Liberal arguments for supporting gun ownership rights

[Chris]

Okay you are most definately out to lunch. Let me explain it to you like you're a fifth grader. You posted a list of sucides per 100,000 people. I posted a list of sucided per 100.000 people. The numbers on my list are all higher than the numbers on your list. Yet you contend that strict gun control correlates to lower suicide. That, my fifth grade friend, is what we call a contradiction. Those countries almsot all have stricter gun laws than the U.S.

You can't handle the truth.

In the United States, states with stricter gun control laws have fewer suicides, murders, and violent crime.

 

[Dr Grump]

If you trust your government, you sir are a fool.

"I'll help vote them out"

I can only surmise that you are incredibly naive.

You live in a different country. I wouldn't trust your form of Govt either. Not naive on my part. I know quite a bit how yoru system works, how my home country system works (NZ), and how my adoptive country's system (Oz) works. In order, I'd put NZ first, Oz second and US third. If I was to include England and Canada, you guys might just be above the English....

 

[del]

True, I think it's probably the case that in those states where people fear their government they usually have good cause. But not trusting government is interesting. If someone doesn't trust their government then it seems to me that they can do one of two things - get rid of the concept of government altogether or move.

i trust our form of government, but it's people who do the work of govt.

it's been my experience that even well intentioned people fuck up.

why take the chance?

 

[Bern80]

You can't handle the truth.

In the United States, states with stricter gun control laws have fewer suicides, murders, and violent crime.

I understand exactley the point you're weakly attempting to make. Again you are trying to correlate rate of sucided to gun control. if there indeed is a direct correlation between the two then it would have to hold true everywhere, not just the U.S. As has clearly been shown stricter gun control does not equal less sucides everywhere. Maybe there is some minimal corelation, but given the evidence of other countries haveing higher suicide rates, yet stricter gun laws suggests that your weak ass correlation may be nothing more than coincidence.

Someone being completely wrong doesn't get too much more straigt forward than this. You believe stricter gun control equals less suicides. The evidence overwhelmingly indicates that there are many other variable at play given the fact that other countries with stricter gun laws have higher sucide rates than we do.

 

[Diuretic]

i trust our form of government, but it's people who do the work of govt.

it's been my experience that even well intentioned people fuck up.

why take the chance?

Always keep an eye on all of them, for sure and hope that the mechanisms in place to keep them from running amok are effective.

 

[Chris]

I understand exactley the point you're weakly attempting to make. Again you are trying to correlate rate of sucided to gun control. if there indeed is a direct correlation between the two then it would have to hold true everywhere, not just the U.S. As has clearly been shown stricter gun control does not equal less sucides everywhere. Maybe there is some minimal corelation, but given the evidence of other countries haveing higher suicide rates, yet stricter gun laws suggests that your weak ass correlation may be nothing more than coincidence.

Someone being completely wrong doesn't get too much more straigt forward than this. You believe stricter gun control equals less suicides. The evidence overwhelmingly indicates that there are many other variable at play given the fact that other countries with stricter gun laws have higher sucide rates than we do.

Obviously there are other variables at play. Suicide is considered "honorable" in Japanese culture for example. But in the United States loose gun laws make it easier for people to kill themselves and others, and the state statistics show this clearly.

 

[Harry Dresden]

No Harry, there is no statutory or constitutional right for anyone in my state to own/use/possess a firearm. In fact our Supreme Court specifically stated in a case (it was an appeal against an administrative action by the Registrar of Firearms) that owning etc a firearm is a privilege and not a right and that the public interest is paramount. I know - and I'm not being a smartarse here - to an American that is an absolutely alien notion. I can understand the dismay that an American might feel but the reality is that given the legal history and cultural antecedents here (we inherited Engish law - I can explain a bit about that but I'll wait until asked, don't want to be a bore) that notion is accepted. There is no equivalent to the 2nd Amendment in my state.

As I mentioned before, Howard bullied the states into accepting his populist bullshit. I was then and I am now totally disgusted by his actions. Fact is that it has had no effect on anything. Our homicide rate by firearm was low (still low). The vast majority of our firearms owners were and are responsible and law-abiding. I've been on a few private ranges and I can tell you the professionalism of members using those ranges is excellent. And tolerance of anyone buggerising around is absolute, they won't accept any deviation from safe and responsible behaviour and total compliance with the rangemaster's instructions. Those were the people who were penalised by Howard's populist bullshit, not crooks, crooks didn't give a shit.

ok Di thanks for the explanation on that....you situation is somewhat different than ours......most of us are not worried about a coup.....but about a constitutional right being taken away,if that goes,what is next....

