Poll: Are Suicide Attempts Enough to Take Your Guns?

[teratos]

Not if it's done right.

Some people attempt to kill themselves because they can't do anything right.....

Also, these people are typically not thinking clearly. The shotgun in the mouth should be a big hint that may be the case.

 

[MD=What 2nd Amendment?]

Not if it's done right.

Define "done right".

 

[teratos]

Define "done right".

That would be illegal. He could be assisting someone in committing suicide.

 

[MD=What 2nd Amendment?]

That would be illegal. He could be assisting someone in committing suicide.

You sir get a 5 star rating and much applause.

 

[tdt91]

Define "done right".

successful

 

[Lex Armarum]

2. Second thought that comes to mind is that the nature of the suicide attempt could encompass a number of methods and therefore, if you follow the idea of confiscating one's firearms because of a suicide attempt, you must also confiscate any manner of objects that one could use to off one's self. If someone attempts suicide by aspirin, should we then confiscate that person's guns and all of the aspirin in the house; create a watch-list registration for aspirin and created "prohibited person" categories for aspirin purchases?"QUOTE]

I generally agree with most of what you say rusty, and think your pretty level headed, but this one has me kind of puzzled. I am not sure how I feel on the actual OP yet but I don't think anyone would actually take it that far. Plus I would think the counter to this would be that if someones wants to take their own life hey do what you wanna but guns give you the ability to take others out with you (I know here comes the comments about knives and such but look at most of the school shootings). When I mention the school shootings I am fully away that they can bring in knives and do the same thing. A lot of the time suicide is proceeded by murder or the whole suicide by cop thing.

Again I really don't know how I feel about the issue yet just playing the other guy role here. This is a tough ? to answer. My thoughts aren't really put together at 3am but I hope you get the jist.

Fair enough. I was using hyperbole to make my point but I understand.

 

[Lex Armarum]

For Real....Some Douche called me a Democrat because of my opinion.

That's just low man. lol

 

[Glaug-Eldare]

I voted no, and I've got two reasons that satisfy me.

1. This is my litmus test question for any disqualification: Should a person be able to provide for their own armed defense if they suffer from depression? Even a terminal cancer patient has this natural right, so I say yes.

2. This is a psychological and medical problem -- not a technological one. I think suspending a person's natural rights because they need help is absurd and cruel. The stigma of mental illness is real; it's hard enough to reach out for help without the government threatening to haul away your property.

 

[tzoid]

I voted no, and I've got two reasons that satisfy me.

1. This is my litmus test question for any disqualification: Should a person be able to provide for their own armed defense if they suffer from depression? Even a terminal cancer patient has this natural right, so I say yes.

2. This is a psychological and medical problem -- not a technological one. I think suspending a person's natural rights because they need help is absurd and cruel. The stigma of mental illness is real; it's hard enough to reach out for help without the government threatening to haul away your property.

I agree with you on both points for the most part.....But attempting Suicide and being depressed are way different things....so you’re not addressing the Poll question.

The real answer here is ONE SIZE DOES NOT FIT ALL....Every case needs to be handled separate.

If a Family member or friend attempted Suicide I would make an attempt to "temporarily" remove all weapons from their reach until the Family feels he or she is no longer a risk. This is NOT a solution . It is an attempt to mitigate the risk and making a decision to try to help and not a mandate by law. Just my view of the world..

 

[sskijr]

"Shall not be infringed" Can't get any clearer than that. Abraham Lincoln, Winston Churchill, as well as many other great men suffered through sever bouts of melancholy (depression) which I'm sure included thoughts of suicide.

 

[axshon]

Melancholy is not depression and depression is not 'clinical depression'. There is a big difference between someone who is down in the dumps for a few days, a week or a month and snaps out of it with a new job or a new girlfriend and someone whose body has started to shut down and who has no internal means of pulling it together or making any real decisions for themselves.

My VERY limited experience is that a person who is clinically depressed will gladly hand over his firearms just because you asked. The guy I'm talking about didn't want to hurt anyone and was afraid of hurting himself even though he talked a lot about suicide. Suicide for him was a way to make it end, not a way to take everyone and every thing down with him. He eventually pulled through and I gave his guns back to him but I never saw in him as a danger to others.

Also, my taking my friend's guns to store for a while is quite a different matter than the state confiscating them. He and I got to decide when he was OK to get them back and no state troopers or judges were involved.

 

[tzoid]

I Guess it's necessary to Post what the Poll question is since so many seem to be drifting off to Gun Grabber land and don't bother to Read or just want to get on the Soap Box.

