Gun industry &, suicide prevention forge unlikely alliance

[AVB-AMG 530]

After a year of discussions, the National Sports Shooting Foundation and the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention announced this week at the 2017 Shot Show in Las Vegas that they have formed a partnership in their joint attempt to prevent suicides using guns.

They apparently started 4 pilot programs last summer and are now initiating a national advertising campaign.
Their goal is to reduce the number of suicides using guns by 10,000 over the  next 10 years.
They want to educate the general public, as well as gun dealers and gun ranges on ways to recognize mental illness warning signs and then preventing the person for accessing a firearm until they are able to recover from their illness.

I actually heard one of their public service advertisements while listening to WCBS (AM) radio yesterday morning during my commute, which focused on the secure and safe storage of guns in the home.  I was pleasantly surprised and applaud their efforts.

AVB-AMG

Here are a couple of links to the story:

http://www.usnews.com/news/business/articles/2017-01-17/gun-industry-suicide-prevention-forge-unlikely-alliance

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2017/01/18/gun-industry-suicide-prevention-forge-unlikely-alliance.html

[Purple Patrick 638]

Murder is illegal and it still happens. Idk crazy people will do crazy things

 

this signature exceeds the 15 character capacity count

[AVB-AMG 530]

As I believe most of us understand, suicide will never go away and it is a shame that a disturbed individual, regardless of who they are, decides to kill themselves.

When they chose to do so with a gun it is just one more public relations and/or media hurdle that all of us legal, law-abiding gun owners have to endure from the anti-gun lobby.

The stark factual statistics show that for the past several years in the USA, there have been approximately 31,000+ deaths via guns per year, with about one-third being homicides and two-thirds being suicides.  For people who try to end their lives with a gun, they are successful in approx. 85% of the time and the majority of these people are white males. (This factual information is from the Center for Disease Control (CDC's) web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System, (WISQARS), which is an interactive, online database that provides fatal and nonfatal injury, violent death, and cost of injury data from a variety of trusted sources, along with the National Violent Death Reporting System, both of which use data compiled that is around 2-3 years old).

Generally speaking, I think that education is a key to reducing this act including:

• Education in recognizing the signs in friends and loved ones who are potentially suicidal and how to go about seeking and obtaining professional help and care.
• Education in the proper safe and secure storage of firearms and ammo in one's home.
• Education in the proper safe use of firearms at a gun range.
• Education in the proper handling, transfer, inspection of any firearm while at a gun store, show, range or home.
• Education in the proper safe handling of any firearm for those that CCW.

Anyone who chooses to attempt or succeed in this sad selfish act of suicide in a public forum surrounded by many other innocent people, whether it is a gun range or other public and populated venue is wrong on a number of levels.  They expose other innocent bystanders to witness their horrible desperate act, as well as potentially putting those people in physical harm’s way. 

AVB-AMG

[Cemeterys Gun Blob 165]

Now just watch for Bloomburg's shock troops to attack and smear this effort.

[jackandjill 683]

Calling this "unlikely" alliance says lot about media bias against legal firearms. Its a non-starter from the beginning.  NSSF is doing this for nothing but little feel-good points. When it comes firearm safety and education, Firearms Industry and organizations such as NRA did more than any gun-grabbing, bloomberg funded moms could ever do. 

 

Legal firearm owners don't owe anyone anything. And no additional "education" programs are necessary other than organizations legally bribing each other and some feel good points. 

[Bully 749]

Momma always said: "if you have nothing nice to say, say nothing. "

 

I think it's a great action being taken by both NSSF and the suicide prevention foundation. As to some of the other points that some have made...

 

I'll shut up now

[AVB-AMG 530]

I did some more research and found this interesting article written by Kate Masters,as an interview with Georgetown Univ. Professor Liza Gold and titled:  A Psychiatrist Debunks the Biggest Myths Surrounding Gun Suicides

Here is the link to the article:
https://www.thetrace.org/2015/11/gun-suicides-mental-illness-statistics/

Also, here are the first two paragraphs from that article:

"Suicide accounts for more than two-thirds of the 32,000 firearms deaths the United States averages every year. Or, to come at the issue a different way: Suicide is the second leading cause of death for Americans aged 15 to 34, and more than 50 percent of cases involve guns. A big reason for the prevalence of firearms in suicides is the deadliness of guns themselves: When a firearm is used in a suicide attempt, there’s an 85 percent chance of it being successful. Whatever numbers you look at, they point to a significant public health problem. But because of a host of misconceptions and a lingering social stigma, suicides by firearm receive little popular attention.