 

[Harry Dresden]

You live in a different country. I wouldn't trust your form of Govt either. Not naive on my part. I know quite a bit how yoru system works, how my home country system works (NZ), and how my adoptive country's system (Oz) works. In order, I'd put NZ first, Oz second and US third. If I was to include England and Canada, you guys might just be above the English....

i wont trust any form of govt Doc.....it is only as good as the people who are running it,and lately i think both our countries have had some piss poor administrators.....especially the top dogs....

 

[Diuretic]

ok Di thanks for the explanation on that....you situation is somewhat different than ours......most of us are not worried about a coup.....but about a constitutional right being taken away,if that goes,what is next....

The need to ensure only necessary government intrusion (wrong word, can't think of a better one right now, I'm sorry) is understandable Harry. Given your constitution was set up with the express intention of limiting government's ability to restrict what were considered natural (ie inalienable) rights, I can understand it as a cultural phenomenon. I used to delight in gently antagonising people here in discussions (verbal, before I got the internet) that every time I presented my passport and visa at LAX my civil rights were increased and when I went home and landed at Sydney or Melbourne my civil rights were decreased the moment I landed back on our soil. It was a good tactic

Right now in my country there is a national discussion about whether or not we should have our own bill of rights (legally speaking we inherited the English Bill of Rights of 1689 and much of its provisions are spread through our laws anyway) and - surprise! - the government is going cool on the idea (see, you elect the bastards thinking they'll do the right thing, they get in and get all po-faced on you ).

We could quite easily use the Canadian Charter as a blueprint, which I think is a very good model, but oh no, suddenly it's become a bit too difficult for our government to look at. Typical. They're all like suitors, promise you the world to get into your pants and then when you've acquiesced they get amnesia. Bastards.

 

[mightypeon]

I would say that the best state is when the gouverment fears its people. And is to weak to opress them, so it has to accomodate them.

 

[Bern80]

Obviously there are other variables at play. Suicide is considered "honorable" in Japanese culture for example. But in the United States loose gun laws make it easier for people to kill themselves and others, and the state statistics show this clearly.

There were quite a fear more countries along with the Japan ahead of the U.S. on that list. I imagine it is not honorable in all of them to commit sucide. Two things occurring at the same time is not a correlation Chris, or did you not learn that in basic statistics?

If your statement is true that loose gun laws make it easier for people to kill themselves, that would have to hold true everywhere, not just the U.S. If your statement is true why does it appear to be so much easier on other countries whos gun laws are even more stict than the U.S.? That evidence indicates guns are not a major variable in sucided rates. In fact, it greater evidence that the coinciding data of yours is more coincidental than anything, given the U.S. is one country out of several.

 

[Missourian]

State Ranking on Suicide Rates

Suicides per 100,000 residents**

1. District of Columbia: 5.3

2. New York: 6

3. Massachusetts: 6.4

4. New Jersey: 6.8

5. Rhode Island: 7.5

6. Illinois: 8

7. Connecticut: 8.2

8. Maryland: 8.9

9. Hawaii: 8.9

10. Nebraska: 9.5

11. California: 9.6

12. New Hampshire: 9.8

13. Minnesota: 10.1

14. Texas: 10.6

15. Michigan: 10.8

16. Virginia: 10.9

17. Delaware: 11.0

18. Pennsylvania: 11.1

19. Georgia: 11.1

20. North Dakota: 11.2

21. Indiana: 11.3

22. Ohio: 11.3

23. South Carolina: 11.3

24. Iowa: 11.5

25. Alabama: 11.8

26. Wisconsin: 11.9

27. North Carolina: 11.9

28. Louisiana (pre-Katrina): 12.1

29. Mississippi: 12.2

30. Missouri: 12.4

31. Maine: 12.4

32. Arkansas: 13

33. Florida: 13

34. Kentucky: 13.2

35. Tennessee: 13.2

36. Washington: 13.2

37. Kansas: 13.5

38. Vermont: 14.2

39. Oklahoma: 14.4

40. South Dakota: 14.9

41. Oregon: 14.9

42. West Virginia: 15.4

43. Arizona: 15.6

44. Colorado: 17.1

45. Utah: 17.1

46. Idaho: 17.5

47. Wyoming: 17.6

48. Montana: 18.7

49. New Mexico: 18.8

50. Nevada: 19

51. Alaska: 23.1

http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2007-11-28-depression-suicide-numbers_N.htm

Once again, the doctors, psychologists, and psychiatrists who conducted the 40 page peer reviewed study that your list above was lifted from came to solid conclusions that more mental health professional and better access to them was the cause for lower suicide rates. Access to firearm was not listed at all in their study. It was not mentioned in their report in any way shape or form.

