Again, loaded with words that prove the study is nothing more than hypothesis, speculation, and plain guesswork, with no scientific legitimacy. The study prefaces itself with words such as "can" or "may" and "potential" meaning Action A has the theoretical potential to lead to Reaction B but cannot be demonstrated as actually being a fundamental truth. There is nothing to prove that Action A can and only will lead to Reaction B, rather than leading to Reaction C, D, or even J. There is simply no hard science that actually proves conclusively that waiting periods lead to a reduction in suicides. Nor is there evidence to prove that the desire to commit suicide comes into existence only during the time an individual wishes to legally purchase a firearm, and ceases to exist afterward. Suicide is not a once in a lifetime desire with a short half-life.
You have absolutley no understanding of science when you start asking for scientific proof. It is laughably stupid.
And there is no actual evidence that waiting periods prevent firearm-related suicides from occurring. It is nothing more than speculation and hypothesis, and the studies admit to such.
You were given evidence. You just don't understand it as shown by your asking for scientific proof which is freaking hilarious!
No evidence was given. A theory was given, dressed up in the form of a study based on sound science, but it was not science, and it was most certainly not evidence. It is nothing more than supposition and guesswork, all to present the message that Action A has the hypothetical potential to lead to Reaction B, but such cannot actually be demonstrated as being proof.
I had a wife of a son in law commit suicide two years ago. When all her things were examined, it came to light that she had been pondering the idea for at least two years. She had collected the means she was going to use and picked the place- then, just waited until the opportune time came along. She had it all planned in detail. She used prescription drugs to sedate herself, went into a wooded space in a park she always liked, sat down and cut her wrists, in zero degree weather. Long ago, another distant relative shot himself out on a riverbank. Things came out that showed he had been thinking of it for six months or more. I would doubt that there are many, if any, suicides that are spontaneous decisions.
Oh my god you continue to just embarrass yourself. Gravity is a theory. Thermodynamics is a theory. The earth being round is a theory. This is just embarrassing for you
People THINK about suicide ofetn for a long time. But the actual impulse to kill yourself can come on very quickly....it can also pass quickly.
The concept of spontaneous suicide is nothing more than an unfounded myth, created by mental health professionals to explain why they failed to notice obvious warning signs that the individual in question was suicidal. Instead of admitting that they do not know what they are doing, they present the myth of suicide being the result of a spontaneous, undetectable, irresistible impulse that can come out of nowhere, and affect any given individual at any given time.
Gravity, thermodynamics, and the earth being round rather than flat do not relate to the restriction of constitutional rights on the weakest of justifications.
Uh..sure? You expecting a genocide in the US anytime soon? First off, wrong link. Second - You forgot to include the rest of the quote so here though I'm not sure how they say that a 5.7 fold higher rate is offest by a 1.5fold higher rate by other means. Not much of an offset. Uh... what? Vancouver has a much longer then 7 day period, as Handguns are restricted, which means you can wait anywhere from a week to 2-3months, depending on how fast the ATT takes to do the paperwork. Also, here you have to have a PAL (gun license), which for the restricted side of things, has a 28 day waiting period for first time buyers. If you already have a gun, this entire conversation is moot. My whole point is about people who don't already have one because if you did, then why would you need to buy another one to kill yourself with? You mean those who will only use a gun and might change their mind if they have to wait. Otherwise your comment doesn't make sense. Yeah, I'm not sure pulling out another gun would qualify as 'proof'. And yes, which has been my point all along. Yes. I think that's an apples to oranges comparison. First off - the wait time period for both has the same overarching goal. To give a 'cool off' period for the individual, in case the decision for their purchase (or abortion) was done in haste or whatnot. I agree with that. Second - The issue I have with the comparison is that for someone buying a gun, the only additional barrier is the wait time and the extra cost of an extra trip. For women and abortions, requiring the wait time imposes extra costs associated with the time in the medical facility, plus the possible issues with that time period covering a change in trimester number which can change things depending on the state, plus the extra possible stress on the mother which can have detrimental affects on health and mental wellbeing. I understand the purpose of the comparison, but I don't see them as being equal enough to create an equitable comparison.
First off, most studies regarding social sciences (and general scientific study on the behaviors of people) all have those words. Why? Because human beings are seperate entities that can change on a dime. Statistical analysis is used to find over-arching patterns that can be identified. The more information, the more accurate the quantification, but realistically, no study will ever be as concrete as 1+1=2. As for the periods of desire to kill oneself; there is something in Mental Illness called Recurrant Brief Depression. Wiki catagorizes it as such But as that's Wiki, i'll provide some better sourcing on it for you https://link.springer.com/article/10.2165/00023210-199504030-00006 http://europepmc.org/abstract/med/7643738 http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/9789814440912_0061 You'll notice suicide and suicidal thoughts are prevalent in all of those. Honestly, I would have much less of an issue around wait times if there was a feasible way to bar those with proven Mental Illness from aquiring guns. I feel that mental illness is the biggest factor in most, if not all the major mass shootings in the US (how many of those shooters were on anti-depressants? Lots) moreso then gun control, but that particular avenue was gutted by Trump (rather then modified to include the courts with respect to declarations of who should be on that 'list').
Thus meaning that if someone wishes to commit suicide, and wishes to use a firearm to achieve such, there is nothing to show that the arbitrarily selected waiting period will do anything to discourage them from committing the act, or otherwise prevent it from occurring? Does such actually translate into a sudden, unpredictable, irresistible impulse to commit suicide being demonstrated by one who would otherwise not be suicidal? What was noticed was this particular passage in the second presented source. The diagnostic criteria for recurrent brief depression requires the presence of at least five of nine depressive symptoms analogous to the symptoms of major depression, yet a duration of less than two weeks (in general 1 to 3 days), a recurrence of at least 12 times a year, and the evidence of work impairment. The above demonstrates that waiting periods on handgun purchases hold no validity with preventing suicides from occurring, as RBD reoccurs in the afflicted multiple times in a given year. This means it can come about long after the firearm has been purchased, long after the proposed waiting period has passed. Ultimately this means the individual is free to commit suicide at any time, and the firearm is now in their possession, thus nothing has actually been achieved. Beyond such, none of the articles do anything to demonstrate the RBD comes about only once the afflicted individual has chosen to legally purchase a firearm. It is not something that can be outmaneuvered with a one-size-fits-all policy that is based on guesswork and speculation. The process for doing such already exists. One must be either adjudicated as being mentally defective, or involuntarily committed to a mental health facility. Either one of which will legally disqualify an individual from being able to purchase or otherwise possess a firearm for the duration of their life. Perhaps those who went on to commit mass shootings were prescribed medications that they truly did not need? Anti-depressants are known for dangerous side effects, especially when taken by those who do not need them. Where is the citation of such?
This is not called The Age of Genocide for nothing. Almost all Americans are now very afraid of their government. You haven't noticed?