According to Liza Gold, a clinical professor of psychiatry at the Georgetown University School of Medicine and editor of the forthcoming Gun Violence and Mental Illness, a lack of information about gun suicides makes preventing them increasingly difficult for mental health professionals. In a conversation with The Trace, Gold spoke about the biggest myths about firearm suicides, and why there’s no such thing as safe gun storage when a family member is in crisis"

[Mrs. Peel 7,157]

I did some more research and found this interesting article written by Kate Masters,as an interview with Georgetown Univ. Professor Liza Gold and titled:  A Psychiatrist Debunks the Biggest Myths Surrounding Gun Suicides

 

Here is the link to the article:

https://www.thetrace.org/2015/11/gun-suicides-mental-illness-statistics/

 

Also, here are the first two paragraphs from that article:

 

"Suicide accounts for more than two-thirds of the 32,000 firearms deaths the United States averages every year. Or, to come at the issue a different way: Suicide is the second leading cause of death for Americans aged 15 to 34, and more than 50 percent of cases involve guns. A big reason for the prevalence of firearms in suicides is the deadliness of guns themselves: When a firearm is used in a suicide attempt, there’s an 85 percent chance of it being successful. Whatever numbers you look at, they point to a significant public health problem. But because of a host of misconceptions and a lingering social stigma, suicides by firearm receive little popular attention.

According to Liza Gold, a clinical professor of psychiatry at the Georgetown University School of Medicine and editor of the forthcoming Gun Violence and Mental Illness, a lack of information about gun suicides makes preventing them increasingly difficult for mental health professionals. In a conversation with The Trace, Gold spoke about the biggest myths about firearm suicides, and why there’s no such thing as safe gun storage when a family member is in crisis"

 

I applaud the concept of reducing suicide and any partnerships geared to that end. That said, I'm very familiar with Trace (the online site quoted above) and frankly, I view their articles and conclusions with the same skeptical eye that I might view an article on InfoWars.  Trace is unapologetically biased towards gun control... and partners in that goal with their brethren, Slate and HuffPo, which should give you a clue. Trace's mission statement is: The Trace is an independent, nonprofit journalism startup dedicated to shining a light on America’s gun violence crisis.

 

​To me, the word "crisis" connotes a growing problem that is spiraling out of control... which does not align with the reality of our decades-long DECLINE in gun crime (we'll see if this last year's uptick is a long-term trend or not... but for many years, it's been a steady decline in the rate. That's just fact). So, to me, Trace railing about our "gun violence crisis" in their mission statement shoots their own credibility to shit coming right out of the gate. 

 

NJGF readers will interpret the article and decide for themselves, of course... I'm merely pointing out the need to "consider the source".  Look at their other articles and ask yourself - is this journalism? or activism? Not denigrating the initial partnership between NSSF and AFSP, mind you, (which sounds very positive)... just pointing out the issues with this particular "news" source... of which the OP may not even be aware.

[jackandjill 683]

Momma always said "beware of brain washing through media".  She also said "some deals are not worth making".  As true today as it was back in the day. 

[WP22 1,558]

Suicide prevention will be the next frontier on gun control. They never give up.

[AVB-AMG 530]

Mrs. Peel:

I think we all understand the likely political leanings and biases of different journalistic sources and therefore do take into account how that may possibly influence the "flavor" of any article we read, whether it is in the NY Times or from Breitbart.  But I do think that the interview with the Georgetown Professor was interesting for the questions asked and her answers.  It is just one more professional opinion on this important subject.

I do not discount all of what I hear and see on Fox News, even though I clearly recognize that its pundits/hosts/commentators have a distinct Republican and/or right wing opinion preference and bias.  To be fair, I think readers should take the same approach to a web site like Trace.  By the way, some people do consider the violence in this country, primarily in urban centers where it is mostly black-on-black shootings, using stolen or illegally obtained guns to be a "crisis", certainly in the past several years with the highly publicized shootings.  As we know, gun related deaths in America has been pretty consistent and level over the past 3-5 years, with almost 2/3's of the annual deaths attributed to suicide.  Yet, I do not immediately jump to the assumption or conclusion that the use of the word "crisis" therefore negates the important points made by the Professor in the interview. 