The study was conducted by a room full of PhDs an MDs who specialize in mental health.

You sell real estate.

When I want conclusions based on analysis of any data but especially their own data, I'll stick with the professionals.

http://www.nmha.org/files/Ranking_Am...tal_Health.pdf page 21-22.

If I decide to buy a house in Virginia, I'll come see you.

 

[Chris]

There were quite a fear more countries along with the Japan ahead of the U.S. on that list. I imagine it is not honorable in all of them to commit sucide. Two things occurring at the same time is not a correlation Chris, or did you not learn that in basic statistics?

If your statement is true that loose gun laws make it easier for people to kill themselves, that would have to hold true everywhere, not just the U.S. If your statement is true why does it appear to be so much easier on other countries whos gun laws are even more stict than the U.S.? That evidence indicates guns are not a major variable in sucided rates. In fact, it greater evidence that the coinciding data of yours is more coincidental than anything, given the U.S. is one country out of several.

The availablilty of guns is a major variable to higher suicide rates in the U.S.

I am not concerned with Belarus.

 

[Chris]

Once again, the doctors, psychologists, and psychiatrists who conducted the 40 page peer reviewed study that your list above was lifted from came to solid conclusions that more mental health professional and better access to them was the cause for lower suicide rates. Access to firearm was not listed at all in their study. It was not mentioned in their report in any way shape or form.

The study was conducted by a room full of PhDs an MDs who specialize in mental health.

You sell real estate.

When I want conclusions based on analysis of any data but especially their own data, I'll stick with the professionals.

http://www.nmha.org/files/Ranking_Am...tal_Health.pdf page 21-22.

If I decide to buy a house in Virginia, I'll come see you.

Your link doesn't work.

Of course mental health pros are going to take credit for lower suicide rates. That means more business for them.

 

[Missourian]

Sorry about that.

Here are the conclusions and the link.



Table 4.2 describes state characteristics associated with state age-adjusted suicide rates. The following factors were significantly associated with suicide rates:

¾ Mental health resources — The more mental health professionals in the state(specifically, the higher the number of psychiatrists, psychologists, or social workers per capita), the lower the suicide rate (p < 0.001). Figure 4.1 describes graphically the association between the psychiatrists per capita and the suicide rate. The line slopes downward indicating a negative relationship.

¾ Barriers to treatment — The analyses indicate that the greater the percentage of the population reporting that they could not obtain healthcare because of costs, the higher the suicide rate (p = 0.006). The portion of the population reporting unmet mental healthcare need was positively associated with suicide rates but the association did not quite reach conventional levels of statistical significance (p = 0.085). Figure 4.2 describes graphically the association between the percentage of the population that could not obtain healthcare because of costs and the suicide rate.

¾ Mental health utilization — Holding the baseline level of depression in the state constant, the higher the number of antidepressant prescriptions per capita , the lower the state’s age-adjusted suicide rate (p = 0.043). In addition, there was a trend showing that the higher the percentage of the population receiving mental health treatment, the lower the suicide rate (p = 0.272). Mental health treatment was defined as having received
inpatient care or outpatient care or having used prescription medication for problems with “emotions, nerves, or mental health.” It should also be noted that the depression index was statistically significantly correlated with state suicide rates, indicating that states with a greater prevalence of depression tended to have higher suicide rates.

¾ Socioeconomic characteristics—The more educated the population, the lower the suicide rate (p < 0.001). The greater the percentage of the population with health insurance, the lower the suicide rate (p=0.002). Median household income was negatively associated with suicide rates but the association did not quite reach conventional levels of statistical significance (p = 0.068).

These findings are consistent with those of Tondo and colleagues (2006). They compared age adjusted suicide rates for men and women with demographic, socioeconomic, and other indices of access to healthcare, by state (N = 51, including the District of Columbia). They found positive bivariate associations with state suicide rates (all p < or = .05) ranked as follows: male sex, Native American ethnicity, and higher proportion of uninsured residents. Negative bivariate associations (all p < or = .02) were ranked as follows: higher population density, higher annual household income, higher population density of psychiatrists, higher population density of physicians, higher federal aid for mental health, and higher proportion of African Americans.

