More guns, more murders and suicides

[Blind groper]

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/magazi ... revalence/


http://www.bu.edu/news/2013/09/13/new-r ... homicides/

The American states with more guns have more murders, at the rate of an extra 0.9% increase in murders for each 1% increase in guns.

The American states with higher rates of gun ownership also have higher raters of suicide.

It is very simple. More guns means more murders and more suicides. More guns = more innocent people killed.

[Tyrannical]

Gee, it's a shame the actual research article is behind a pay wall. You could run the same regression analysis on each of those variables listed because I suspect it is not gun ownership that is the most important variable

Oh who am I kidding? I already know the answer because FBI statistics show that Blacks commit firearm murders on average 4-6 times the rate of the White population. So the study could have just as easily and correctly shown that for every 1% increase in the Black population, murders go up 5%.

Regression analysis was used to examine the relationship between state levels of gun ownership and firearm homicide rates, while controlling for a range of potential state-level confounding variables, including: age, gender, race/ethnicity, urbanization, poverty, unemployment, income, education, divorce rate, alcohol use, violent crime rate, nonviolent crime rate, number of hunting licenses, age-adjusted non-firearm homicide rate, incarceration rate, and suicide rate.

I will add it was poor science to do it by State, since murder rates can vary drastically within a State. This type of research is always done on the city/metropolitan area and not on the State level for this reason

[Blind groper]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/1 ... 24063.html

To Tyrannical

The above reference reports on the study linking gun ownership with higher rates of murder, and is not behind a pay wall.

More guns means more murders and more suicides. A killing requires a person with intent, but it is made much easier if that person has a gun. More such guns means more killings.

[Audley Strange]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/1 ... 24063.html

To Tyrannical

The above reference reports on the study linking gun ownership with higher rates of murder, and is not behind a pay wall.

More guns means more murders and more suicides. A killing requires a person with intent, but it is made much easier if that person has a gun. More such guns means more killings.

Well while murder is a concern, why is suicide. In fact one could go as far as saying that a gun is a useful tool for people who are so bereft of hope that they wish to end it all against the wishes of backwards laws within most societies.

[piscator]

Presumably this explains why Japan has a suicide rate almost double the US?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... icide_rate

[Blind groper]

Re suicide.

First, the comparison to Japan is misleading. The implied argument is that guns play little role since Japan has few guns and a high rate of suicide. The flaw in that argument is that guns are only one factor determining suicide rate. It is the dominant factor in the USA, but the dominant factor in Japan is the attitude that suicide is honorable. Apples and oranges.

On the importance of stopping suicide.
I have said this so many times before, but many people fail to understand.

Suicide is mostly on impulse, and most people who attempt suicide and fail, do not attempt it again. If you can prevent the impulsive attempt at suicide from succeeding, the person will very likely live a long and reasonably happy life. Each death is a tragedy.

The argument just put up by Audley is based on the fallaceous assumption that people who attempt suicide are total failures at life. Research shows that most are not. Most are simply people who are down and sad for a short time. If they can survive that period of depression, they can live good lives.

Having a gun available prevents those people from having that chance. Bang, bang and you are dead.

[JimC]

Re suicide.

First, the comparison to Japan is misleading. The implied argument is that guns play little role since Japan has few guns and a high rate of suicide. The flaw in that argument is that guns are only one factor determining suicide rate. It is the dominant factor in the USA, but the dominant factor in Japan is the attitude that suicide is honorable. Apples and oranges.

On the importance of stopping suicide.
I have said this so many times before, but many people fail to understand.

Suicide is mostly on impulse, and most people who attempt suicide and fail, do not attempt it again. If you can prevent the impulsive attempt at suicide from succeeding, the person will very likely live a long and reasonably happy life. Each death is a tragedy.

The argument just put up by Audley is based on the fallaceous assumption that people who attempt suicide are total failures at life. Research shows that most are not. Most are simply people who are down and sad for a short time. If they can survive that period of depression, they can live good lives.

Having a gun available prevents those people from having that chance. Bang, bang and you are dead.

Small correction - with suicide, not "bang bang", just "bang"

[piscator]

Re suicide.

