UKC

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-35000998

In most countries, a killing spree with semi automatic weaponary by people wearing 'military style clothing' would self evidently be a terrorist attack. In the US, this sort of thing happens so much that 24 hours on they still aren't sure whether it was or not.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-34996604

Some statistics in the link that I just can't get my mind around:

- in the US in 2015 so far, there have been 353 mass shootings. More than one every day.

- the US spends over a trillion dollars a year on protecting itself against terrorism; but 20 times as many Americans die every year from gun related incidents as are killed in terrorist attacks.

- more Americans were killed by firearms between 1968 and 2011 than in *every war America has ever participated in, including the war of independence*- 1.4 million vs 1.2 million

And not in the link: Black Friday was the biggest day ever for registering new firearm purchases- over 180000 in one day alone.

I'm almost lost for words reading these figures. Every society decides what values it regards as most important. But it's hard to understand how a nation so superficially similar to us can value a right which made sense in the context of a new nation emerging from colonial dominance over the lives of so many of their current citizens.

I'd ask, what will it take to change this? But looking at the graphs, I know the answer already. Sadly, nothing can.

Best wishes

And RIP the victims of all these incidents

Gregor

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:

It's the NRA innit, National Rifle Association, and they say it's all about freedom:

https://home.nra.org/

Thanks for the statistics, Gregor, it's a shocker to me too.

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:

I'm not sure if it's possible to change it. The sheer amount of weapons and ammunition in circulation must make banning and confiscation impossible, even if the political will was there.

I wonder if gun ownership in the US is driven by paranoia, and the prospect of legal guns being removed leaving the criminals with sole access to formidable armouries would only stoke that paranoia.

I must admit, if I lived in an isolated rural location in the US I'd feel a lot safer with a 9mm at hand and something bigger under the bed, given the almost free availability of weapons over there.

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:
Where did you get the black Friday stat from? Not questioning it, just would like to use it quoting a source.

T.

...now found something via Google...

In reply to Pursued by a bear:

It was on radio 4 on way home tonight.

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:

One of the more insane things about guns and violence is that it's not permitted for the US government agencies to investigate why it happens.

The sticky mitts of the NRA is all over this

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/jay-dickey-gun-violence-research-amendm...

In reply to Ridge:

Indeed- becomes a vicious circle- even if you don't really want one, when everyone else has got one, I can see the pressure to have one too.

There's a fascinating analysis to be had in there somewhere about the narratives that nations use to define themselves, and how these can blind their people to truths that are self evident to outsiders.

But not sure my hearts in it tonight.

Cheers
Gregor

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:


This one is a bit hard to believe. But working that to deaths per year, actually it's quite realistic. Wow.

While fact checking it I discovered that military deaths in WWII are incredibly high for Germany, Russia and China. I didn't expect China or Russia to be so high. Over an order of magnitude above UK, US, France.

In reply to Ridge:


Absolutely. Home invasions in the US are very different from what we see hear in the UK. My cousin has two handguns, an AK47 and an M-16. His attitude is if they break in to his house he'll happily take them down. Exactly how many people are going to break in and how many bullets he'll get off i'm not sure. I assume he anticipates they'll walk in slowly one at a time so he can get them all.

In reply to Father Noel Furlong:

I thought it wasn't legal to own automatic weapons?

Certainly thought it was not possible to legally buy them.

In reply to andymac:

No idea. He might be talking crap, I haven't visited in over 20 years.

In reply to andymac:



Think it depends on the state, I think some do allow full automatic. Most of the AK and AR derivatives in the USA are semi- automatic.

Anyway, pump action shotguns loaded with steel shot are apparently more effective against 'home invaders' than a full auto AK. A lot of metal flying at your visitor in a reasonably accurate manner in a short space of time...

In reply to Philip: You honestly didn#t know that re. Russia. I find that hard to believe.

