
www.Usenet.com
| <-- __Chronological__ --> | <-- __Thread__ --> |
On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 18:44:04 -0500, "Some Guy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"COGunWoman55" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Interesting suicide rate chart, comparing nations:
>> http://tinyurl.com/wk4i
>
>The old causation gambit.
>
>Of course an inanimate object doesn't cause anything. But what do you think
>will be the difference in outcome to a suicidal person if he tries a non-gun
>method (average 5% "success" rate) or a gun (85% "success" rate).
>
>It's common sense. The country-by-country comparison is irrelevant.
>
>Just ask yourself, if you had a friend who had a clinically depressed
>teenage son, and your friend asked you if he should buy a gun, what would
>you say to him?
>
>By the say, Kleck claims there is no relationship between suicide rates and
>gun ownership, but he had to jump through some complicated statisical hoops
>to reach that conclusion. Again, it goes against common sense.
>
>SG
>
Then why does this person want his wife to have one?
"If you've got to resist, you're chances of being hurt are less the
more lethal your weapon. If that were my wife, would I want her to
have a .38 Special in her hand? Yeah." Dr. Arthur Kellerman: Health
Magazine (March/April 1994) and the author of the infamous "43 times
more likely to kill an acquaintance" study.
| <-- __Chronological__ --> | <-- __Thread__ --> |