387
Firearm suicides reached "unprecedented" high in 2022, CDC data shows
(www.cbsnews.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 01 Dec 2023
387 points (97.1% liked)
News
21693 readers
3660 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Legalize doctor assisted suicide. Let people end their lives with dignity.
Bruh I'd vote for this
Yeah but I'm not so sure we should be allowing people to make that choice on a whim because they're depressed or feeling down at the time. Humans are wildly impulsive sometimes.
They're not drive thru places. Typically you have to go thru counseling and thru evaluations to make sure it's what you want. But right now people are just buying guns to blow their heads off and leaving their body for first responders or their family to find. People are always going to kill themselves, you might as well make it a clean and dignified end.
People are always going to kill themselves, but programs like MAID make it more attractive to people that normally wouldn't.
They're already allowed....
No one is suggesting a Futurama style suicide booth on the side of the road my man.
On topic: Dignity includes being able to determine one's own end. However, it is difficult to find a regulation that excludes knee-jerk reactions and external influence in the decision.
A distinction should also be made here between different forms of temporary mental problems and fatal physical illnesses as a reason for ending the own life.
That's why I'm not sure what I would support here.
What is dignity and why is it morally relevant? I'll even let you assume that dignity by definition requires a third-party to provide assistance in active killing.
Part of (inner) dignity is self-determination. So in the end, freedom again?
And what is freedom? Why is it morally relevant? Using vague weasel words doesn't really permit any evaluation of a claim. This is why statements like "freedom" and "liberty" are political claptrap you will never see them in formal ethics.
The freedom and the secure feeling of being able to decide for yourself when you want to die under certain circumstances.
For me, morality (right or wrong) comes into play when a balanced middle way has to be found between an individual's lack of alternatives to dying and external help and advice against it.
It's almost the same issue as making counseling mandatory before an abortion.
Again why is this relevant? This is simply vague posturing.
You need to show that people have a right to have their wishes fulfilled, that this right extends to dying, and with much more difficulty show that society should place limits on it but cannot prohibit it.
I would consider the latter to be impossible, because as soon as you permit a third-party to set criteria for the permissibility of an action, there is nothing stopping them from setting unachievable criteria.
I partly agree to your last sentence. But this moral dilemma couldn't be solved if we see it absolute black or white.
To stay with the example of abortion: In my country, you need a state-recognized counselling certificate (by approved state or private organizations) for this and must comply with a wait time of three days. I don't see any impossible hurdles here if you want to achieve this goal and they don't change the rules by will. Of course, legislation could change this, but that would be another problem.
Why? What's the offensive part of that?
Is it how accessible it is? Because for millions of American households, needing to venture out into public is less accessible than the firearm of their nearest "responsible gun owner".
Is it that a company makes a small profit from each suicide? Because the guns used in all these suicides aren't given away for free.
Way back in 1999 when this episode first aired, the joke was that phone booths have been replaced by suicide booths, a joke written when the Nokia 5110 was a flagship phone.
But of course, 25ish years later, neither phone booths nor suicide booths are anywhere to be found because they simply can't match the convenience of the phone in your pocket or the gun in your drawer.
It's primarily the accessibility, yes.
While I support assisted suicide being an option, it should have requirements including a wait period.
Why not? That's the logical conclusion.
Assisted suicide requires that one's desire takes preeminence over any future value of existence and that society has a responsibility to satisfy this desire.
Adding a restriction on when you are allowed to assist in it (besides purely the subject's immediate desire) is special pleading. This is why MAID in Canada is slippery sloping into euthanasia for all and any reason, because there is no actual barrier to it after they accepted the initial premises.
Who would use it when they have pro-gun assisted suicide?
For doctor-assisted suicide, you need to be over 18 anywhere it's available.
But for pro-gun suicide, children only need a "responsible gun owner" in the house with a poorly secured firearm, thanks to their staunch opposition of safe storage laws and need to be 3 second from a gun at all times.
For doctor-assisted suicide, you generally need to be terminally ill first and undergo a psychological evaluation to ensure you're mentally capable of making an informed decision.
But for pro-gun suicide, you can kill yourself without even the most token effort to cure your mental health problems, thanks to their staunch opposition to red flag laws. Their only requirement is "not a felon" and they even ensure you can get around it with a private sale loophole.
For doctor-assisted suicide, you usually need the approval of two doctors, both of which have years of medical school to pay off and neither of which your sleazy insurance company will want to pay for.
But for pro-gun suicide, a cheap handgun can be yours for under $200, because that's what someones life is worth to them.
For doctor-assisted suicide, you will usually have a minimum waiting period between your first and second requests, to ensure you're not making an impulsive decision.
But for pro-gun suicide, you can do it on a whim. Even if you haven't surrounded yourself with super cool guns already, the waiting period is typically only a few days and if you're lucky enough to live in a pro-gun state, there might be no minimum waiting period at all.
For doctor-assisted suicide, the medication is very deliberately dispensed to ensure there is no danger to anybody else.
But for pro-gun suicide, take all the people you want with you when you go. Family members, a room full of terrified children, a bunch of minorities some Discord channel insisted were the reason your life sucks -- the pro-gun community don't even pretend to care, let alone do something about it.
Ultimately, doctors just can't compete with the cheap, accessible, fast and poorly considered suicides offered by American gun laws. Why else do you think they've skyrocketed?
Because it's definitely not because terminally ill people are deciding to end their life without the dignity of keeping their brains inside their skull -- an idea that is so thoroughly stupid that I'm having a hard time believing your intention is anything more than simply making the statistics around firearms look better.