You do have to wonder what it will do to move US attitudes to this. A lot of americans don't like the number of guns floating around but there is such a strong political movement to keep them - 2nd amendment and so on. For the gun owning R Obama's obvious dislike of gun ownership really grates. I wonder if they feel a little bit guilty

In reply to Ridge:


That makes chilling sense, and in an enclosed space too. Suddenly glad I live in England (not that I'd home invade).

In reply to wbo:


Given the regularly-heard response to such incidents is to say that *more* guns in more hands is the solution (so the 'bad guys' will be outgunned), I doubt if guilt is a common feeling among NRA members, sadly.

In reply to wbo:


I knew it was high, but 10million military 27million total. 14% of 1939 population. At a guess I'd have though a couple of million.

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:

and then you get this sort of thing going on: youtube.com/watch?v=tgpziBRc4iY&

In reply to Philip:


I'm also a little surprised you didn't know this. Hastings believes the reason is that these were the nations (including Japan) which institutionalised brutality against their enemies but also treated their own soldiers brutally and as canon fodder. Germany didn't have quite the same attitude to being careless with the lives of its own soldiers (Russian generalship and effective abuse of its own soldiers was appalling) but Russia took full revenge when it had the opportunity and it's soldiers were actively encouraged to do so (meaning German losses were huge towards the end of the war). The German civilian population also suffered terribly at the hands of the Russians in particular but I suppose it's hard for them to play that card in the light of what went before. The civilised Western nations were quite squeamish in comparison and didn't in reality lose that many soldiers. Arguably this veneer of civilisation also meant that many of the more western nations didn't perform very well either during the war.

In reply to Ridge:


"I'm not sure if it's possible to change it. "

Sort of agree. I think we need to pick our battles. I think we can make small changes with big impacts but guns will never be banned.

Hunting here is a way of life in much of the US.

I went to a friends last week, its black powder season now, he had 2 rifles, a crossbow and a shot gun out on his pool table.. I took my parents and our newborn around and even texted to say maybe get rid of the guns..

For him the deer season is just the time to get meat for the next few months. They use every bit of them.

But he's responsible and owns guns to hunt, not defend.

I think reducing magazine sizes, controlling assault rifles, better checks, better mental health care,

You are right that there is a LOT of fear. TBH yes someone may have a gun and come around but that risk is pretty minimal to your kid blasting their mother or their mate or them by mistake..

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:


No they are convinced the solution is more guns.

This was on Facebook today, from Ulster County NY
https://www.facebook.com/UlsterSheriff/posts/1201965929817773?fref=nf&p...

"Ulster County Sheriff's Office
10 hrs ·

December 3, 2015

ATTENTION LICENSED HANDGUN OWNERS

In light of recent events that have occurred in the United States and around the world I want to encourage citizens of Ulster County who are licensed to carry a firearm to PLEASE DO SO.

I urge you to responsibly take advantage of your legal right to carry a firearm. To ensure the safety of yourself and others, make sure you are comfortable and proficient with your weapon, and knowledgeable of the laws in New York State with regards to carrying a weapon and when it is legal to use it.

I also want to remind all Police/Peace Officers both active duty and retired to please carry a weapon whenever you leave your house. We are the thin blue line that is entrusted in keeping this country safe, and we must be prepared to act at any given moment.

Thank you,

Paul J. Van Blarcum
Ulster County Sheriff"

In reply to Father Noel Furlong:


And knock as presumably they are locked up..
youtube.com/watch?v=7OZIOE6aMBk&

I really dont think the risk is that great.

In reply to Roadrunner5:



Spot on. Thanks for sharing

In reply to Roadrunner5:


Interested to hear your perspective being our there, Iain- how widespread is the 'cult of the second amendment'- I know that the American political system can give disproportionate influence to certain groups, particularly those in small-population 'red' states, and those with a lot of money. Is there a sense that an NRA 'tail' is wagging the dog, or are the views of the gun lobby actually pretty representative of a broad swathe of American public opinion?

In reply to Ridge:

"Anyway, pump action shotguns loaded with steel shot are apparently more effective against 'home invaders' than a full auto AK. A lot of metal flying at your visitor in a reasonably accurate manner in a short space of time..."