First, the comparison to Japan is misleading. The implied argument is that guns play little role since Japan has few guns and a high rate of suicide. The flaw in that argument is that guns are only one factor determining suicide rate. It is the dominant factor in the USA, but the dominant factor in Japan is the attitude that suicide is honorable. Apples and oranges.

On the importance of stopping suicide.
I have said this so many times before, but many people fail to understand.

Suicide is mostly on impulse, and most people who attempt suicide and fail, do not attempt it again. If you can prevent the impulsive attempt at suicide from succeeding, the person will very likely live a long and reasonably happy life. Each death is a tragedy.

The argument just put up by Audley is based on the fallaceous assumption that people who attempt suicide are total failures at life. Research shows that most are not. Most are simply people who are down and sad for a short time. If they can survive that period of depression, they can live good lives.

Having a gun available prevents those people from having that chance. Bang, bang and you are dead.

I don't think I buy the argument that suicide and homicide rates are primarily functions of convenience.

[Blind groper]

I need to ask you to explain that. What do you mean by 'functions of convenience?'

[Tyrannical]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/1 ... 24063.html

To Tyrannical

The above reference reports on the study linking gun ownership with higher rates of murder, and is not behind a pay wall.

More guns means more murders and more suicides. A killing requires a person with intent, but it is made much easier if that person has a gun. More such guns means more killings.

This is the actual study, and it is behind a paywall. What you are posting are (biased) news stories about the study.
http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/ab ... 013.301409

[Blind groper]

Perhaps, but I have seen the figure of 0.9% increase in homicide for every 1% increase in gun ownership in three such references. I suspect that, at least, is a correct reflection of the actual study.

[pErvinalia]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/1 ... 24063.html

To Tyrannical

The above reference reports on the study linking gun ownership with higher rates of murder, and is not behind a pay wall.

More guns means more murders and more suicides. A killing requires a person with intent, but it is made much easier if that person has a gun. More such guns means more killings.

Well while murder is a concern, why is suicide. In fact one could go as far as saying that a gun is a useful tool for people who are so bereft of hope that they wish to end it all against the wishes of backwards laws within most societies.

Yeah, I get really annoyed at the inclusion of suicide in these sorts of stats. It's nobody's (in the context of society) fucking business if someone wants to top themselves. It should only concern society if it becomes an epidemic.

[pErvinalia]

Suicide is mostly on impulse, and most people who attempt suicide and fail, do not attempt it again. If you can prevent the impulsive attempt at suicide from succeeding, the person will very likely live a long and reasonably happy life. Each death is a tragedy.

Sure, but it's their decision, not yours.

The argument just put up by Audley is based on the fallaceous assumption that people who attempt suicide are total failures at life. Research shows that most are not. Most are simply people who are down and sad for a short time. If they can survive that period of depression, they can live good lives.

So what?

[JimC]

Perhaps, but I have seen the figure of 0.9% increase in homicide for every 1% increase in gun ownership in three such references. I suspect that, at least, is a correct reflection of the actual study.

I suspect that some of our fellow posters would say, even given that they accept the figures, that:

1. A lot of the homicides could be righteous self-defence by armed civilians against armed attackers (particularly if "homicide" in the study meant a deliberate shooting death, even if subsequently found not guilty by a court)

2. Even if true, and the homicides represented actual murders, nothing will ever trump their right to bear arms...

[JimC]

Suicide is mostly on impulse, and most people who attempt suicide and fail, do not attempt it again. If you can prevent the impulsive attempt at suicide from succeeding, the person will very likely live a long and reasonably happy life. Each death is a tragedy.

Sure, but it's their decision, not yours.

The argument just put up by Audley is based on the fallaceous assumption that people who attempt suicide are total failures at life. Research shows that most are not. Most are simply people who are down and sad for a short time. If they can survive that period of depression, they can live good lives.

So what?

Well, it's a fair argument by BG, I think. A certain proportion of suicides will be impulsive decisions by people in a temporary emotional state. If they have the means of immediately acting on their impulse (and a handgun is the most obvious choice) they may do so, whereas without one, the delay may save their lives. They may subsequently get help with whatever their problem is, and have a normal life.

I think the "it's their choice" argument can apply in some circumstances, but not in all...