Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Release of “13 Reasons Why” Associated with Increase in Youth Suicide Rates

nimh.nih.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 264 posts

Re: Release of “13 Reasons Why” Associated with Increase in Youth Suicide Rates

#201

Post by lutorm »

mjfl wrote: post #46
TheArcane wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Limit second amendment more to prevent more shootings. I've always wondered the validity of a "constitutional freedom" that allows random everyday people to own and operate tools that are essentially killing machines.

It’s an enshrinement of values - America puts more value on the protection of the individual from society than the protection of society from an individual.

* America puts more value on the protection of the individual from society than the protection of society from an individual.*

That's not true, though. U.S. laws and their enforcement are extremely punitive compared to most other western countries. It seems the values are very specifically centered around the right to own guns, not around protecting individuals from society in general.

Re: Release of “13 Reasons Why” Associated with Increase in Youth Suicide Rates

#202

Post by seiferteric »

munk-a wrote: post #175
umvi wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The scary thing is that both this article and the example you cited are used as reasons to limit constitutional freedoms: Limit second amendment more to prevent mass shootings. Limit first amendment more to prevent suicides. Really though, we should be focusing on the root cause: lonely/sad/broken people. Focus on helping/loving them and I bet suicide/mass shooting rates drop significantly.

> Really though, we should be focusing on the root cause: lonely/sad/broken people. The US is an extreme outlier in terms of gun homicide in the first world, is the assumption that every country except the US has solved lonely/sad/broken people? The second amendment (the full reading of it) doesn't give carte blanch coverage to own firearms and the US populace agrees that, for instance, inmates in prison and domestic…

>Defenders of the second amendment often say it's an opposition to tyranny, but I fail to see how a hand-gun will help to protect you against an Abrams wielded by a tyrannous government - or should tanks, jets and battleships be objects that private citizens should be able to purchase and own for self-defense?

You could say the same thing for the 1st amendment for individuals vs large media companies. Individuals will always be weaker than well organized, better funded groups. It's impossible to know what would happen in the event of a modern civil war, but it's conceivable that the military would fracture.

As far as reading the 2nd amendment, I have been arguing lately that the "well regulated militia" should mean that gun owners should be required to attend militia training at least once a year, and if you don't, your weapons must be stored in an armory instead of at home. Something more akin to the Swiss system. Having to attend some classes would greatly reduce the number of people that would bother keeping guns at home I think, and would allow others to identify people with mental health issues. I would argue that right now we don't have a "well regulated militia" in any sense.

Re: Release of “13 Reasons Why” Associated with Increase in Youth Suicide Rates

#203

Post by lutorm »

andrewla wrote: post #157
TheArcane wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Limit second amendment more to prevent more shootings. I've always wondered the validity of a "constitutional freedom" that allows random everyday people to own and operate tools that are essentially killing machines.

"Validity" or "advisability"? I think the amendment seems fairly clear to me. I, too, disagree that it should be enshrined in the constitution, or even that it should exist as a right in such an unrestricted form. But there's no doubt that it's in there, and we already have a process for changing the constitution. If I were a Supreme Court justice, I would push to invalidate all laws that limit the ownership and carr…

I disagree that the amendment is clear. It is so obliquely written that it took the Supreme Court over 200 years to conclude that it, in fact, conveys an individual constitutional right to own a firearm.

Re: Release of “13 Reasons Why” Associated with Increase in Youth Suicide Rates

#204

Post by Rapzid »

emtel wrote: post #188

You should be _extremely_ skeptical of this finding. 1. It's an observational, retrospective study. 2. The control analysis is dubious, and its unclear if the control analysis was selected in advance. 2. It's an astonishingly high effect size. 3. They do numerous sub-group analyses without any indication that such analyses were pre-registered, and apparently without doing any multiple-comparisons corrections (e.g. bo…

Nothing about this "research" is compelling. This is 2019s Momo; hide your kids!

Re: Release of “13 Reasons Why” Associated with Increase in Youth Suicide Rates

#205

Post by bargl »

csharpminor wrote: post #128
duxup wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NPR did a good story on a study that examined what shooters DO and DO NOT like. They like videos of chaos and screaming. They like their photo shown. They don't like stories about the victims that make the victims seem like they're human. What they were doing before the shootings, things they did with their lives, etc. They don't like stories about the community itself that aren't just about the event (shooting). I n…

Could you link to a source? This is interesting to me but I'd like to know more about their method for arriving at those conclusions. I wasn't able to find the article/study you're referencing.