That's what I have. Although it's not pump action...it's in a safe under the stairs, a break safe (which means the gun is in pieces to fit in it), the ammo is in a strong box in the garden shed, the keys for the safe and strong box are in the kitchen, and they look identical and I NEVER pick the correct ones first. I will be in my underpants and there will be childrens toys all over the floor. I reckon I could take intruders on with a 15 minute warning headstart...but that would be pushing it.

I think the childrens toys are probably the most dangerous thing ...they will be limping out of my house with the telly

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:
1.4 million over 41 years is 325,000 per year or about 100 people per 100,000.

Given a high proportion (around 50%) of these deaths are accidental or suicide it's useful to compare them with the U.K. where suicide rates are close to 10 per 100,000.

So the suicide rate in the US is around 5x that of the UK. And a lot of those are men aged 15-40, who decide to take a few people with them.

Also their way of dealing with crime is to lock people up or execute them. Not very proactive.

Very sad, but the problem isn't guns, it's suicide and a failure to tackle crime.

In reply to balmybaldwin:


Thanks for sharing that. My first thought was it was a stunt just to show how stupid the law is, but no, it just seems like he has a very unhealthy obsession with his gun.

In reply to Roadrunner5:

In reply to Road runner5's link (https://www.facebook.com/UlsterSheriff/posts/1201965929817773?fref=nf&p... I think the comment posted along with it says it all..

"William C Giles
I can not believe how many people here have posted stupid liberal responses !
The fact that there are educated legal firearm owners that carry in this nation is the only positive point that we haven't been overrun yet by evil criminals, and terrorists !
Clue # 1 it's going to get a lot worse before it gets better, And the police are just one facet of protection, A firearm in the hand of a trained marksmen is worth 10 officers on the phone, You people think you live in utopia, You don't, get real, radical Muslims have one intent, and that is to take over the world !
You sheep will be slaughtered cowering for your life, the field must be leveled by having every law abiding citizen willing to give, OR take a life to protect the innocent,...
Wake up n look around, there is not a law on the books that will prevent what is happening, evil must be stopped one situation at a time, You can lock your doors, but people must socialize, and that's when evil of this magnitude strike,...
Live free, or die !!!"

In reply to Tom F Harding:

"You can have my gun, when you pry it from my cold dead fingers"
"Your proposal is acceptable"

In reply to DancingOnRock:






I agree, up to the last point

The basis of any suicide prevention strategy is restricting access to means of carrying it out

Ready access to lethal means is likely to lead directly to more completed suicides

Guns are very much the problem.

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:


Part of the problem - other countries, such as Canada, have lots of guns but not the same problems with mass shootings. The other half is the attitude towards guns. Seeing them as a tool for farming or hunting leads to far fewer problems than seeing them as form of defence coupled with a general sense of paranoia . It's this attitude that is prevalent in parts of the US that is the major problem.

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:

The root cause is not the guns, it's the mental state of the people using them.

I just read an article where 12 policemen shot dead a man who had been shooting a gun in the air at a shopping centre. He put the gun away but they still shot him.

I question that if "All it takes to stop a bad man with a gun is a good guy with a gun." is true, why send 12 professionally trained policeman?

They've got it completely back to front and are too convinced of their own abilities.

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:
I don't know.

My wife's from a very rural area in south jersey which is like a southern state. Very pro gun.

You do see NRA bumper stickers but it's more than the NRA.

This week congress have blocked a bill which just required background checks for online sales and gun show purchases that are already required for Gun shop purchases.
Seemed a common sense step to fill a gap in the legislation

But with recent attacks in Paris and now CA gun sales are spiking. A friend had a Facebook post, he lives in Northern NH and his friend was talking about buying a bigger gun due to the threat of ISIS.. This is a very remote valley in the mountains..