I think we all would be better off if we do not instinctively refuse to give validity to any comment, opinion, study or results provided by either left-leaning or right-leaning media outlets, but to recognize that there may be a sympathetic slant to the reporting.  Otherwise, we all will just gravitate to the echo chambers of sources that will just reinforce and validate our current beliefs, without ever learning anything new or contradictory.

AVB-AMG

[Zeke 5,504]

I would argue that media should fall back to the

" who, what, when, where and how"

Regardless of professionalism and pedigree. Opinions are in fact,just opinions .

[jackandjill 683]

I was once young and in college. There was this kid, very smart & hard working. Lived next door to an apt I shared with couple of friends. We woke up to commotion next door and go there to find the kid hanging from the ceiling. There were just 4 of us to witness a dead body of the guy we spoke to just the other day. 

 

We were later told that he couldn't take pressure of college and his folks back home were really struggling to support him financially. Real tragedy. Horrible scene and I still remember the body hanging from the ceiling. 

 

But, I dont remember anyone talking about rope, the chair he stood on before kicking it off, or even the financial burden of college.  I don't remember anyone talking about rope safety classes or restricting access to rope on campus or any number of other things that "theoretically" would have lowered his chances of this horrible death. 

 

Somehow, it appears that people today got lot of time on their hands to micro-analyze everything that doesn't matter, but too busy to pay attention issues that matter.  I don't remember last time an organization that spends Millions towards "reasonable restrictions" or "common sense background checks" come to discuss horrible deaths of victims like Carol Bowne where a life was taken AGAINST their will. 

 

I dont remember any organization spending money or running education camps on gun possession or help with filling the silly NJ Firearm paperwork for DOMESTIC VICTIMS. 

 

I am all for sensitivity and compassion, but lets show it where it really matters. 

[AVB-AMG 530]

On 1/19/2017 at 6:06 PM, jackandjill said:

I dont remember any organization spending money or running education camps on gun possession or help with filling the silly NJ Firearm paperwork for DOMESTIC VICTIMS. 

 

I am all for sensitivity and compassion, but lets show it where it really matters. 

jack:

That must have been a chilling experience for you  and your buddies back in college and something that you will never forget...  Sometimes, we can all be too focused on ourselves and our issues to recognize possible signs of pending or growing troubles of others until it is too late.  I am not saying that is what happened in your college experience, but your point is well taken on intense analysis of the less important things that are part of the compilation of these type of events.

So when you say: "but lets show it where it really matters..", what do you suggest?

AVB-AMG

[AVB-AMG 530]

I came across this interesting article from the UK-based web site Mosaic, that is published by the Wellcome Trust, a global charitable foundation, also UK-based, dedicated to improving health.  Mosaic is a weekly web magazine that is editorially independent, dedicated to exploring the science of life, discussing people, ideas, trends that drive biology and medicine that affects our lives, health and society. (that is for you Mrs. Peel).

The article written by Emma Young and published in Mosaic on Jan. 17, 2017, is titled:

Iceland knows how to stop teen substance abuse but the rest of the world isn’t listening

In Iceland, teenage smoking, drinking and drug use have been radically cut in the past 20 years. Emma Young finds out how they did it, and why other countries won’t follow suit.  Today, Iceland tops the European table for the cleanest-living teens. The percentage of 15 and 16 year-olds who had been drunk in the previous month plummeted from 42% in 1998 to 5% in 2016. The percentage who have ever used cannabis is down from 17% to 7%. Those smoking cigarettes every day fell from 23% to just 3%.  Here is a link to that article:

https://mosaicscience.com/story/iceland-prevent-teen-substance-abuse

When I read the article the course of action they took, to institute a number of laws/regulations that pertain to teenagers, followed by funding a variety of activities for them to participate in, makes a fair amount of sense.  Yet I realize that some of the socialist aspects would not be received very favorably in the U.S.  I also recognize that the smaller and more homogonous population of Iceland probably has much to do with the success of their program strategy.  It would be an interesting experiment for some States to consider, maybe putting it to a public referendum vote….  

AVB-AMG

[jackandjill 683]

jack:

 

That must have been a chilling experience for you  and your buddies back in college and something that you will never forget...  Sometimes, we can all be too focused on ourselves and our issues to recognize possible signs of pending or growing troubles of others until it is too late.  I am not saying that is what happened in your college experience, but your point is well taken on intense analysis of the less important things that are part of the compilation of these type of events.

