it does.

If you think I'm trying to say that people shouldn't have the right to defend their homes with firearms please feel free to show me where I said that. Actually feel free to go through my entire post history and try to find that.

Get that chip off your shoulder, it's gonna make your arm sore and affect your aim.

tl;dr

Back up your claims or stop playing the victim


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Edit: for fun I included all the themes from my posts in this thread to try to figure out where I danced around my attempt to have a "you shouldn't be allowed to own firearms to defend your home" discussion.

- the original posts, where I pointed out that the bad guy screwed up in multiple ways
- the second post where I actually made it pretty clear what my point of the thread was (hint: it wasn't 'take guns away')
- the third post which covers the fact that everybody is allowed to use lethal force to defend their home, but that felons can't use guns, with throwback to post #2
- post #4 countered the false statistic that gun ownership rates are up and that suicide rates are down, with cited sources, but didn't use that to argue against guns
- post 6 asked if felons should be able to use a gun to defend their home if the fun is legally owned by someone in that home (I think they should be able to)
- post 7 asked if a felon unintentionally benefitted from a law that may have been written to stop anti-gun activists

Then there were a couple other posts making fun of a couple tropes that get thrown around in gun threads and a couple posts asking people to back up their claims of an agenda.

We can argue all night about the relative rates of suicides in different countries, but if people are interested in the details, the WHO mortality database can be searched here.

http://apps.who.int/healthinfo/statistics/mortality/whodpms/

Broadly there isn't any correlation between the suicide rate and gun laws. The USA and Norway are roughly level pegging, the UK, with more restrictive laws has about half the rate, while Japan, with even more restrictive laws, has over double the rate of the USA and Norway.

The reason for is that the epidemiology of suicide is complex.

There may still be causation, of course, even if there is no correlation.

 Ashiraya wrote:
There may still be causation, of course, even if there is no correlation.

I'll agree that some suicides happen because a gun is available, but I think Japan's per capita suicide rate proves my point that if someone wants to kill themselves, they'll most times find a way to do it if no gun is available.

Despite the difficulties that led to the mindset needed for it, the final act of suicide is often a spur of the moment decision. If you prevent someone jumping off a bridge they won't immediately try again as soon as you let them go. The more barriers put in the path of carrying out that snap decision the more likely they will come to their senses and seek treatment or have intervention from another source. Obviously some are determined but many don't have a long term desire meaning that not having a gun close to hand, or other easy instant means of carrying out the suicide attempt, likely does make a difference.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/suicide.htm

It does seem that gun suicide is one of the more popular forms, but that doesn't mean they wouldn't have turned to one of those alternative forms of guns were not available. But on the other hand, there is an argument based on the ease of using a gun that could facilitate it. I think a deeper issue is whether mental healthcare provision in the US is adequate to treat people at risk.

Putting it rather bluntly, it's not simply a mental healthcare issue.

Suicide is an issue that has many factors that could mitigate it. The spike in suicides among younger people has a lot to tie in with things that improved mental healthcare alone cannot resolve.

Unemployment?

- the financial crisis
- increase in the number of veterans
- increased insurance coverage and prescription of antidepressants without the needed warning of increased risk of suicide in the first few weeks despite the black box warning
- the thoughts of a Trump/Hillary presidency

Guns don't cause suicide, but access to a gun can be a factor in a successful suicide.

The thought of going into a voting booth in November 2016, and seeing that the mainstream (actually electable) choices are either Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton would make even the most laid back person consider putting a gun in their mouth and ending it all.

 Ouze wrote:
The thought of going into a voting booth in November 2016, and seeing that the mainstream (actually electable) choices are either Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton would make even the most laid back person consider putting a gun in their mouth and ending it all.

You, sir, earn an exalt.