This made me think of this video of the UK police restraining someone, who is threatening them with machete but also clearly mentally ill. It was shown on US TV news. The reporters all agreed that if the same situation had happened there he would have immediately been shot dead.

youtube.com/watch?v=cX5CPx4RKWw&

In reply to DancingOnRock:

But you can't separate the two in that way.

Both are entirely relevant if you are drawing up a public health strategy to reduce suicide rates. You try to improve recognition of abnormal mental states that suggest an increased risk of suicidal acts, and improve interventions to manage these mental states when recognised.

But you also try to deal with the availability of the means to complete suicide in the environment. A high number of suicidal acts are impulsive in nature, and restricting access to more lethal means is an effective way of reducing the suicide rate. This is why the maximum number of paracetamol that could be bought at one time was reduced in the UK- yes, people can go to another shop and get more, but the more steps you put between the person and accessing the means to end their life, the less likely it is they will go on to do so.

There is also a well recognised relationship between occupation and suicide, with occupations where there is ready access to lethal means having a higher rate- farmers with access to shotguns, vets and doctors with access to medications.

And clear epidemiological evidence that this works as an intervention to reduce suicide- the single biggest drop in the suicide rate in the UK happened when we switched from coal gas to North Sea gas, as it had lower carbon monoxide levels and 'sticking your head in a gas oven' became an uncomfortable way to spend time rather than lethal.

The other biggest determinant of the suicide rate is the performance of the economy. Evaluations of mental health interventions show these make much less of a contribution.

So if public health America wanted to reduce the suicide rate in the US, the single most effective step would be to control access to firearms.

I'm not going to hold my breath though, as the 'it's not the guns' argument will continue to be deployed every time the issue come up, even though its obvious it really, really is...

In reply to Roadrunner5:



When its part of the core narrative of what America is, and what being an American means, as it seems to be, then its just not going to change....

In reply todancing on rock: Sorry, I see your point, but don't fully agree. While the frequent (daily ! ) mass shootings are partly a mental health problem there is also an issue of too many guns floating around.

Examples would be the numerous stupid accidental shootings. People are also too keen on shooting suspected burglars 'just in case', burglars are armed 'just in case' , and you have a country with a civil arms race.

There are just too many guns floating around, and a lot of people, including the police, are far too casual in their use

In reply to Tom F Harding:

I wonder if any of the mass shootings have been prevented or limited by civilians with guns? The self defence argument falls down hugely on the front that I have never heard of anyone defending themselves against a mass shooter! Maybe they have and we just don't hear about it?

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:


http://www.theonion.com/article/second-amendment-little-creeped-out-how-obs...

The views of the gun lobby are pretty representative, sadly.

alicia (american)

In reply to girlymonkey: I've never heard of this and I listen to a LOT of american news (NPR). I'm sure if it had happened the case would be a 'poster child' for the NRA. Dismal

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:

I agree. You can't separate the two.

Maybe I should have said the guns aren't the cause of the problem, I think I did clarify in a later post.

WBO has written a good post.

In reply to wbo:


It happens occasionally. However, in reality, it's not played out as it is in the movies. There's lots of confusion, shouting, shots are fired, everyone misses everyone else, a bystander might get hit, the "bad guy" runs away.

Give YouTube a search.

In reply to girlymonkey:

Really?

That was big news here. A Texan shot a would be terrorist this year.

In reply to girlymonkey: yeah agree. It's easy to blame the NRA but it's more than them. They don't help.

It's also a massive economy. The government doesn't like change which causes people to lose jobs. I live in a state where we can't pump gas, but to allow that we have to find jobs for thousands of workers. Likewise only buying alcohol in liquor stores, to change that we'd lose liquor stores and jobs..

In reply to DancingOnRock:


Factor of ten out...

1,400,000/41 ~ 34,000

Which tallies with my recollection of the figures, being that two years' gun deaths exceeded the ~60k US killed in Vietnam.

In reply to wbo:

http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/05/us/texas-police-shooting-hero/

In reply to captain paranoia:




That's interesting then. So the gun deaths in the US are no more than the suicide rates in the uk.