 

So when you say: "but lets show it where it really matters..", what do you suggest?

 

AVB-AMG

I get nightmares about college exams, not about anything else. S**t happens. 

 

What I suggest is empower people. Get out of People's way.

Enable a society where folks take ownership for their own actions first.

Not blame innate objects. Not focus on innate objects.

Respect personal choices, whatever they may be.

 

Enable victims (including DV)  exercise their rights including their right to self defense. 

Last but not least, realize that s**t happens and sometimes there is nothing we can do. Recognize it and move on. 

[AVB-AMG 530]

On 1/19/2017 at 6:02 PM, Zeke said:

I would argue that media should fall back to the

" who, what, when, where and how"

Regardless of professionalism and pedigree. Opinions are in fact,just opinions .

Zeke:

So would I... Essentially like it was 40+ years ago, when we had 3 major TV networks where the News Divisions were independent, and considered a loss-leader and public service.  Unfortunately, in the ensuing years, the News Divisions were put under the control of the networks Entertainment Divisions and the news unapologetically gravitated to emphasize inane celebrity and professional athletes idolization and gossip, as well as politically biased presentations of news stories.  The evolution continued to increase either left or right biases until it was no longer clear as to what really was honest, factual and unbiased.  We should now clearly segment and advertise the opinion shows and their pundits as just that.  As much as I would also like to see the return of news that does provide the "who, what, when, where and how", without the added biases, I wonder if that is now possible and whether or not we will see that in our lifetime....?

AVB-AMG

[Mrs. Peel 7,157]

Mrs. Peel:

 

I think we all understand the likely political leanings and biases of different journalistic sources and therefore do take into account how that may possibly influence the "flavor" of any article we read, whether it is in the NY Times or from Breitbart.  But I do think that the interview with the Georgetown Professor was interesting for the questions asked and her answers.  It is just one more professional opinion on this important subject.

 

I do not discount all of what I hear and see on Fox News, even though I clearly recognize that its pundits/hosts/commentators have a distinct Republican and/or right wing opinion preference and bias.  To be fair, I think readers should take the same approach to a web site like Trace.  By the way, some people do consider the violence in this country, primarily in urban centers where it is mostly black-on-black shootings, using stolen or illegally obtained guns to be a "crisis", certainly in the past several years with the highly publicized shootings.  As we know, gun related deaths in America has been pretty consistent and level over the past 3-5 years, with almost 2/3's of the annual deaths attributed to suicide.  Yet, I do not immediately jump to the assumption or conclusion that the use of the word "crisis" therefore negates the important points made by the Professor in the interview. 

 

I think we all would be better off if we do not instinctively refuse to give validity to any comment, opinion, study or results provided by either left-leaning or right-leaning media outlets, but to recognize that there may be a sympathetic slant to the reporting.  Otherwise, we all will just gravitate to the echo chambers of sources that will just reinforce and validate our current beliefs, without ever learning anything new or contradictory.

 

AVB-AMG

 

I'm just curious... were you implying that "I" was "instinctively refusing to give validity...yada, yada, yada"? Personally, I regularly read about a dozen different online political sites and blogs across the spectrum - including those that lean left like Slate and HuffPo. I don't "instinctively" accept or reject anything out of hand... from any source. 

 

However, I do believe that language means something. And there has been a not-so-subtle war of words that has been waged over the last few years on the gun issue. I've already described the inflammatory use of the word "crisis" - you are free to disagree. I personally think the "crisis" in our cities is real, but it has far more to do with dysfunctional homes, gangs replacing the missing family structure, etc.

 

Here's a couple of other examples where language is being used to twist the facts:

 

- the term "gun violence" has been used by the anti-gun movement liberally lately. Isn't it funny how rarely you hear progressives say "gun crime" these days? Now, why is that? Is it because the word "crime" conjures up the thought of a "criminal" which further reminds us of "personal responsibility?" By using language that focuses on the object used, rather than the intent of the user - that's an attempt to change the narrative. Do we hear about "knife violence"? "baseball bat" violence? No!

