TexasCHLforum.com

I saw the headline and had to read the article. This is one of those studies IMHO that has a conclusion and then looks for facts to back it up. According to the study, people who live in homes that have access to firearms have a three times higher incidence of suicide than those who don't. I don't suppose that it might be that is because using a firearm is a quick and easy way to harm oneself??

To me this is similar to saying that car ownership (or access to a car) means that someone is three times more likely to commit suicide by CO poisoning than those who don't have access to vehicles. They are trying to draw a correlation that is murky in my mind. They do admit that errors could be present due to the population used for the sample, the questions used, etc.

Just looks like another one of those anti-gun studies to me. Thoughts?

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/01/2 ... =obnetwork

The FBI and National Institutes of Health keeps stats on gun deaths and suicides. I'd like to see if their statistics (not opinions) align with the "study".

The second sentence of the story.

Researchers found people who lived in homes with firearms were between two and three times more likely to die from either cause, compared to those who lived in homes without guns.

Now let's put that in perspective.

Researchers found people who own automobiles were between two and three times more likely to die in one, compared to those who don't own automobiles.

Well doh!

I read this as: "Gun ownership tied to Three-fold increase in suicide success rate".

Makes sense to me.

The scary statistic for me - and you guys can help me figure out how to rationalize is the one that says owning a firearm in the home puts you at substantially greater risk of firearm related injury. It was so significant that the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends removing guns from the home if you have kids... (1992 and 2000 studies).

So then I think that if we excluded people who improperly stored firearms, we'd be OK... Apparently that isn't the case either - odds are almost twice as likely:
http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/1 ... ull#ref-30


Again, walk me through it so I can counter-argue... Because I'm not sure that I can, other than on the basis that I don't live my life to minimize risk every second of the day.

The way I read this, "Gun ownership tied to three-fold increase in suicide risk" it seems to me that they must have evaluated, in their study, the suicide risk in the participants before they actually owned gun, and then re-evaluated after those same people purchased guns. In other words the overall group that they studied can be shown to have a lower risk of suicide than the members of the group that went out and purchased guns, right? Or is it that the established control group committed suicide one third as often?

Of course I didn't read the study because on the face of it that just doesn't make sense.

cb1000rider wrote:I read this as: "Gun ownership tied to Three-fold increase in suicide success rate".

Makes sense to me.

The scary statistic for me - and you guys can help me figure out how to rationalize is the one that says owning a firearm in the home puts you at substantially greater risk of firearm related injury. It was so significant that the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends removing guns from the home if you have kids... (1992 and 2000 studies).

So then I think that if we excluded people who improperly stored firearms, we'd be OK... Apparently that isn't the case either - odds are almost twice as likely:
http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/1 ... ull#ref-30


Again, walk me through it so I can counter-argue... Because I'm not sure that I can, other than on the basis that I don't live my life to minimize risk every second of the day.

I had always heard that compared to swimming pools and other things that kids get hurt/killed with, guns accidents are actually fairly low. Not sure of the numbers, but I don't see those people proposing to ban swimming pools.

People use what is convenient to commit suicide. In San Fransisco, they jump from the bridge or use one of the tall cliffs in the area. Guns are hard to get, so they probably do not use a gun. Therefore gun control works, right.

It would be interesting to see the amount of suicide in total compared to gun availability. For example is suicide per capita higher in the UK or lower.

Suicide may also be impulsive. Having easy access to a gun may provide an easier route to suicide, rather than having to come up with different method. After you have then figured out a different way, the impulse may have passed.

Of the five suicides I am familiar with in my lifetime. Only two involved a gun. Four were in Texas where guns are easily available. One was in San Fransisco, that person did not use a gun.

The issue with suicide, rather than how, was why.

This is just a rehash of the same garbage from some years back. The study that claimed children were dying by firearms at such high rates...but counted 20 something gang-bangers as children because 20 somethings are youths and youths are children. The same study that claimed that mess, also claimed that having a firearm in the home was pretty much guaranteeing a suicide in the home. Pure fantasy by desperate antis.

*EDITED TO ADD: Sent the link to John Lott. If you do not know who he is, he is a defender of the Second Amendment who uses the numbers to prove the point. He has debunked things like this again and again.

MechAg94 wrote:

cb1000rider wrote:I read this as: "Gun ownership tied to Three-fold increase in suicide success rate".