The finding that higher rates of antidepressant prescribing is associated with lower rates of suicide has also been found in other studies (Mann et al., 2005, Hall et al., 2006).

http://www.nmha.org/files/Ranking_Americas_Mental_Health.pdf page 21 and 22.


What do you know...not one word about Firearm Ownership.

The study concluded that, and I'm paraphrasing here, richer more indutrialized and urbanized states that had a significantly higher percentage of psychiatrists, psychologists, and social workers and higher rates of health insurance had better resources for dealing with depression than poorer rural states.



And with that coup de grâce, I bid you ado. I appreciate the practice. Better luck next time.

 

[Missourian]

Your link doesn't work.

Of course mental health pros are going to take credit for lower suicide rates. That means more business for them.

Impervious to facts once again.

 

[del]

Impervious to facts once again.

at the risk of repeating myself, you are aware that chris is an idiot, right?

 

[Chris]

Sorry about that.

Here are the conclusions and the link.



Table 4.2 describes state characteristics associated with state age-adjusted suicide rates. The following factors were significantly associated with suicide rates:

¾ Mental health resources — The more mental health professionals in the state(specifically, the higher the number of psychiatrists, psychologists, or social workers per capita), the lower the suicide rate (p < 0.001). Figure 4.1 describes graphically the association between the psychiatrists per capita and the suicide rate. The line slopes downward indicating a negative relationship.

¾ Barriers to treatment — The analyses indicate that the greater the percentage of the population reporting that they could not obtain healthcare because of costs, the higher the suicide rate (p = 0.006). The portion of the population reporting unmet mental healthcare need was positively associated with suicide rates but the association did not quite reach conventional levels of statistical significance (p = 0.085). Figure 4.2 describes graphically the association between the percentage of the population that could not obtain healthcare because of costs and the suicide rate.

¾ Mental health utilization — Holding the baseline level of depression in the state constant, the higher the number of antidepressant prescriptions per capita , the lower the state’s age-adjusted suicide rate (p = 0.043). In addition, there was a trend showing that the higher the percentage of the population receiving mental health treatment, the lower the suicide rate (p = 0.272). Mental health treatment was defined as having received
inpatient care or outpatient care or having used prescription medication for problems with “emotions, nerves, or mental health.” It should also be noted that the depression index was statistically significantly correlated with state suicide rates, indicating that states with a greater prevalence of depression tended to have higher suicide rates.

¾ Socioeconomic characteristics—The more educated the population, the lower the suicide rate (p < 0.001). The greater the percentage of the population with health insurance, the lower the suicide rate (p=0.002). Median household income was negatively associated with suicide rates but the association did not quite reach conventional levels of statistical significance (p = 0.068).

These findings are consistent with those of Tondo and colleagues (2006). They compared age adjusted suicide rates for men and women with demographic, socioeconomic, and other indices of access to healthcare, by state (N = 51, including the District of Columbia). They found positive bivariate associations with state suicide rates (all p < or = .05) ranked as follows: male sex, Native American ethnicity, and higher proportion of uninsured residents. Negative bivariate associations (all p < or = .02) were ranked as follows: higher population density, higher annual household income, higher population density of psychiatrists, higher population density of physicians, higher federal aid for mental health, and higher proportion of African Americans.

The finding that higher rates of antidepressant prescribing is associated with lower rates of suicide has also been found in other studies (Mann et al., 2005, Hall et al., 2006).

http://www.nmha.org/files/Ranking_Americas_Mental_Health.pdf page 21 and 22.


What do you know...not one word about Firearm Ownership.

The study concluded that, and I'm paraphrasing here, richer more indutrialized and urbanized states that had a significantly higher percentage of psychiatrists, psychologists, and social workers and higher rates of health insurance had better resources for dealing with depression than poorer rural states.



And with that coup de grâce, I bid you ado. I appreciate the practice. Better luck next time.

Pretty lame.

So Colorado and Nevada are "poor rural states?"

You really need help, honestly.

 

[Missourian]

Pretty lame.

So Colorado and Nevada are "poor rural states?"

You really need help, honestly.

You are smart enough to understand that when you put something in quotes it's supposed to be what I actually said, right?

If you believe Colorado and Nevada are as rich and populated as Mass, NY and CT your the one who need help.

 

[Missourian]

at the risk of repeating myself, you are aware that chris is an idiot, right?

Yes, I know...I promise this is my last post in this thread.