There is a whole campaign around this. I've read through some of their stuff but if you're digging and see some red flags please bring it back here because I'd love to know.

https://nonotoriety.com/

Re: Release of “13 Reasons Why” Associated with Increase in Youth Suicide Rates

#206

Post by Analemma_ »

umvi wrote: post #189
jdietrich wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Yeah, but lowering the 50% one will increase usage of the other methods significantly. The evidence says otherwise. Most suicidal ideation is brief and impulsive, so making it harder to access effective means of suicide doesn't just lead to a substitution. Multiple studies have found a lasting reduction in the overall suicide rate after a highly lethal means of suicide became less easily available. The majority of p…

Unless you can show a country's (i.e. Australia's) suicide rate plummeting shortly after banning guns, I'm going to have a hard time believing it has a big an impact as you claim. There are lots of first world countries in EU and Asia where guns are banned that have suicide rates comparible to or higher than the US's (and I have a hard time believing guns are the only thing standing between the US being comparible to…

- After the UK phased out coal gas for central heating, which provided a quick and easy death, overall suicides dropped markedly: [0].

- When Sri Lanka replaced a common pesticide which made it easy for farmers to commit suicide with another one that was not as toxic to humans, suicide rates fell by half: [1]

- Many different bridges which were popular suicide sites installed bridges and found that overall suicides decreased and did not relocate to nearby bridges without nets. Here is one example from Montreal, there are many others: [2]

It is very well-established in the literature that eliminating easy means to suicide does reduce total suicides and causes only a minor a displacement effect to other methods. Your obstinance on this fact is only making you look like a flat-earther.

[0]: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC478945/

[1]: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3154644/

[2]: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3682603/

Re: Release of “13 Reasons Why” Associated with Increase in Youth Suicide Rates

#207

Post by cheriot »

umvi wrote: post #10
aphextim wrote: post #2

Same reason that when they show the shooter's face all over the media and they give them tons and tons of attention, it typically spawns more copycats who are just lonely/sad/broken teens looking for the same attention. In the show, this teen's suicide was portrayed to have had an impact on many students/families/teachers etc for a very long time after the incident. It almost glorified the suicide and the methods of…

The scary thing is that both this article and the example you cited are used as reasons to limit constitutional freedoms: Limit second amendment more to prevent mass shootings. Limit first amendment more to prevent suicides. Really though, we should be focusing on the root cause: lonely/sad/broken people. Focus on helping/loving them and I bet suicide/mass shooting rates drop significantly.

The scary thing is that every time an individual or company does something wrong someone justifies it as a "right". No, having a right to do something does not exempt them from taking responsibility for their actions. Network news should not make school shooters famous. Netflix should not glorify suicide. We don't need laws to prevent these things; just a society that refuses to tolerate them.

And, yes, we should _also_ focus on the lonely/sad/broken people.

Re: Release of “13 Reasons Why” Associated with Increase in Youth Suicide Rates

#208

Post by TheArcane »

jakelazaroff wrote: post #92
mieseratte wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've always wondered the validity of a "constitutional freedom" that allows random everyday people to own and operate tools that are essentially killing machines. Not sure why you put quotes around constitutional freedom. The reason for the amendment is such that when someone or someones come along and attempt to abridge your rights you can kill them with the killing machine. As simple as that.

It will always be weird to me that threatening to murder other citizens for some vague, ill-defined hypothetical transgression is a mainstream, mostly accepted political viewpoint here in the US.

> threatening to murder other citizens for some vague, ill-defined hypothetical transgression

So much this. Growing up, it was so strange to see people pulling out a gun on someone for walking on their lawn in Hollywood movies.

Re: Release of “13 Reasons Why” Associated with Increase in Youth Suicide Rates

#209

Post by Mikeb85 »

sdinsn wrote: post #190
Mikeb85 wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm implying that some of the attempts may be half-hearted. The US has more than 1 gun for every person in the country. The fact anyone survives a suicide attempt means that perhaps they didn't really want to die?

Women are much less likely to own guns.

Are they less likely to live in households where there are guns?

Men are what, 10x more successful in suicide attempts? It's quite the discrepancy.

Re: Release of “13 Reasons Why” Associated with Increase in Youth Suicide Rates

#210

Post by m_coder »

irrational wrote: post #49
TheArcane wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Limit second amendment more to prevent more shootings. I've always wondered the validity of a "constitutional freedom" that allows random everyday people to own and operate tools that are essentially killing machines.

I thought it had to do with the British saying the colonists shouldn't have weapons that could help the colonists revolt against their government. So the constitution says that the people should have access to the weapons they need to overthrow the government if needed. Of course, the constitution writers didn't envision the government having tanks, airplanes, nuclear missiles, etc. that make it practically impossibl…

>>practically impossible for modern citizens to overthrow a corrupt government.

However, given a sufficient percentage of the population which is interested in doing this, it would be very difficult even for the US military to completely conquer.

Post reply on HN