America's average gun violence victim is white and male

The evidence suggests otherwise

 

You can repeat that narrative is much as you want.
Suicidal person narrative A:
"Oh man, they took away my gun. Now there's no way I can commit suicide. I guess I'll just never kill myself"
Suicidal person narrative B:
"Oh man, they took away my gun. What's another way I can kill myself"

The fact that you defend narrative A, explains a lot.

 

I cite evidence. The fact is suicide is often an impulsive act and when the impulse passes so does the danger. That is a simple fact

 

Finding a bridge and jumping off is impulsive.
This is a classic case of "if plan A doesn't work, I'll go to plan B". We'll never know though as guns are never being removed from the United States

 

No it is not. An impulse can pass in seconds or minutes. This is my field. You do not understand the issue

 

Why should we even argue? Guns aren't going anywhere.

 

I agree. But gun control can be done. One of the largest groups we are trying to save are actually veterans

 

And yet there has been nothing on the part of yourself, except for outright refusal, to actually present the proof of such, despite being questioned for it numerous times. Nothing whatsoever has been presented except the same three words repeated over and over. The statement of "gun control works" does not amount to anything but a slogan. There is no evidence to be found within any of it.

The claim made by yourself is that it is known what works. If this is truly the case, then actually provide the proof that it works. Show the methodology of exactly how any particular piece of firearm-related restrictions has the effect of being able to actually reduce suicides being committed with a firearm. Show exactly how these restrictions do just that. If it is known what works, then it must be known how it works. If it is known how it works, then there is no legitimate reason for refusing to provide that proof when questioned.

 

And yet when such was proposed, actually doing all that can be done to prevent suicides from occurring, it was rejected by yourself. If preventing suicides from being committed is truly of such importance, then there is sufficient ground to push for individuals with suicidal tendencies to be medically incarcerated, and placed in medically-induced comas for the duration of their lives, in order to keep them alive, and thus unable to harm themselves. That is the only course of action that will actually have any measurable effect on the number of annual suicides.

Then get to presenting the actual proof, rather than just the claim. Show how these firearm-related restrictions go about preventing sucides from occurring.

 

Coma's? Now that is hilarious. I get jokes. LOL

 

Here you go....not that it will do any good.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/02/health/gun-laws-lead-to-suicide-drop/

 

The above data cites Arthur Kellerman and his research. Therefore it is invalid, and will not be discussed any further. This debate and discussion has been had numerous times over the years, and each time it is established that Arthur Kellerman is not a credible source on the matter. There is no sense in visiting the same matter once again, just to arrive at the same conclusion once again.

 

Association is not evidence. That is why the term "guilt by association" exists in the first place. States claim that waiting periods reduce the risk of suicide in order to justify the law being implemented, but they have never offered anything resembling actual proof. Even yourself has failed to demonstrate anything resembling actual proof. Nothing more than a claim is hard, and claims are irrelevant.

 

Kellerman is a widely respected researcher affiliated with Harvard medical School that is arguably one of the finest schools in the country. But I could care less what you want to ignore. Ignore the fact that the sun will rise in the morning if you like....it still will.

 

Here you go.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/02/health/gun-laws-lead-to-suicide-drop/

 

From the title of the article alone, Strict state gun laws could lead to drops in suicide, study says

"Could" means speculation. It is a hypothesis, it is guesswork. It is not evidence by any measure.

Beyond such, the article keeps mentioning specific words. Could, predict, probably, unclear, suggest. These words are repeated over and over again. These words show that the article is nothing more than guesswork at the very best, meaning that there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever, that would actually prove the concept. The article is no more valid than the phrase "maybe" in this matter.

 

What words are you looking for specifically? LOL

 

Correction. He was respected. Then it was shown that his methodology for examining firearm-related deaths was flawed from the very beginning. His own paper specifically stated that defensive uses of a firearm were excluded from the final data when the evidence showed the perpetrator was a stranger who did not live within the home.

What is being looked for is actual proof, not that something may work, but rather than something will work, as has been claimed repeatedly. May work is nothing more than hypothesis, it is not evidence.

Beyond such, no effort has been made to explain precisely how various restrictions will actually go about reducing suicides. It is claimed that they will do such, but no explanation as to how they will work to achieve such is ever presented. It has been proven just why the sun will rise on the morning, but firearm-related restrictions reducing suicides is nothing more than speculation at best. No evidence exists to show that it actually works. None whatsoever. If it existed it would have been presented by yourself before now, but is has not been done. Since no evidence is ever presented, it is an invalid, wishful claim.

 

Shocker.... you make more unsupported claims. Then you ask for scientific proof when scientific proof does not exist for anything in the world. All you have is opinion which is easily dismissed

 

"Suicide rates are much higher in states with higher rates of gun ownership, even after controlling for differences among states for poverty, urbanization, unemployment, mental illness, and alcohol or drug abuse."
https://injury.research.chop.edu/vi...-violence/gun-violence-facts-and#.Wc2DB29Szrd

The evidence is overwhelming.

 

So. What?

 

Scientific proof was not requested in the above, only evidence of the claim being factual, rather than hypothetical. Time and time again, the request for proof has been denied. The only conclusion that can be drawn from such evasiveness, is that no such proof actually exists, and the claim pertaining to firearm-related restrictions being able to prevent suicides is nothing more that hypothetical guesswork.

The only thing overwhelming pertaining to the cited article, is the amount of factual inaccuracies, and outright intellectual dishonesty, that are being presented as if it were factually. Chief among them is the counting legal adults as being minors. Any group, any organization that is going to intentionally count legal adults when addressing minors, is arguing political narrative, rather than actual facts.

 

You asked for the evidence....you were given it ....and you don't believe it. Call me underwhelmed

 

No.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-new-brain/201607/fact-check-gun-control-and-suicide

 

Well some people would like to reduce suicide rates....so theres that