Are You Going to Kill Yourself No Matter What?
In the below Chicago Tribune editorial, Steve Chapman says having a gun in the house doesn't really make a difference when it comes to suicide.
« Cute Fix: Singing Puppies to Sleep | Main | Is It Insane That I Want This? »
In the below Chicago Tribune editorial, Steve Chapman says having a gun in the house doesn't really make a difference when it comes to suicide.
Liz Spikol is senior contributing editor of Philadelphia Weekly. She writes the award-winning column The Trouble With Spikol, which began as a chronicle of her struggle with mental illness, and has since expanded into humorous musings on everything from graphic novels to how to use a mop. She also writes the paper's book review column, Lit Gloss. This blog -- named one of the Top 10 Bipolar Blogs of 2007 by PsychCentral -- is about mental illness policy, news, personal journeys and more.
Comments
I think that Mr. Chapman thinks there is a move to deprive Americans of guns lurking around every corner. I think that is his main concern. That is not the point with respect to guns and suicide. In fact, I think he makes the very point himself---"the increase in gun ownership does not raise the number of people who kill themselves--only the number who do it by gun". He is taking the position that people who want to commit suicide will do it one way or another. Without a gun in the house would the suicide rate lower?
The fact that hanging or pills or carbon monoxide can be just as lethal is beside the point. Guns are quicker and lend themselves to spontaneous action.That is the concern with a suicidal person, the ability for them to commit a spontaneous action.
He mentions carbon monoxide--with late model cars, the carbon monoxide emitted is low enough you have a fair amount of time to think. Not so with a gun.
Posted by: scott | July 15, 2008 05:51 PM
Very interesting. It reminds me of this recent article in the NYT that states:
"There are those who display the classic symptoms of so-called suicidal behavior, who build up to their act over time or who choose methods that require careful planning. And then there are those whose act appears born of an immediate crisis, with little or no forethought involved. Just as with homicide, those in the “passion” category of suicide are much more likely to turn to whatever means are immediately available, those that are easy and quick."
It's a good read. Basically it says that a lot of people choose a method of suicide and when denied easy access to that method, they are very unlikely to try suicide by other means. The British coal-gas story is especially telling.
Personally, I think Steve Chapman is wrong.
Link to the article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/06/magazine/06suicide-t.html?_r=2&pagewanted=1&oref=slogin
Posted by: Roma | July 15, 2008 07:34 PM
Hi Liz. I read this editorial. It made my brain hurt. This guy I guess is your average gun lovin gun lover. He loves guns. Oh and he has some statistics. Ok, keep your guns and protect yourself Mr. Gun Lovin Dude. I'm with the Harvard guy. You're asking for trouble. Oh, you're also asking for trouble if you keep a gun where children can get at it. Or do you have some statistics on that, Yosemite Sam? Defenseless Dave
Posted by: David | July 16, 2008 02:06 AM
I think, rather than focusing on taking away various potential methods for suicide, we should be focused on trying to enhance the lives of people, stressed or ill, so that suicide never becomes an option in their minds to begin with.
Posted by: Stormgazer | July 16, 2008 03:41 AM
I think, rather than focusing on taking away various potential methods for suicide, we should be focused on trying to enhance the lives of people, stressed or ill, so that suicide never becomes an option in their minds to begin with.
Posted by: Stormgazer | July 16, 2008 03:41 AM