Poll Question: Is/Are suicide attempt(s) enough to confiscate the persons guns already in their pos


Very different than getting depressed because your Dog Died or Woman is banging the neighbor.

 

[fivepointstar]

I Guess it's necessary to Post what the Poll question is since so many seem to be drifting off to Gun Grabber land and don't bother to Read or just want to get on the Soap Box.

Poll Question: Is/Are suicide attempt(s) enough to confiscate the persons guns already in their pos


Very different than getting depressed because your Dog Died or Woman is banging the neighbor.

Thanks for getting us back on track!!

Again...60-40!!

I wouldn't think of calling anyone Liberal b/c they are in the 40%. People have to stop thinking in Black and White and absolutes. In life there is always an exception to the rule.

again please keep it civil.

 

[clandestine]

I Guess it's necessary to Post what the Poll question is since so many seem to be drifting off to Gun Grabber land and don't bother to Read or just want to get on the Soap Box.

Poll Question: Is/Are suicide attempt(s) enough to confiscate the persons guns already in their pos


Very different than getting depressed because your Dog Died or Woman is banging the neighbor.

Its simple. If your dog dies just eat him. If your significant other is banging someone else then move on.

 

[Glaug-Eldare]

I agree with you on both points for the most part.....But attempting Suicide and being depressed are way different things....so you’re not addressing the Poll question.

The real answer here is ONE SIZE DOES NOT FIT ALL....Every case needs to be handled separate.

If a Family member or friend attempted Suicide I would make an attempt to "temporarily" remove all weapons from their reach until the Family feels he or she is no longer a risk. This is NOT a solution . It is an attempt to mitigate the risk and making a decision to try to help and not a mandate by law. Just my view of the world..

I'll admit the the post got away from suicide attempts, but the way I see it, suicide (or attempts) are a symptom/signal of a disease. Somebody who's suicidal falls into the category of depression, and that's a group of people who need to be helped, not punished.

A suicidal person should still enjoy all his natural rights -- the road to recovery shouldn't involve being punished. I would certainly encourage a suicidal person to voluntarily separate himself from guns if he's concerned he will use them on himself, but that should be up to him.

(For the purposes of interpreting the post hereinabove, any reference wheresoever to the masculine sex shall be taken to include the feminine sex or any other sex to be amended by law.)

 

[rseymorejr]

I think that a question that must be considerd is: Who determines when someone's guns are taken and when (IF) they are returned.
Does anyone here trust a "state employee" to do this, especially in MD

 

[Indiana Jones]

if you want to kill yourself youll do it. 'attemps' are from people who dont wanna do it.

 

[teratos]

if you want to kill yourself youll do it. 'attemps' are from people who dont wanna do it.

Not always. Most of the time, but not always. Also, who is to say the issues won't progress? Cry for help...no help comes. Decide it just isn't worth living anymore. BANG!

 

[tzoid]

The Poll question definitely brings lot's of debate and as Noel has said a few times there is NO Right or Wrong answer.

I think the results would be different if we personally were in the position of having to surrender our weapons because we attempted suicide or if someone that attempted Suicide and in the act killed or injured one of our loved ones.

There are plenty of ways to look at this....

 

[Happydude]

Why I voted no

Please pardon any incoherence on my part but here's a case I'm familiar with regarding the topic.

1. A person blows off steam to another concerning people they had issues with. No mention is made of the workplace.
2. That person they spoke with then calls the individual's place of employment assuming they're venting about people at work.
3. The folks at work go into a semi-state of panic thinking there will be an incident at work and threaten the employee with termination if they do not
turn their guns over to someone else.
4. The employee, wanting to keep their job and maintain the peace, is
flabbergasted at the turn of events but voluntarily gives them over to family members.
5. The workplace then "requires" an evaluation be done at which time the psychiatrist states that before they'll give an "all clear", a signed statement will be required from the recipient of the firearms that they have possession of them. Also, the holder of the weapons won't release them until the psychiatrist says it's okay to do so.
6. Furthermore, the weapons are not to be returned unless the folks at work say it's okay to do so.
7. After 3 months, the people at work then backtrack and state that they are not going to provide a statement to the doctor as "it's none of their business" and they don't want the "organization" to be involved. Excuse me? Emphasis mine
8. Therefore, the psychiatrist won't provide a letter to the holder of the weapons and now this person is royally screwed.
9. At no time was this person ever determined to be "mentally defective" or anything like that so now their only alternative is to go right back and get more firearms.

The reason I put all this here is that I do fear the "slippery slope" but also the "unfounded allegation" that is borne out of ignorance and/or fear.