search results matching tag: suicides

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.001 seconds

    Videos (625)     Sift Talk (20)     Blogs (51)     Comments (1000)   

Russian chugs 3 bottles of vodka

James Gunn's Suicide Squad Sneak Peek

Whats the strongest thing we should build?

BSR says...

In my personal experience suicides are higher than homicides. Most suicides are by gun owners and 2nd are hangings. Jumpers in 3rd place. Near the bottom of the list are the ones who stab themselves in the heart. Only had 2 suicides by helium.

BSR (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

Yes, he planned to commit suicide on stage, the event owner found out he was serious and cancelled the show, he went home and did it alone.
His stage shows usually ended with him naked, bleeding, and sometimes covered in shit.

As for the translation, I just pulled apart and recombined what you wrote. Come on. Bleeding hearts and artists....and bleeding artists. ;-)

BSR said:

Showing results for GG Allin

I think I remember seeing a video about this guy. Didn't he want die on stage?

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

Here's the thing, Bob.
You were wrong. There are NOT known cases of Democrats cheating in elections in the last decade, only Republicans caught cheating thousands of times.

It's ok to be wrong if you can admit it....but you just can't. When you see you can't back up your claim, but you continue to make it, that's when you go from being duped to being a liar. I think you passed that point on this topic 7+ weeks ago.

It's ok to say you were misled, lied to. In fact, I think I can speak for most that that admission is what we all want for, and from you. Whoever told you there were known instances of Democrats cheating outright lied to you, born out by the fact that you can't find a single instance after two months of being harassed over claiming it.

You can't escape a lie until you admit it is one, something Trump has told you is bad, a sign of weakness, but that's backwards. Being unable to admit a mistake is a sign of weakness, an ego so fragile it can't survive being wrong, a lack of confidence so severe that one mistake makes a person worthless, so admitting a mistake is like suicide. That's nonsense, the kind of logic you get from clinically insecure narcissists. You deserve better.

Btw, your obsession with CNN is telling. I don't watch it, something I've told you a dozen times, but you have a pathological need to believe they're the source of anything bad about Trump. Sorry, but that source is Trump himself, not your CNN bogeyman. Nothing could make his words, actions, and plans worse that he makes them himself. He's the one doing us all wrong.

bobknight33 said:

For someone who has the answer on all matter you are suddenly dumbfounded in finding such issues.
Gather that fake news does not mention such things. brian stelter and Rachel Maddow are doing you wrong.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/ballots-pile-mail-potential-nightmare-looms-election-night/story?id=71719232

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/scattered-problems-with-mail-in-ballots-this-year-signal-potential-november-challenges-for-postal-service/2020
/07/15/0dfb8b42-c216-11ea-b178-bb7b05b94af1_story.html

https://nypost.com/2020/08/05/84000-mail-in-ballots-disqualified-in-nyc-primary-election/

Coronavirus:The Lost 6 Weeks America Wasted

JiggaJonson says...

What a fucking dumb analogy. WASTED BREATH


Can i get suicide if I bump into someone suicidal at the grocery store?

If I'm accidentally poisoned, should I worry about giving it to everyone at the office?

If my grandma breaks her hip and falls down the stairs, can I care for her and not put my child and wife at risk?

If I have the flu, and everyone around me has a current flu vaccination, should I treat it the same way I would COVID 19?

bobknight33 said:

Perspective

Flutterbye fairy toy flies into fire O'Fortuna

BSR says...

That little girl must be a real jerk if her toys are committing suicide. If only Woody was there...

Wait for it

Payback says...

To be fair, child molesters don't last long behind bars, and often not due to suicide. I'm fully capable of believing he was killed, I just don't think you need a conspiracy to complete the task.

School coach Keanon Lowe disarms student

newtboy says...

I agree. His plan was to traumatize the entire class with his in your face suicide....assuming they have the story correct.
Pretending he was only going to harm himself, so deserves compassion, is not being honest or rational, imo.
I'm glad no one was hurt, but he definitely intended to severely hurt everyone in that classroom emotionally. I would hazard a guess that he expected some of them to be traumatized enough to follow his example. In school suicides often lead to more suicides.

viewer_999 said:

Yeah, maybe I'm lacking compassion, but fuck compassion. You bring a gun to a classroom, your freedom is forfeit. Give him all the care you want to, apart from society. It's stupid to risk countless lives and loves of people who aren't deranged to coddle the feelings of one who is.
He'll be back.

Back-To-School Essentials | Sandy Hook Promise

wraith says...

Thank you for your reply Harlequinn.

I beg to differ: The rate of gun deaths in the USA is only low when compared to countries that are either active (civil-) war zones or basically run by drug cartels. When compared to other, similar developed countries, it is at least 4 times as high (when excluding suicides/accidents) .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate
I would call that a significant deviation from the norm and stand by my use of "staggering".