 

- likewise, why the push to lump murder and suicide together under that same misnomer of "gun violence"? Is someone who hangs themselves a victim of "rope violence"? If they jump off a bridge, is it "bridge violence"? No, it's still suicide... which has a completely different root cause than murder. Lumping them under the same heading serves ONE PURPOSE ONLY... it amplifies and exaggerates the numbers - so that people will mistakenly believe that the suicides were violent crimes against another person also. The fact that this doctor WANTS the numbers lumped together (emphatically so) is enough to make a reasonable reader question her overall viewpoint. I'm thinking she may be one of those doctors that views gun crime not as "crime" but as a contagious "public health issue".  That theory I DO reject, strongly. We should not water down - candy coat - or obfuscate in any way - the personal responsibility inherent to crime. And it serves no real purpose to conflate it with the issue of suicide. It's a shell game. And I'm not buying into it. (Stomps foot!)

[Zeke 5,504]

Zeke:

 

So would I... Essentially like it was 40+ years ago, when we had 3 major TV networks where the News Divisions were independent, and considered a loss-leader and public service. Unfortunately, in the ensuing years, the News Divisions were put under the control of the networks Entertainment Divisions and the news unapologetically gravitated to emphasize inane celebrity and professional athletes idolization and gossip, as well as politically biased presentations of news stories. The evolution continued to increase either left or right biases until it was no longer clear as to what really was honest, factual and unbiased. We should now clearly segment and advertise the opinion shows and their pundits as just that. As much as I would also like to see the return of news that does provide the "who, what, when, where and how", without the added biases, I wonder if that is now possible and whether or not we will see that in our lifetime....?

 

AVB-AMG

You omit radio

[Zeke 5,504]

And print I should add

[Mrs. Peel 7,157]

You omit radio ... and print

 

Can't be everywhere! :-)

[AVB-AMG 530]

On 1/19/2017 at 6:49 PM, Zeke said:

You omit radio

I only listen to AM radio for news headlines, sports scores, weather and traffic reports.

I listen to FM and satellite radio for music, live NFL football games while driving and NPR.

On 1/19/2017 at 6:55 PM, Zeke said:

And print I should add

Print...  What is that???

Who reads paper newspapers anymore?

I read The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal, as well as The Economist, all online now on my iPad.

I am old enough to have fond memories from my childhood of the photo magazines Look and Life.  We all have seen the demise of the weekly "news" magazines such as Time, Newsweek and US New and World Report, all superseded by the internet and for many, social media.  Yes, the newspapers and the last three magazines had and have their biases as well....

AVB-AMG

[AVB-AMG 530]

I posted this in another thread but also realized that for the sake of continuity of the suicide topic, that it makes sense to post it here as well.

Since a number of you are making broad statements about suicide and @Sniper22 asked the question regarding if suicides are out of control in Red states, it sparked my interest as well to know the correct answer of what states, red or blue, have the most suicides, as well as some other facts associated with suicide.  So, I did some research and here is what I found, (along with links below to the web sites with these study results.). 

I found out that of the top 15 states with the highest suicide rate, 12 of them are so-called Red states, that have voted for Republican candidates for the past approximately 20 years.  Yet, as important, the research results show that it is not so much a factor of whether or not a state leans left or right politically, but that the state’s population is less dense, and more rural and spread out.  It is that isolation, as well as factors such as a working population that has historically relied primarily on agriculture, coal mining and/or heavy industry manufacturing that appears to be the common traits that are correlated with a higher suicide rate.  Additional factors that contribute to a state having a high suicide rate include: undiagnosed/untreated mental illnesses, depression, substance abuse and poor access to medical care, high levels of obesity and cigarette smoking, all factors that are more frequently found in less dense/more rural states.

What is noteworthy is that men are almost 4 times as likely to commit suicide than women.  Another interesting fact is that the suicide rate for non-Hispanic white men, age 85 or older is 4 times as high as the national average. The suicide rate is also nearly 30% higher in people ages 65 or older.  White people in the US have recorded the highest rates of suicide at 14.7% followed by Native Americans at 10.9%, Hispanics at 6.3%, Asians, and Pacific Islanders at 5.9% with the lowest rates being among blacks at 5.5%.

Also, to the point made by @Greenday, firearms are the most used methods in suicide with 49.9% of the deaths, followed by suffocation at 26.7%, and poisoning at 15.9% other methods contribute to 7.5% of the deaths. The distinction is that men tend to choose to use firearms far more than women do, who tend to choose a different method.  Due to the stigma associated with suicide, most of the cases go unreported and untreated. Suicide rates in the US have increased by 24% in last fifteen years from 10.5 to 13.0 persons in 100,000 persons. 

