SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the 1-(800)-273-8255-National-Suicide-Prevention-Lifeline dept.
Experts and laymen have long assumed that people who died by suicide will ultimately do it even if temporarily deterred. Now Celia Watson Seupel reports at the NYT that a growing body of evidence challenges this view with many experts calling for a reconsideration of suicide-prevention strategies stressing “means restriction.” Instead of treating individual risk, means restriction entails modifying the environment by removing the means by which people usually die by suicide. The world cannot be made suicide-proof, of course. But, these researchers argue, if the walkway over a bridge is fenced off, a struggling college freshman cannot throw herself over the side. If parents leave guns in a locked safe, a teenage son cannot shoot himself if he suddenly decides life is hopeless.
Reducing the availability of highly lethal and commonly used suicide methods has been associated with declines in suicide rates of as much as 30%–50% in other countries (PDF). According to Cathy Barber, people trying to die by suicide tend to choose not the most effective method, but the one most at hand. Some methods have a case fatality rate as low as 1 or 2 percent,” says Barber. “With a gun, it’s closer to 85 or 90 percent. So it makes a difference what you’re reaching for in these low-planned or unplanned suicide attempts.” Ken Baldwin, who jumped from the Golden Gate Bridge in 1985 and lived, told reporters that he knew as soon as he had jumped that he had made a terrible mistake. "From the instant I saw my hand leave the railing, I knew I wanted to live. I was terrified out of my skull." Baldwin was lucky to survive the 220 foot plunge into frigid waters. Ms. Barber tells another story: On a friend’s very first day as an emergency room physician, a patient was wheeled in, a young man who had shot himself in a suicide attempt. “He was begging the doctors to save him,” she says. But they could not.
(Score: 2) by Hairyfeet on Thursday March 12 2015, @01:06PM
Just remember where all gun laws come from folks....fear of an armed negro.... Don't take MY word for it, look it up, there is an excellent documentary on YouTube under that title that traces back to the first gun laws where the ones who wrote it state outright that is what they are for. Rich white folks can afford to jump through the hoops, poor whites and blacks can't. That is why they demonized the "Saturday Night Special" in the 70s, it was cheap and well made. After the cop shooting in MO expect a LOT of "for your safety" gun laws, but they are really written to make sure you don't have armed blacks who can defend themselves.
So just remember gun banners, when you support gun control? You are supporting policies based on racism.
ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2015, @04:24PM
They may have initially been created due to racism but racism is far from the only reason for them. Saying that racism is the only reason for them is pure straw man.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2015, @11:33PM
OK then. What other reason is there where banning or restricting firearms would be effective? Go ahead, I DARE you.
Anything you come up with will have been tried elsewhere and failed or had significant negative unintended consequences in one way or another.
All the countries where firearms have been seriously restricted have either seen no statistically significant change or, far more likely, an increase in the crime rate. Australia and the UK.
I will simply drop this link in as it is a great resource for people who want to let facts and logic, rather than feelings, rule government policy.
http://www.gunfacts.info/ [gunfacts.info]