"Shitty weather" is not objective. You can't control for something where the definition can be reversed at the drop of a hat.
And to further question this premise, why are non-firearm suicides relatively consistent under this model? Is there something about "shitty weather" that makes people want to swallow a bullet instead of overdose?
Well, it could just be politics, one or more political parties always benefits from lower turnouts in elections, and they could be in control and looking after their own interests. As I indicated, I'm American, and not Norwegian, and don't presume to know the nuance of the situation.
Okay, I think this one may be debunked, on the grounds of the lifelong suicide risk direct correlation to firearm ownership.
But rather than dig that one study I remember reading that addresses that particular thing, I think I'd prefer to point out that:
Hawaii is the hottest average temperature and is in those low suicide states.
Alaska is the coldest average temperature and is coastal and among the high suicide states.
Wisconsin and North Carolina aren't traditionally "super red" voting states either. The aspects you're casting as defining are kinda a stretch. I mean, if you insist we examine this hypothesis, we can, but firearm-ownership to firearm-suicide is the much more natural causative connection to make.
If we're criticizing the lack of controls, it helps to take those uncontrolled variables, and study in more depth. Chances are they have and the resulting data doesn't support your position, but if you want the benefit of the doubt, you should state an affirmative position of some kind.
Or I an read multiple threads like anyone else, and happen to spot a tremendous hypocrite who doesn't actually value the principles they say they do, and instead uses them as trite excuses for their own asinine argumentative behavior.
I'm perfectly willing to accept any and all criticism you have, but it'll be taken with the reasonable critical, and I'm sorry you can't take being called on your bullshit, but I'm not going.
In the future, try to be earn the respect you go around demanding like a child.
If this isn't just color and context, and is attempting to make the point that more success is somehow preferable, I'd only respond with the following point:
It seems entirely reasonable, and it's worth noting that the majority of people who attempt suicide and survive say that they regretted it.
The actual definition comes from dismissing arguments on the basis of who's making them. That's not what happened here, but it's also not what happened when he was being a whiny baby that was looking for an excuse to ignore a perfectly valid argument.
Look, if there's one thing American Medicine beats the entire rest of the world yet, it's exploiting peoples' body image dysphoria to charge lots of money for unnecessary operations.
(I'm a little scared that I'll offend some transsexual people by using the word dysphoria, but that's life, I guess)
The very article we're discussing raises the probability that alcohol is the single biggest cause of preventable premature deaths. So I'm not sure what "different type" of harm is being dismissed, and by whom, but your allegation that it's an order of magnitude more deaths is simply contrary to the information presented.
"Having a grown up conversation" means letting utter bullshit that's intentially deceitful go uncalled out?
Fuck that. All you had to do was not be a piece of shit misrepresenting what I said purposefully, and it wouldn't be called-for to call you an idiot.
You were being an idiot and I'm not going to let that slide, just because it hurts your feelings. The degree to which you embrace ignorance as a virtue is always going to be a fuckton worse than a few well-deserved names.
I know, I know, reusing the same data for everyone in this thread, but they all seem to be making the same argument that is strictly hypothetical, and doesn't account for real-world data.
"You called me stupid when I was being stupid, and I mistook identifying that fact as an ad-hominemm argument, and then I could continue to wallow in the ignorance that causes me to be stupid in the first place".
Congratulations, Mr. Sensitive pants.
You also don't know what an ad-hominem argument is. Look it up, sometime.
Slashdot Mirror
Impeding government operations is illegal. Protesting government operations is legal. Hope that helps.
"Shitty weather" is not objective. You can't control for something where the definition can be reversed at the drop of a hat.
And to further question this premise, why are non-firearm suicides relatively consistent under this model? Is there something about "shitty weather" that makes people want to swallow a bullet instead of overdose?
Well, it could just be politics, one or more political parties always benefits from lower turnouts in elections, and they could be in control and looking after their own interests. As I indicated, I'm American, and not Norwegian, and don't presume to know the nuance of the situation.
Okay, I think this one may be debunked, on the grounds of the lifelong suicide risk direct correlation to firearm ownership.
But rather than dig that one study I remember reading that addresses that particular thing, I think I'd prefer to point out that:
Hawaii is the hottest average temperature and is in those low suicide states.
Alaska is the coldest average temperature and is coastal and among the high suicide states.
Wisconsin and North Carolina aren't traditionally "super red" voting states either. The aspects you're casting as defining are kinda a stretch. I mean, if you insist we examine this hypothesis, we can, but firearm-ownership to firearm-suicide is the much more natural causative connection to make.
Evidence-based governance is completely foreign to us Americans, you'll have to understand if some of us can't quite understand it.
It would help if you weren't posting things that people have frequently stated to me as honest opinions as "jokes".
No.
You tell me what you think they have in common.
If we're criticizing the lack of controls, it helps to take those uncontrolled variables, and study in more depth. Chances are they have and the resulting data doesn't support your position, but if you want the benefit of the doubt, you should state an affirmative position of some kind.
Oh, I'm hurt.
No wait, it's not actually a big deal. You're an anonymous stranger on the internet.
Also, justify your criticism. Having a point helps a lot if you're trying to reprimand someone for doing something awful.
Or I an read multiple threads like anyone else, and happen to spot a tremendous hypocrite who doesn't actually value the principles they say they do, and instead uses them as trite excuses for their own asinine argumentative behavior.
I'm perfectly willing to accept any and all criticism you have, but it'll be taken with the reasonable critical, and I'm sorry you can't take being called on your bullshit, but I'm not going.
In the future, try to be earn the respect you go around demanding like a child.
Obviously, I did allow it, because I thought that any offense actually taken wouldn't actually be the justified sort.
Um, okay?
If this isn't just color and context, and is attempting to make the point that more success is somehow preferable, I'd only respond with the following point:
It seems entirely reasonable, and it's worth noting that the majority of people who attempt suicide and survive say that they regretted it.
They choose the data this way:
They sorted the states by rate of firearm ownership. Then they divided them such that half the US population was represented in each group.
That's not particularly "cherry-picked"
I haven't conflated those things. I was afraid someone would think I conflated those things. But I getchya.
The actual definition comes from dismissing arguments on the basis of who's making them. That's not what happened here, but it's also not what happened when he was being a whiny baby that was looking for an excuse to ignore a perfectly valid argument.
Look, if there's one thing American Medicine beats the entire rest of the world yet, it's exploiting peoples' body image dysphoria to charge lots of money for unnecessary operations.
(I'm a little scared that I'll offend some transsexual people by using the word dysphoria, but that's life, I guess)
Cheap almost certainly means "cheap enough to be on par American medicine" not any sort of actual definition of the term.
Oh, look, it's that guy who was sooooooooooo sensitive about "ad-hominems" just a couple threads ago.
Funny.
The very article we're discussing raises the probability that alcohol is the single biggest cause of preventable premature deaths. So I'm not sure what "different type" of harm is being dismissed, and by whom, but your allegation that it's an order of magnitude more deaths is simply contrary to the information presented.
"Having a grown up conversation" means letting utter bullshit that's intentially deceitful go uncalled out?
Fuck that. All you had to do was not be a piece of shit misrepresenting what I said purposefully, and it wouldn't be called-for to call you an idiot.
You were being an idiot and I'm not going to let that slide, just because it hurts your feelings. The degree to which you embrace ignorance as a virtue is always going to be a fuckton worse than a few well-deserved names.
And if I were trying assert that other things can't cause deaths, that would be an astounding counter-argument.
Because I'd be pretty dumb to argue that. Because it's a stupid point.
Your hypothesis doesn't explain the available data
I know, I know, reusing the same data for everyone in this thread, but they all seem to be making the same argument that is strictly hypothetical, and doesn't account for real-world data.
How about data to support the notion I'm presenting
Non-firearm suicides are pretty consistent with high and low gun ownership, but firearm assisted suicide goes waaaaaaaaaaay the fuck up.
Let's reinforce this with some related data:
here we go
Simply not true.
Suicidal ideation isn't tied to handgun purchases. That's also been measured.
"You called me stupid when I was being stupid, and I mistook identifying that fact as an ad-hominemm argument, and then I could continue to wallow in the ignorance that causes me to be stupid in the first place".
Congratulations, Mr. Sensitive pants.
You also don't know what an ad-hominem argument is. Look it up, sometime.