Interestingly, New Jersey is one state that has one of the lowest suicide rates of 7.2 suicides per 100,000 people.

AVB-AMG

Here are the U.S. States with the most suicides, with the highest amount ranked first.  If you check out the noted sources you will see that the numbers do vary and the state ranking will differ a bit.  For the list below, I decided to use the statistics from the CDC for calendar year 2016, that are more conservative from the sources I researched.  The important factor is that in all of these studies, the list includes the same states, albeit in a different order with slightly different suicide rates:

1.  Montana (Red State) – 25.9 suicides per 100,000 people
2.  Alaska (Red State) – 25.8 suicides per 100,000 people
3.  Wyoming (Red State) – 25.2 suicides per 100,000 people
4.  New Mexico (Blue State) – 22.5 suicides per 100,000 people
5.  Utah (Red State) – 21.8 suicides per 100,000 people
6.  Idaho (Red State) – 21.4 suicides per 100,000 people
7.  Nevada (Purple State) – 21.4 suicides per 100,000 people
8.  Oklahoma (Red State) 21.0 suicides per 100,000 people
9.  Colorado (Purple State) –  20.5 suicides per 100,000 people
10. South Dakota (Red State) – 20.2 suicides per 100,000 people
11.  West Virginia (Red State) – 19.3 suicides per 100,000 people
12.  North Dakota (Red State) – 19.0 suicides per 100.000 people
13.  Missouri (Red State) – 18.4 suicides per 100,000 people
14.  Arkansas (Red State) – 18.2 suicides per 100,000 people
15.  Kansas (Red State) – 17.9 suicides per 100,000 people
16.  Oregon (Blue State) – 17.8 suicides per 100,000 people
17.  Arizona (Red State) – 17.7 suicides per 100,000 people

Here are the links to the sources I obtained this information from:

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/suicide-mortality/suicide.htm

https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/states-with-the-highest-suicide-rates-in-us.html

http://www.businessinsider.com/states-with-the-most-suicides-2010-12

https://afsp.org/about-suicide/suicide-statistics/

[Sniper 6,372]

2 minutes ago, AVB-AMG said:

Also, to the point made by @Greenday, firearms are the most used methods in suicide with 49.9% of the deaths, followed by suffocation at 26.7%, and poisoning at 15.9% other methods contribute to 7.5% of the deaths. The distinction is that men tend to choose to use firearms far more than women do, who tend to choose a different method.

Here is where you and your friend, Greenday, go off the rails, blaming firearms for suicides. In SUCCESSFUL suicides, a firearm was a popular choice. But when you look at total ATTEMPTED suicides, including the UNSUCCESSFUL attempts, firearms don't even make it into the top category.

On 6/5/2018 at 0:55 AM, Sniper22 said:

There are 42,000 suicides a year, and if a firearm is used 50% percent of the time, that would make 21,000 die from a firearm.

There are 1.3 million attempts a year, and 21% were attempted by a cutting instrument, which would be 273,000 attempts. Wouldn't it make more sense to ban knives? Or ban poisons, since 728,000 people try to poison themselves every year.

Are you seeing the problem with "Liberal Logic" yet when it comes to firearm restrictions?

On 6/5/2018 at 0:55 AM, Sniper22 said:

 

 

 

@AVB-AMG see a problem yet with your and @Greenday narratives?

 

 

[Mrs. Peel 7,157]

And since we're now repeating ourselves (LMAO)… I'll also insert here (again) that listing "red, blue or purple" on those states is misleading, unless it's been proven that politics affects suicidality. It does NOT, as you yourself pointed out. Na-naahhh!! (LOL, just funnin' with ya, despite the horrible, serious topic).

[AVB-AMG 530]

16 minutes ago, Mrs. Peel said:

And since we're now repeating ourselves (LMAO)… I'll also insert here (again) that listing "red, blue or purple" on those states is misleading, unless it's been proven that politics affects suicidality. It does NOT, as you yourself pointed out. Na-naahhh!! (LOL, just funnin' with ya, despite the horrible, serious topic).

@Mrs. Peel

Gee, I can do this too.... Tag, your "it", heh, heh....