Makes sense to me.

The scary statistic for me - and you guys can help me figure out how to rationalize is the one that says owning a firearm in the home puts you at substantially greater risk of firearm related injury. It was so significant that the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends removing guns from the home if you have kids... (1992 and 2000 studies).

So then I think that if we excluded people who improperly stored firearms, we'd be OK... Apparently that isn't the case either - odds are almost twice as likely:
http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/1 ... ull#ref-30

Again, walk me through it so I can counter-argue... Because I'm not sure that I can, other than on the basis that I don't live my life to minimize risk every second of the day.

I had always heard that compared to swimming pools and other things that kids get hurt/killed with, guns accidents are actually fairly low. Not sure of the numbers, but I don't see those people proposing to ban swimming pools.

Japan has a higher suicide rate than the U.S., but almost no gun suicides because they don't have any.

Their favorite methods are jumping in front of moving trains and flinging themselves off of cliffs.

In the city where I worked, people came from miles around to kill themselves there because we had the tallest parking structures you could drive to the top of and jump off from.

The fact is that people use what's available when they decide to take their own lives.

The folks who believe banning multistory buildings and trains and leveling mountains is the answer can't be helped.

Excaliber wrote:

MechAg94 wrote:

cb1000rider wrote:I read this as: "Gun ownership tied to Three-fold increase in suicide success rate".

Makes sense to me.

The scary statistic for me - and you guys can help me figure out how to rationalize is the one that says owning a firearm in the home puts you at substantially greater risk of firearm related injury. It was so significant that the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends removing guns from the home if you have kids... (1992 and 2000 studies).

So then I think that if we excluded people who improperly stored firearms, we'd be OK... Apparently that isn't the case either - odds are almost twice as likely:
http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/1 ... ull#ref-30

Again, walk me through it so I can counter-argue... Because I'm not sure that I can, other than on the basis that I don't live my life to minimize risk every second of the day.

I had always heard that compared to swimming pools and other things that kids get hurt/killed with, guns accidents are actually fairly low. Not sure of the numbers, but I don't see those people proposing to ban swimming pools.

Japan has a higher suicide rate than the U.S., but almost no gun suicides because they don't have any.

Their favorite methods are jumping in front of moving trains and flinging themselves off of cliffs.

In the city where I worked, people came from miles around to kill themselves there because we had the tallest parking structures you could drive to the top of and jump off from.

The fact is that people use what's available when they decide to take their own lives.

The folks who believe banning multistory buildings and trains and leveling mountains is the answer can't be helped.

There was a study that suggested when japanese investigtors felt they could not solve a murder they would list the cause of death as suicide to save face

They "reviewed studies" to draw these conclusions. I'm looking at the list of stuff they reviewed right now; surprise, surprise, the long-discredited Kellermann study is in there. Given that was debunked hard and fairly thoroughly, I wonder what else they "looked at," and how biased, slanted, or just plain wrong, those are. I don't have time to go through and check them or their methodologies (nor do I have a statistical background), but if there's someone on here who does, here's the link: http://annals.org/article.aspx?articleid=1814426" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The article itself is all doomy-gloomy; but they don't show any data, only share their conclusions. I went straight to references.

Oh, nice. The further down the list of references I go, the more and more Kellermann's name is referenced. I would be willing to place money that half or more of the "studies" and references they looked at were either funded by anti-gunners like Brady, Joyce, Handgun Control, etc., were run by researchers who were anti-gun themselves, or both. Just the titles alone are making my eyebrows climb; talk about leading your jury!

According to the CDC in 2010....

"The gun debate has focused on mass shootings and assault weapons since the schoolhouse massacre in Newtown, Conn., but far more Americans die by turning guns on themselves." In fact, "nearly 20,000 of the 30,000 deaths from guns in the United States in 2010 were suicides, according to the most recent figures from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The national suicide rate has climbed by 12 percent since 2003, and suicide is the third-leading cause of death for teenagers."

It is possible that if all guns were banned that the above paragraph might read 20,000 of the 30,000 (fill in the blank) deaths...

I would bet though that the knowledge that 66% of gun deaths comes from suicide and not crime or hunting accidents or whatever is quite sobering. It is the mental state that drives people to suicide that is the problem, not the guns.

cb1000rider wrote:I read this as: "Gun ownership tied to Three-fold increase in suicide success rate".

Makes sense to me.