So you're just as at much risk in the US of being shot/shooting yourself as you are in the UK of committing suicide.

Statistics are a funny thing...

In reply to DancingOnRock:

Yes, an interesting way of looking at it

Some other statistics: the rate of suicide in the US and UK is similar (about 12/100,000 vs 11/100,000), but the methods are different. 50% of suicide deaths in the US are related to firearms vs 4% in the UK. Rates of suicide vary between countries, so a rate of 10-12/100,000 isn't a 'natural base rate' as far as I can see. So its possible that if access to firearms was restricted, the US may have a lower suicide rate than here, as its not a given that all those currently using the very accessible and violent method of firearms would necessarily turn to other methods.

So gun control might not just save the lives of many of the 12000 per year killed in firearm related homicide; but could also save the lives of many of the 18000 or so who commit suicide using firearms.

Which in some ways makes the current refusal to even consider the most basic of regulations eg the check when guns purchased by mail order than Iain referred to, even more tragic,

Gregor

In reply to Roadrunner5:


That's a police officer, not an average member of the public

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:

I would be interested to know whether stopping selling paracetamol in 100 tablet bottles reduced suicides or whether it reduced accidental overdoses, which was my understanding of why it was reduced to 12 tablet packets.

Do people commit suicide using automatic weapons and rifles? Doesn't seem a very practical method.

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:
seems this Californian shooter had praised ISIS on facebook on day of attacks. Can't say i'm that surprised. Did seem odd that they would have so much weaponry (even for the US) for a work dispute gone out of proportion. Be interesting to see where this rabbit hole goes.

edit...his wife praised ISIS, and friends wonder if he married a terrorist when he brought her back from Saudi."Does my bomb look big in this darling?"...gulp

In reply to DancingOnRock:

It reduced suicides

http://www.bmj.com/content/346/bmj.f403

And the figures found didnt break down by type of firearm for US suicide deaths, just that in 51% of completed suicides, firearms was the method used.

In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:


Very good, but might not be quite the right audience

In reply to balmybaldwin:


Wasn't he off duty?

In reply to Roadrunner5:

I'm not sure that's relevant but yes I think so although article isn't clear He would still be significantly more trained than your average Joe. He also would be a lot more sure of his rights to actually take action whereas average Joe with a gun caught up in a mass shooting might not be

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:

It will be interesting to see how this plays out now it seems they were indeed terrorists. Already seen reports talking about stockpiles of illegal weapons (which weren't illegal).

I wonder how much the NRA will respond as to whether it's right this pair had the right to bear arms.

Hopefully they'll find they bought their guns at a fayre or garage sale which might turn round the most recent blocking of gun law (that I'd and back ground checks must be done in any sale of a gun, not just at gun shops

In reply to balmybaldwin:
The NRA have already said even those on the terrorist watch list can bear arms.. They oppose ALL restrictions by default.


http://m.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2-000-terror-suspects-bought-guns-le...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/11/16/why-the-nra-opposed-...

There's more here..

In reply to balmybaldwin:

Yes, I'm just highlighting that it was his right to carry a gun outside of work, denied in the UK for example, that stopped a gun attack.

I sort of know a guy who works as a nuclear power station security, who is armed, very pro gun, and always carries..

He's so proud that he's always ready to defend America.. I point out that he's more likely going to see his kids harmed.

In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:
It's amazing that it didn't set of some sort of alarm bells, there's obviously no checking.

My worry is we have the anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim view alienating people, then people trying to radicalize them. Such an arsenal, explosives, the contacts suggests this was connected to Islamic terror.

But I can't see how Trumps register for Muslims to track movements will do anything but further alienate.

In reply to Roadrunner5:

Yes, and I suspect this will further encourage idiots like Trump and get them more votes too.