I agree with you that this is a hard topic and felt it makes sense to commingle posts on it in a thread where we have been discussing it as an overall topic, as opposed to stand-alone suicide incidents.  Today, I decided to find our for myself if suicides occur at a higher rate in red states than in blue states.  Technically, it does generally speaking, but I recognize that alone is a very simplistic as well as misleading observation, taken all by itself and spun by some for political purposes.  As I pointed out and stated in my opinion in my post, based on additional reading and research, is that there are many other additional contributing factors as to why these particular states have such a high suicide rate. 

Yet, I also believe that there is a link and can speculate as to why ALL of these factors make these states Red politically AND why so many citizens who are residents of those states voted for Donald Trump.  Can it be proved, without a doubt....?  Of course not, but I do believe that rational logic will support the connection and that other's will provide additional reasons to support this assumption of correlation. 

AVB-AMG

[Mrs. Peel 7,157]

1 minute ago, AVB-AMG said:

@Mrs. Peel

Gee, I can do this too.... Tag, your "it", heh, heh....

I agree with you that this is a hard topic and felt it makes sense to commingle posts on it in a thread where we have been discussing it as an overall topic, as opposed to stand-alone suicide incidents.  Today, I decided to find our for myself if suicides occur at a higher rate in red states than in blue states.  Technically, it does generally speaking, but I recognize that alone is a very simplistic as well as misleading observation, taken all by itself and spun by some for political purposes.  As I pointed out and stated in my opinion in my post, based on additional reading and research, is that there are many other additional contributing factors as to why these particular states have such a high suicide rate. 

Yet, I also believe that there is a link and can speculate as to why ALL of these factors make these states Red politically AND why so many citizens who are residents of those states voted for Donald Trump.  Can it be proved, without a doubt....?  Of course not, but I do believe that rational logic will support the connection and that other's will provide additional reasons to support this assumption of correlation. 

AVB-AMG

Apology accepted. I win. 

[AVB-AMG 530]

12 minutes ago, Mrs. Peel said:

Apology accepted. I win. 

Damn....!
My wife says that to me as well.......

AVB-AMG

[SuRrEaLNJ 294]

On 1/18/2017 at 10:30 AM, AVB-AMG said:

Anyone who chooses to attempt or succeed in this sad selfish act of suicide

get off your high horse

people in red states kill them selves

people in blue states

rich people, poor people, siucide knows no demographic, class etc

i am not defending anyone who does it publicly, or puts others at risk by doing it

unless you know whats in that persons head the second they do it then no one has any right to open their mouth

 

On 1/19/2017 at 6:32 PM, jackandjill said:

I get nightmares about college exams, not about anything else. S**t happens. 

 

What I suggest is empower people. Get out of People's way.

Enable a society where folks take ownership for their own actions first.

Not blame innate objects. Not focus on innate objects.

Respect personal choices, whatever they may be.

 

Enable victims (including DV)  exercise their rights including their right to self defense. 

Last but not least, realize that s**t happens and sometimes there is nothing we can do. Recognize it and move on. 

so in other words exactly the opposite of society as a whole?
im in total agreement with you, but so far thanos seems to have the most valid way to do it

 

 

 

 

[AVB-AMG 530]

8 hours ago, SuRrEaLNJ said:

get off your high horse

people in red states kill them selves

people in blue states

rich people, poor people, siucide knows no demographic, class etc

i am not defending anyone who does it publicly, or puts others at risk by doing it

unless you know whats in that persons head the second they do it then no one has any right to open their mouth

@SuRrEaLNJ:

Yes, people from all walks of life in our country commit suicide.
Yet from your sarcastic comment, it sounds like you just prefer to make a generalized assumption and leave it at that.  I prefer to scratch below the surface, doing some research and attempt to understand why people commit suicide, learning what I can from other's who have studied this topic in more depth and for some time.

Like you, I cannot and will not defend anyone who decides to commit suicide in a public forum, where they may expose other innocent bystanders to their tragic decision, as well as possibly putting those folks in harms way.  I also think that in many suicide cases, there were probably a number of troubling signs that may have been observed by others close to the person, which were either not acted upon or if so, rather ineffectually so. 

I will stand my may statement that you quoted that I believe anyone who chooses to attempt or succeed in this sad act of suicide is being very selfish, not caring how their death by suicide will profoundly and adversely affect their friends and loved ones.

AVB-AMG