The scary statistic for me - and you guys can help me figure out how to rationalize is the one that says owning a firearm in the home puts you at substantially greater risk of firearm related injury. It was so significant that the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends removing guns from the home if you have kids... (1992 and 2000 studies).

So then I think that if we excluded people who improperly stored firearms, we'd be OK... Apparently that isn't the case either - odds are almost twice as likely:
http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/1 ... ull#ref-30


Again, walk me through it so I can counter-argue... Because I'm not sure that I can, other than on the basis that I don't live my life to minimize risk every second of the day.

CB, this is purely anecdotal, but it is from my own personal experience of time spent working in a busy ER.....people who commit suicide with firearms are generally very serious about killing themselves. People who use some other method are usually crying out for help. The former seldom notify anyone beforehand that they are going to kill themselves. They may or may not leave a suicide note. The latter usually call someone and say they are going to do it, and then they do something that threatens their life without having an instantaneous result. They take a half bottle of Tylenol (which can actually be fatal.....about 2 weeks later), or they scratch up their wrist with a pair of scissors, or they take a couple of valium and drink a glass of wine.

SOME of those people who commit a "quasi-suicidal" acts come from homes with firearms in them, but they don't use the gun. SOME of those who used guns in real suicides come from homes with Tylenol, scissors, valium, and wine, but they use the gun and not those other things.

I think it is a safe bet that people who are serious about killing themselves, who don't own a gun, will use a method like hanging themselves (like my old employer did), or jumping out of a high-rise window....or some other method with has a high probability of success. The lack of a gun isn't going to stop them from killing themselves if that's what they really want.

JSThane wrote:They "reviewed studies" to draw these conclusions. I'm looking at the list of stuff they reviewed right now; surprise, surprise, the long-discredited Kellermann study is in there. Given that was debunked hard and fairly thoroughly, I wonder what else they "looked at," and how biased, slanted, or just plain wrong, those are. I don't have time to go through and check them or their methodologies (nor do I have a statistical background), but if there's someone on here who does, here's the link: http://annals.org/article.aspx?articleid=1814426" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The article itself is all doomy-gloomy; but they don't show any data, only share their conclusions. I went straight to references.

Oh, nice. The further down the list of references I go, the more and more Kellermann's name is referenced. I would be willing to place money that half or more of the "studies" and references they looked at were either funded by anti-gunners like Brady, Joyce, Handgun Control, etc., were run by researchers who were anti-gun themselves, or both. Just the titles alone are making my eyebrows climb; talk about leading your jury!

And this is why I sent the link to Mr. John Lott...he DOES have the statistical background and he has made it his area of expertise, so to speak. I've sent him other things like this before and sure enough, he's serious about it. Unless he happens to be very busy, I would expect to see a rebuttal of that study from him pretty soon, probably on Foxnews.com.

psijac wrote:

Excaliber wrote:

MechAg94 wrote:

cb1000rider wrote:I read this as: "Gun ownership tied to Three-fold increase in suicide success rate".

Makes sense to me.

The scary statistic for me - and you guys can help me figure out how to rationalize is the one that says owning a firearm in the home puts you at substantially greater risk of firearm related injury. It was so significant that the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends removing guns from the home if you have kids... (1992 and 2000 studies).

So then I think that if we excluded people who improperly stored firearms, we'd be OK... Apparently that isn't the case either - odds are almost twice as likely:
http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/1 ... ull#ref-30

Again, walk me through it so I can counter-argue... Because I'm not sure that I can, other than on the basis that I don't live my life to minimize risk every second of the day.

I had always heard that compared to swimming pools and other things that kids get hurt/killed with, guns accidents are actually fairly low. Not sure of the numbers, but I don't see those people proposing to ban swimming pools.

Japan has a higher suicide rate than the U.S., but almost no gun suicides because they don't have any.

Their favorite methods are jumping in front of moving trains and flinging themselves off of cliffs.

In the city where I worked, people came from miles around to kill themselves there because we had the tallest parking structures you could drive to the top of and jump off from.

The fact is that people use what's available when they decide to take their own lives.

The folks who believe banning multistory buildings and trains and leveling mountains is the answer can't be helped.

There was a study that suggested when japanese investigtors felt they could not solve a murder they would list the cause of death as suicide to save face

That's the Japanese term for covering your assets. It doesn't do much for lowering the crime rate.