In reply to DancingOnRock: et al

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr64/nvsr64_02.pdf
is 2013 data and intersting not sure if 2104 is availble yet (i've rounded a tad)

Deaths from Suicides: 21K of 41K firearms related
Deaths From Assault: 11K of 16K firearms related
Total Firearms Deaths: 33K

plus 505 accidental discharge deaths
and 281 unkown intent firearms deaths

from same : total drug induced deaths 46K can drill down further from the link

In reply to Father Noel Furlong:


Yes, that's another major American skill set.


We have seen from the Pistorias case what happens when you are paranoid and tooled up to deal with an intruder.

How many poor souls are living in the house with him? I recommend that they sleep in their body armour and keep a potty under the bed instead wandering off to the toilet in the middle of the night.

In reply to lithos:




No, there'll be a bit of a delay before is ready...

In reply to andymac:
I think you can, they are restricted and hard to get, but I thought they were still legal.

I thought the 'oath keepers' carried them?

In reply to Roadrunner5:


Looking at the State By State laws on Wiki,I see that California ,Connecticut ,and Massachusetts are the States who seem to have the most controls and laws in place.

Quite alarming to think that as a U.S. Citizen ,I could head of to Walmart tomorrow morning and put an AR15 and Glock in my trolley (cart).beside the cheese and diapers.

Or am I reading it wrong?

The aforementioned States are leading the way .which is great.

The U.S. will always bear arms .But surely implementing the controls adopted by California etc can't hurt that much.

In reply to andymac:
I didn't think Walmart did anymore, but Dicks sporting goods.. Sell kids footballs next to semi-automatics..

I'm not sure what my rights are as an immigrant. In NJ I'm blocked from obamacare but no doubt could go and guy a big gun..

They use Chicago as the argument against gun laws because they strengthened them and gun crime remained, yet it was an historic crime land city so it won't suddenly get rid of guns. Likewise DC I think, but in DC you can nip to neighboring states like VA and buy guns..

They need to chip away at gun rights, improve checks, improve mental health care, and be a more caring society. If a person breaks down mentally few will help.. They spiral, get cut off then come back with a bang like the recent guy in colorado.

But it's such a complex problem that won't change quickly nor with any single solution.

Also someone mentioned executions in the U.S. You have to remember executions take 10-20years, execution sentences are falling rapidly at the moment as counties can't afford them, plus the issues over the method so even in TX that is changing.

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:

I think there are 3 main groups of people. Those that profit and are removed from the situation, those who are for the proliferation of guns and see the problem as being not enough guns or there being too many "inherently bad people" (these people are usually pretty poor logicians), those who are against the proliferation of guns and see easy access and societal ill as the issue. And I think the first group are too good at controlling the second, for the third to have enough sway in the matter. I think the long-term solution is critical thinking, but unfortunately that doesn't seem to be a high value thing anymore.

Interestingly, I notice a lot of gun proliferators on the US climbing forums too (i.e. they seem to dominate the gun threads there).

In reply to andymac:

The guns are kept behind counters under lock and key. Like any high value goods are in currys or John Lewis in the uk.

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:

This is instructive:

https://youtu.be/9pOiOhxujsE?list=PLOKWcH1zBl2kfnCwyyZWk5MW28lgaNa7L

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:

Strong words on the front page of the New York Times today:

"It is a moral outrage and a national disgrace that civilians can legally purchase weapons designed specifically to kill people with brutal speed and efficiency. These are weapons of war, barely modified and deliberately marketed as tools of macho vigilantism"

Quite right too.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/12/05/opinion/end-the-gun-epidemic-in-americ...


T.

In reply to Roadrunner5:


That's where the Chicago argument (of the NRA) falls down also - you can drive 45 minutes in any directions from Chicago into rural IL or over into Indiana and pick up a gun legally very easily.