You compare gun deaths to deaths from car crashes. Others have already pointed out that one of the main differences is that cars are not tools for killing that are put into public hands and furthermore, since I asked you the question (that you did not answer): "Is the reason for the Second Amendment worth the amount of gun violence in the USA?", my follow up question would be: I can show you the (financial, societal, etc.) benefits of cars (i.e. individual travel by car) for the society, what exactly are the benefits of private gun ownership?
(Whether cars are really worth it, is a whole other discussion.)

Regarding suicide rates, this seems to be a compelling argument until you notice that suicide rates in some, equally developed countries and some lesser developed countries are higher than in the USA and that the number of gun killings that are not suicide is still way higher than in comparable countries (see above).

I do not think that gun violence in the USA can be blamed on mental health issues though <irony>unless you count gun/power fetishism among mental illnesses </irony>.
Edit: Saying that whoever commits an act of gun violence must be mentally ill is tantamount of saying that any criminal must be mentally ill and thus not responsible for his/her actions.

<aside>
One nice observation about this gun fetish (not by me, I think it was Bill Burr): Another common argument pro guns is that people are in it only for home security, if that were the case you would have tons of photos of people with their new door locks or magazine-covers with girls in bikinis in front of security doors.
</aside>

I applaud your stand on public (mental-) health policies though.

Now to your main question:
Have I ever encountered interpersonal violence against me or others?
Yes, but not on a level that bringing lethal force to the situation ever seemed warranted. Thankfully. One obvious reason for that is that I live in a country where I don't need to expect everyone else to carry a gun.
Would it be possible that I would think otherwise, if it would have been the case? Yes.
Would I be correct in thinking that way? No.

To explain: I am not a friend of passive aggressive "stand you ground" thinking. The sane response chain is: 1. Try not to let yourself be provoked, 2. try to de-escalate, 3. try to evade/flee, 4. try to defend yourself.....And of course: CALL THE COPS!

Does that harm my male ego? Yes.
Does that matter enough to me for me to risk killing another human being? No.

harlequinn said:

Thanks for the good questions.

a) yes
b) yes
c) no
d) yes
e) n/a

If you exclude suicide, the USA doesn't have a staggering rate of gun deaths. It is high compared to some other western countries, but on a world rate it is still very low.

When looking at public health (which is the reason for reducing gun violence) you need to be pragmatic. What will actually give a good outcome for public health? In this case there are about a half a dozen things that kill and maim US citizens at much higher rates than firearms do.

E.g. you are much more likely to be killed in a car crash than murdered by someone with a firearm. Cars by accident kill more people in the USA each year than firearms do on purpose. That's some scary shit right there. Think about that for a second, cars are more dangerous than firearms and people are not even trying to kill themselves or someone else with one. So as an example, you'd be better off trying to fix this first.

Or fix the suicide rate in the US. People aren't in a happy place there.

Obesity kills more people. Doctor malpractice kills more people. Etc. But these are hard issues to tackle that will cost billions or trillions. The low hanging fruit is firearms.

Free health care and mental health care, a better social security system, and various other means would all have magnificent outcomes on everyday life in the USA. But again, they cost a lot and require a paradigm shift.

Have you ever encountered interpersonal violence against you (i.e. had someone attack you)? Or have you maybe worked in a job where you often come into contact with people who have been attacked? I find people change their mind after they realize that they were only ever one wrong turn away from some crazy bastard who wanted to hurt them badly.

Back-To-School Essentials | Sandy Hook Promise

harlequinn says...

Yes, they have lower rates. But the point isn't that the rates are the same (they're not), the point is that the rates are low enough to not have an immediate fear of them. An immediate fear would be unwarranted and irrational.

E.g. you probably don't fear dying every time you hop into a vehicle because it has a relatively low risk of killing you (even though the risk is much higher than that of being killed in a homicide by firearm). Having an immediate fear of it would be irrational.

You probably don't fear dying in a general accident (i.e. including all work place and public accidents together). Even though it represents about 170,000 deaths a year (an number so large it makes the topic of firearms deaths look like a joke), it is still a relatively low risk. Having an immediate fear of it would be irrational.

This is not to suggest that these things are not to be respected. We must try and reduce all mortality and morbidity. But you need to be effective at it. This is public health. You choose the method that will have the largest effect.

For example, you will have a bigger effect restricting sugar intake to reduce diabetes deaths, which outnumber homicide by firearm deaths by about an order of magnitude.

The majority of the 40k firearm deaths consist of suicides. There is an important distinction between homicide (the topic) and suicide. Don't mix them up if the topic is homicide by firearm.

Go look at what is actually killing people:

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr68/nvsr68_06-508.pdf

notarobot said:

In the US firearm related murders are far more common than shark attack, being struck by lighting, or killed in a plane crash.

In 2018 there was ONE fatal shark attack in the US. There were FORTY THOUSAND gun related deaths the year before.

