Hacker News Reader

Comment by qaq | Hacker News Reader

It's really hard to conduct a meaning-full study and in general the issue is given way more attention compared to its actual impact on everyday lives.

View on HN

What do you mean by "more attention compared to its actual impact on everyday lives"?

Firearms are currently tied with motor vehicles as the second leading mechanism of injury-related death [0]. Number 1 is poisoning, which has recently surged thanks to opioids.

[0]: https://wonder.cdc.gov/controller/saved/D132/D21F190

Subtract suicides

Not if you want a meaningful result. There are strong correlations between having a gun in the house and increased suicide rates. Yes, I get it, it's a correlation. The point is it's a gross oversimplification to just say "subtract suicides."

Meaningful is very abstract term. The problem is people wanting to commit suicide not the tool they are using. There is a way stronger correlation of people being unemployed and committing suicide for example.

That may be true, but it remains a gross oversimplification to say "subtract suicides"

Not to get into the weeds too much here, but a completed suicide has a lot to do with the speed/effectiveness of the tool in question. Almost nothing is as fast/effective for this as a gun. Plus, suicide is frequently attempted impulsively, during a time of emotional crisis, so adding logistical barriers is a very effective reduction technique.

"Almost nothing is as fast/effective for this as a gun" drugs ? especially considering it requires far less will power to take a few pills vs to pull a trigger?

According to http://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/2...

Suicide attempts using a firearm result in death 86% of the time; ingestion of drugs or poisons with the intent to commit suicide is successful less than 2% of the time.

Only because car deaths have plummetted.

You're right, the United States has been incredibly successful at reducing motor vehicle deaths [0]. Those reductions aren't fortuitous; they're the result of engineers, policymakers, and public health professionals recognizing a problem and designing novel solutions. Maybe we could apply some of that same creativity and engineering talent to the problem of firearm deaths.

[0]: http://www.iihs.org/iihs/topics/t/general-statistics/fatalit...

I clicked on that and selected California where I live, the search defaulted to 2015. In that year 0.007% of people had a firearm related death (3095 deaths in 39,144,818 people).

That 3095 deaths however includes:

  * non legal gun ownership (felons, carry without permit, etc)
  * clinically depressed people killing themselves, I'd be fine with mental health checks for gun ownership.
  * terminally ill killing themselves (because there's no right to die in the California).  Seems batshit insane that you can end your dog's life when time is right, but not your own.
  * accidental deaths when a negligent gun owners lets it fall into the hands of kids, drunks, addicts, etc.
  * gangs
  * drug dealers
  * illegal guns
  * very high crime areas that I don't live in

IMO, the number that should be discussed is how many (non-suicide) deaths are there caused by legal gun owners/legal guns. My understanding is that it's a very tiny fraction of that 0.007% and once you remove the fluff the numbers are actually pretty comparable to the number of times people have actually protected their homes.

Personally I'm fine with someone who wants a gun, is mentally stable, not an addict/alcoholic, and will keep their gun locked when not in use so a kid can't find it, a thief can't easily steal it, etc.

However what I do see missing is that doctors, friends, family, etc should be able to vote/warn police about someone in an unstable state. Maybe like a fixit ticket where you could go in for an evaluation.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com