In reply to Roadrunner5:
One of my friends in the US was a typical 'mountain man' although he actually lived in a town due to his job.
He hunted with guns, bows, crossbows, catapults and anything else he could lay his hands on. He skinned all the animals he killed and fed his family with the meat. He made clothes, boots and bags with the skins. He stuffed some of the dead animals, as in taxidermy and sold the stuffed animals to make extra money. He loaded his own ammunition (after casting his own bullets for his muzzle loaders) and hand made his own arrows. He did these things because he grew up in the countryside where this behaviour was the norm. He carried a handgun in cowboy fashion on his belt at all times and had a rifle in open view in the back window of his pick up. He did this because it was lawful in the state where we lived. He had a loaded shotgun above his bed and a loaded handgun in his bedside table. His children had been brought up to know that guns were tools to do a job. They weren't toys and they were always loaded unless you personaly checked otherwise. His rational was that there was no point having a gun for self defense unless it was ready to use. His children were learning the skills that their father had. At first I thought he was mental but eventually saw the reasoning behind his actions. Would his behaviour be seen as 'normal' and acceptable in the UK? In many ( but certainly not all) parts of the US it is.

Pmc

In reply to baron: sounds very like the guy I know. His guns are locked away as his house, well garage is the local man cave.. You can always call around for a beer and there's always kids about. I know people say bring the kids up to respect guns but 3-4 years old won't and don't understand.

He's well out of town and there's little crime so for him they aren't self defense.

One local guy just shot his disabled son in a deer hunt, the kid chased out the deer, got too excited and crossed the line of fire.. He lived but luckily.

I think the risk from spontaneous suicide or firearms accident is far greater than the risk of a home invasion.

In reply to Roadrunner5:

People don't suddenly decide to commit suicide. They plan it very carefully.

In reply to DancingOnRock:
Some do, some just snap. Likewise they have a violent outburst and can grab a gun. You can't say how someone does or does not commit suicide. I had a friend who killed himself very suddenly after a row with his girlfriend. There was no way he'd planned it at all.

This also says many are impulsive. I'm amazed you think you can speak so definitively on all suicides.

http://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/suicide-is-forever-but-the-stress-leadin...

"One of my tasks was to update the section on suicide. In the aftermath of Tom£s death, one fact struck me in particular: Many suicides (estimates range from 30% to 80%) are impulsive, with just minutes or an hour elapsing between the time a person decides upon suicide and when he or she commits the act"

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp0805923

"Why might the availability of firearms increase the risk of suicide in the United States? First, many suicidal acts — one third to four fifths of all suicide attempts, according to studies — are impulsive. Among people who made near-lethal suicide attempts, for example, 24% took less than 5 minutes between the decision to kill themselves and the actual attempt, and 70% took less than one hour"2
(Simon OR, Swann AC, Powell KE, Potter LB, Kresnow MJ, O'Carroll PW. Characteristics of impulsive suicide attempts and attempters. Suicide Life Threat Behav 2001;32:Suppl:49-59)

In reply to DancingOnRock:

As Iain says, some do, many don't. That's why the paracetamol restrictions were effective- you only have to make the chain of actions to the suicidal act a little bit longer and you will save lives

When you've got a loaded firearm in the drawer, the chain of actions from the impulse to the act is very short indeed.

In reply to Pursued by a bear:

Strong words, thanks for link.

Is this the sort of position the NY times has had for a while? Or a shift?

Not sure it's place in US media, will it just be seen as the voice of the liberal elite, or is it a more populist publication with the ability to influence opinions among those who would normally be pro gun?

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:




It varies, but the NY post, huff post, tend to be more liberal. The NE is generally much less gun obsessed but that changes as you getto the more rural NE further up.

There's been a general voice in some sections of the press that something needs to change but an almost acceptance it won't.

In reply to Roadrunner5:

Thats the actual descision. People don't decide to kill themselves in a weeks time on Tuesday. They plan 'When things get really bad I'll commit suicide and I'll do it like this."

I'd be very surprised (and quite frightened) if someone wakes up in the morning full of the joys of life, loses his job at midday, and kills himself by half past 12.

It's a very complex subject.

Having a gun in the house makes it simple and no logistical planning necessary. No drive to the chemists, hardware store or climbing a building to delay the thoughts when they finally become overwhelming.

Anyway, not a great subject to dwell on or argument over.