Meanwhile there have already been TWENTY-NINE school shooting this year alone.

Sure, nobody was hurt when someone shot out a window of a school bus in Florida earlier this year but that doesn't mean elementary-aged kids inside won't end up being scared.

Back-To-School Essentials | Sandy Hook Promise

harlequinn says...

Thanks for the good questions.

a) yes
b) yes
c) no
d) yes
e) n/a

If you exclude suicide, the USA doesn't have a staggering rate of gun deaths. It is high compared to some other western countries, but on a world rate it is still very low.

When looking at public health (which is the reason for reducing gun violence) you need to be pragmatic. What will actually give a good outcome for public health? In this case there are about a half a dozen things that kill and maim US citizens at much higher rates than firearms do.

E.g. you are much more likely to be killed in a car crash than murdered by someone with a firearm. Cars by accident kill more people in the USA each year than firearms do on purpose. That's some scary shit right there. Think about that for a second, cars are more dangerous than firearms and people are not even trying to kill themselves or someone else with one. So as an example, you'd be better off trying to fix this first.

Or fix the suicide rate in the US. People aren't in a happy place there.

Obesity kills more people. Doctor malpractice kills more people. Etc. But these are hard issues to tackle that will cost billions or trillions. The low hanging fruit is firearms.

Free health care and mental health care, a better social security system, and various other means would all have magnificent outcomes on everyday life in the USA. But again, they cost a lot and require a paradigm shift.

Have you ever encountered interpersonal violence against you (i.e. had someone attack you)? Or have you maybe worked in a job where you often come into contact with people who have been attacked? I find people change their mind after they realize that they were only ever one wrong turn away from some crazy bastard who wanted to hurt them badly.

wraith said:

@harlequinn:

Putting the legal concerns (It is in the constitution, so we have to heed it) aside, what do you think about the Second Amendment?

Was it meant to enable the people to
a) defend against foreign incursion (in lieu of a standing army)?
b) defend against an oppressive government (as a militia)?
c) assume police duties?
d) defend themselves (in absence of police)?
e) none of the above? (Please state what you think its intended meaning was.)

For your selected reason/s given above, does it/do they still apply today?

What do you think is the reason for the staggering amount of gun violence/deaths in the USA when compared with other countries?

Is the reason for the Second Amendment worth the amount of gun violence in the USA?


Full disclosure:
I am genuinely interested in your answers since you seem to have given this some thought (an impression I frankly do not have about bobknight33) .
I am not from the USA and against any form of private gun ownership except under some very rare circumstances.

Back-To-School Essentials | Sandy Hook Promise

Back-To-School Essentials | Sandy Hook Promise

newtboy says...

If the left didn't care about people getting shot and killed, why would they care about guns? Duh.

99% of shootings are by illegally obtained guns in democratic cities?!
Site your source.....I know you can't, you flushed already. The actual number is 40-<60% of those convicted of illegal shootings admit they used illegally obtained guns, the number varying by state, higher where laws deny violent convicts the right to own them, lower when they can. As to your ridiculous 99% Democratic city claim, you're just repeating a long ago debunked lie from a failed Republican candidate 5 years ago. Here's some data.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jul/12/deadliest-cities-gun-control-laws-congress-chicago
Note how many Republican led cities are worse than Chicago.

99% are non NRA members? Maybe, but >99.5% of Americans are non NRA members, most NRA members quit the organization decades ago like I did, but are still listed as "members". Since most americans aren't members, actually the NRA gave a pitch to prospective sponsors in which it said that about half of its then-4 million members were the “most active and interested.” (the other 2 million are often dead members, ex members, or those given free but unwanted memberships with a purchase) so there MAY be 2 million, but that's likely still a massive overestimate, meaning using their own numbers, active NRA members are far more likely than the average person to murder with a gun IF your 1% guess is right (and there's absolutely no way to know, those statistics aren't kept).

Yes. Mass terroristic attacks with or without guns get more attention than individual personal attacks. Odd, you think that's proper if it's not a right wing terroristic attack, like most today are.
Suicides account for >60% of shooting deaths but get zero coverage. Why not whine about that?

Odd, you seem to be saying you're afraid of the violent, gun toting democrats who are 99% more ready and better armed for violent political civil war than Republicans....but you also claim Republicans have all the guns and are better shots and ready to go.....which is it?

2017 had nearly 40000 gun deaths, the highest since 1968.

bobknight33 said:

LAMO such propaganda and fear mongering.

The left do not care about saving people from getting shot or killed. Its only a political tool to spread over hyped fear to take all guns away from the public.

Generally speaking:
99% of all gun shooting are illegally obtained guns of Democrat controlled cities.

99% of of shooting are non NRA members.


School - mall- etc shootings represent less that 1% of shootings but get 80% of the national press coverage.

How to Solve a Rubik's Cube!



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon