Argument: Gun control doesn't reduce suicide rates, because decreases in gun suicides are offset completely by increases in suicides by other means. (Also stated as "people just kill themselves another way" or something like that.)
Example: "...even if you remove guns from a home, a person who wants to commit suicide will still find other means." (The Federalist)
Another example: "Suicide is a mental health issue. If guns are not available other means are used." (Psychology Today)
Response:
Method substitution (people killing themselves another way if firearms, or any method, becomes less available) is not a large-scale concern when it comes to the effectiveness of means restriction (including gun control) (Daigle 2005). Specifically, decreases in gun suicide rates within the US are not associated with increases in suicides by other methods (Anestis et al. 2017). In Switzerland, a gun control law passed in 2005 was followed by a drop in gun suicides, and an increase in non-gun suicides. However, only about 22% of gun suicides estimated to have been prevented by the law were offset by suicides by other methods (Reisch et al. 2013).
Further evidence against the substitution hypothesis as a major factor in suicide prevention has been presented elsewhere (Chapman et al. 2006, 2016; Bridges & Kunselman 2004, Leenaars 2007, Lambert & Silva 1998). It makes sense that, as these studies indicate, means restriction is effective, because suicide is often an impulsive act done as a result of a fleeting urge (Lewiecki & Miller 2013)
Anestis et al. 2017: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28455222
Bridges & Kunselman 2004: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15141925
Chapman et al. 2006: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17170183
" 2016: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27332876
Daigle 2005: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001457505000400
Lambert & Silva 1998: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A%3A1024714619938
Leenaars 2007: http://psycnet.apa.org/record/2007-13949-008
Lewiecki & Miller 2013: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3518361/
Reisch et al. 2013: https://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/abs/10.1176/appi.ajp.2013.12091256
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Evaluating anti-gun control arguments #14: More gun ownership doesn't mean higher crime rates
Argument: Higher rates of gun ownership are not associated with higher violent/overall crime/murder rates. Therefore, one can be confident i...
-
Argument: The real problem with gun violence/mass shootings in America is mental health, not a lack of gun control. Example: "This i...
-
Argument: There is no good reason to focus mainly on guns, rather than crime or criminals in general. It doesn't matter what weapon the ...
-
Argument: Gun control doesn't reduce gun violence because if it did, Chicago's strict gun laws would make it very safe relative to o...
No comments:
Post a Comment