Washington Should suicides be included in gun-death statistics?

[Burnhaven]

I am curious about whether suicides should be included in gun death statistics? That's not even similar to nut jobs killing your family at Walmart.

If you look at injuries, not deaths, you get a different picture.




https://everytownresearch.org/gun-violence-america/

Read More

 

[awshoot]

It depends on how suicides are included. If done deceptively, as in the vast majority of reporting, then no, they should not. If done honestly, that is fine.

The normal deceptive manner is to do something like this:

There are 40,000 gun deaths in America annually. Joe Jerk used an AR15 to kill five people. Time to ban the AR15.

Statements like that make it sound like 40k people are being murdered. It's a slimy way of writing that generates the false impression that rifles are the problem (fists or hammers are a bigger problem). An honest way to use the stats would be:

There are 40,000 gun deaths in America annually, but 2/3 of those are suicides, but we will ignore the issues of people who would kill themselves by one means or another. Joe Jerk used an AR15 to kill five people, a relatively uncommon event statistically speaking, as rifles of all types make up the smallest proportion of murders. Despite the statistical insignificance, we are of the opinion that we should focus all our effort, money, and time on the AR15.

 

[BSG 75]

Gun control advocates do that intentionally because they know that when they keep talking about 33,000 "gun deaths" or "people killed by guns" many voters are going to think they are talking about murders. Whenever anyone uses the statistic "gun deaths" without explaining most of those deaths are suicides they are trying to mislead people. Including suicides makes the number much bigger. In Oregon more than 80% of "gun deaths" are suicides. The percentage is similar for several other western states but the gun control advocates never mention that.

 

[WoodsPlinker]

Not only that but I heard on gun talk the CDC plans to include deaths in war in the gun death statistics.

They will stop at nothing to demonize the scary shooty sticks.

 

[awshoot]

The deception is especially evident in magazine ban rhetoric where using the suicide numbers is completely misleading. A suicide requires a magazine capacity of one, so limiting magazine size is 100% useless.

 

[coop44]

How many more are the result of police actions?

 

[Burnhaven]

I agree that when you look at suicides they are qualitatively different ....when you go out to the mall with your family you're not generally exposed to risk from somebody contemplating suicide although there is the occasional death by cop but most of those suicides are somebody who shot themselves in their bedroom ......in many of those cases the family members and relatives are to blame for not taking some kind of action ahead of time.
I'm still trying to understand the need for large magazines ....let's just leave out of the argument those that think they need them because the government is going to send their black helmeted squads into your living room to confiscate your guns .......for self-defense generally in the home and for hunting you don't need a 15-round magazine .....if you do you're such a poor shot you shouldn't be hunting

 

[BillM]

Suicide, gang activity and maybe gun use related to other criminal activity (drug wars etc) should not be
included.

 

[ACO]

Like it matteres what gun owners think when it comes to how the anti-gun people use data....‍

 

[Aero Denezol]

I think a lot of these little psychos who shoot up innocents are suicidal. You can't possibly expect to come out of something like that alive. I'm thinking most of them die in a hail of police gunfire, which is probably what they wanted.

 

[coop44]

If i don't need a large capacity magazine, then why does law enforcement? Owning a gun isn't about hunting or self defense exclusively. It goes beyond feeding yourself and protecting your family, it reaches beyond, to your community, your state and your country.
because of the second amendment our country has the singular ability, in the entire world and in all of time, to field the largest army ever imagined. Think about it, China has the largest formal army in the world, about three million. The United States has sixty five million gun owners. If "they gave a party" and only ten percent were willing and able to show up, it would still be double that force. Trust me, we are envied by other countries, have always been, and it is precisely for that reason the second amendment is there.

 

[Aero Denezol]

If i don't need a large capacity magazine, then why does law enforcement? Owning a gun isn't about hunting or self defense exclusively. It goes beyond feeding yourself and protecting your family, it reaches beyond, to your community, your state and your country.
because of the second amendment our country has the singular ability, in the entire world and in all of time, to field the largest army ever imagined. Think about it, China has the largest formal army in the world, about three million. The United States has sixty five million gun owners. If "they gave a party" and only ten percent were willing and able to show up, it would still be double that force. Trust me, we are envied by other countries, have always been, and it is precisely for that reason the second amendment is there.

I agree. The American Civil War was fought mostly by hastily trained militias as the regular Army was very small at the time. The National Guard follows in that tradition of state militias.

 

[coop44]

I agree that when you look at suicides they are qualitatively different ....when you go out to the mall with your family you're not generally exposed to risk from somebody contemplating suicide although there is the occasional death by cop but most of those suicides are somebody who shot themselves in their bedroom ......in many of those cases the family members and relatives are to blame for not taking some kind of action ahead of time.
I'm still trying to understand the need for large magazines ....let's just leave out of the argument those that think they need them because the government is going to send their black helmeted squads into your living room to confiscate your guns .......for self-defense generally in the home and for hunting you don't need a 15-round magazine .....if you do you're such a poor shot you shouldn't be hunting

who let this ignorant, anti second amendment, brainwashed, libtard in here?

 

[Burnhaven]

Sounds like you don't want discussion here, just an echo chamber....I believe in the second amendment and I own firearms I'm just not convinced of the need for huge magazines.

" I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."
Evelyn Beatrice Hall

 

[N2-Rob]

I'm still trying to understand the need for large magazines ....let's just leave out of the argument those that think they need them because the government is going to send their black helmeted squads into your living room to confiscate your guns .......for self-defense generally in the home and for hunting you don't need a 15-round magazine .....if you do you're such a poor shot you shouldn't be hunting

That is the typical liberal argument that has no logic in my mind. Can I live without my firearms? Yes. Is it a direct necessity to life? No.

Let's take that further. Do we need the First Amendment? Can people just button up their sucks and carry on with their day? Yes. We don't respond to hate speech by eliminating free speech all together because someone spouts off racist dialogue do we? No, we condemn the speaker.

I counter that we NEED high capacity magazines so that the government knows we have them and they know they work for us (The People). We will likely never need to use them against a tyrannical government in this nation. It is difficult to silence a group when they're equally armed.

 

[Andy54Hawken]

No...
Suicides are a mental health issue and should be grouped there.

As for the comments made about magazine capacity...

If you want to own a magazine with a capacity of 3-15 shots...then that is just fine and dandy...
I just ask that you don't make that choice for others...
What you like and want in a firearm is great...for you....it may not be so great for another person.

Should we ban things just because someone doesn't see the need for it..?
That is kinda arrogant..
Who is better to decide just what one should be able to own...
The person themselves...or a stranger who has no real idea of a person , their household or situation....?

Why should those who have not harmed anyone or broken any laws ..be made to give up something...?
Andy

 

[coop44]

Sounds like you don't want discussion here, just an echo chamber....I believe in the second amendment and I own firearms I'm just not convinced of the need for huge magazines.

" I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."
Evelyn Beatrice Hall

I'm not convinced that your opinions are your own, but those given to you by the media and politicians.

 

[Camelfilter]

Sounds like you don't want discussion here, just an echo chamber....I believe in the second amendment and I own firearms I'm just not convinced of the need for huge magazines.

" I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."
Evelyn Beatrice Hall

That's fine should you decide not to use standard capacity magazines for yourself, however don't make that choice for us, nor anyone else. IMO.

 

[No_Regerts]

I'm still trying to understand the need for large magazines ....let's just leave out of the argument those that think they need them because the government is going to send their black helmeted squads into your living room to confiscate your guns .......for self-defense generally in the home and for hunting you don't need a 15-round magazine .....if you do you're such a poor shot you shouldn't be hunting

Did you know that over 50 million people were murdered by their governments immediately after being disarmed? In the 1900s alone?

Look at our military engagements since 1900. We have not had an armed conflict against an irregular force that we walked away from and called it a "win". Peasants with rifles and a belief system are extremely formidable foes. You can destroy governments and armies, you can't destroy ideas. There is a reason we've haven't been invaded by an army since the 1800s.

And as an LEO, I can tell you from experience that a four-man fire team with ARs or AKs would be enough to lock up LE resources for the entire county, if not region. LE don't make an oath to be willing to give their lives in the defense of others. Many will, but most wont. That's the 2nd Amendment working for you. Did you know that in Athens, TN, citizens drew arms and defeated a Sheriff who was doctoring elections? One of his deputies killed a black man who tried to vote. The citizens took their votes back by force. Check it out sometime.

 

[N2-Rob]

Did you know that over 50 million people were murdered by their governments immediately after being disarmed? In the 1900s alone?

Look at our military engagements since 1900. We have not had an armed conflict against an irregular force that we walked away from and called it a "win". Peasants with rifles and a belief system are extremely formidable foes. You can destroy governments and armies, you can't destroy ideas. There is a reason we've haven't been invaded by an army since the 1800s.

And as an LEO, I can tell you from experience that four man fire team with ARs or AKs would be enough to lock up LE resources for the entire county, if not region. LE don't make an oath to be willing to give their lives in the defense of others. Many will, but most wont. That's the 2nd Amendment working for you. Did you know that in Athens, TN, citizens drew arms and defeated a Sheriff who was doctoring elections? One of his deputies killed a black man who tried to vote. Check it out sometime.

Well said. I'd also add that there are not many of my LEO brothers and sisters here in So Oregon who would take up arms against law abiding citizens exercising their 2nd Amendment RIGHTS. For that reason, I can't see Americans ever relinquishing their "Right to Bear Arms." Who is going to enforce it? It will only happen voluntarily.

I'm sure the anti-gunners are absolutely giddy over these recent murders by cowards. It supports their agenda.