• ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Sure, suicide is easier with guns, but Japan demonstrates quite well that they are hardly a prerequisite. Guns are banned in Japan and so, to the other commenter’s point, they find another way to achieve their goals. Guns aren’t even statistically the most effective, drinking on train tracks is (or doing fentanyl on the train tracks, hit ya with the 2x.)

    You can all keep insisting that the attackers will switch to the next best thing but if that was the case, every other country in the world would have an equal amount of murder sprees, just committed by cars instead?

    Sure if you don’t account for any other differences between countries like mental health or other social services, or culture, or anything. Unfortunately in reality it is rarely that black and white, there are other differences.

    • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      Ελληνικά
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Suicide is definitely faster with guns. I wouldn’t call it easier. You can take yourself out quietly, cleanly and peacefully with stuff you can buy over the counter at any pharmacy on the planet.

      No, before you ask, I won’t post specifics here on how to do it. If you are considering ending your life, please get help. If you are in a country that allows for medical euthanasia, please work with them rather than take your life on your own.

    • TheFonz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The studies I refer to use local groups for control and not other nations. It is worthwhile looking up the studies.

      Absolutely there is more nuance, I was responding to the person that brought up the Paris truck attack. All things combined, the deterrents are what seem to have the most effect.

      • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Sure, but deterrents also have to be effective. Simply banning assault rifles for instance will just transfer it to the already-more-often-used handguns. Background checks are already a thing, unfortunately the Gov won’t give gun owners access to NICs for private sales (though they’ve been begging for decades, and that would help), but the people who pull these shootings are always some shit like this where they should have kept him IVC’d (which federally, legally, disqualifies him from firearms ownership and he should have had them confiscated and the IVC reported to NICs, already all laws people just didn’t do their job), or steal the guns from someone, or just are able to squeak through with a clean background. And some things like mental health checks are already a thing with the IVC but tbh I think things like “no guns for people with PTSD” sounds pretty fucked up even if that would help, people with PTSD have rights too.

        • TheFonz@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I agree. I firmly believe something like universal background checks and closing the private sales loophole would be a step in the right direction. Again, these aren’t intended to be perfect solutions, they are just meant to slow it down. We can’t let perfect be the enemy of progress.