64
How David Hogg’s Multimillion-Dollar Bid to Elect Young Dems Fared at the Polls
(www.the74million.org)
this post was submitted on 15 Nov 2024
64 points (95.7% liked)
politics
19104 readers
2185 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I believe guns increase the likelihood of suicide. There was a study on this, and lately firearm instructors have been conveying(in Utah at least) that removing guns from your home if suicidal is crucial. And to watch for signs of depression in other gun owners.
But I agree with your overall point. Removing the guns won’t eliminate those suicide deaths, only reduce them.
And more to my point, if RFK is in power when bird flu achieves human to human transmission, gun deaths will be background noise.
Even small barriers to a quick death can dramatically reduce suicide rates. Blister packs replacing bottles of pills reduced overdose suicides by 22‰.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC526120/
The issue with that logic is correlation doesn't equal causation...you just need to look at japan. The country with pretty much the hardest gun control, has one of the highest suicide rates in the world.
The point you're missing is if Japan had lax gun laws they would have more suicides. Not sure if you're slow to catch on or just obstinate.
That's not how correlation works at all. By that same logic you're stating that without guns here, then all of our suicides by firearms wouldn't happen at all, and people wouldn't try something else.
Listen, the evidence that having a gun in the home increasing the risk of suicide is well established. The burden of proof is on you. Your opinion is shit.
No it doesn't, you're basically giving me the point that someone who can't swim is more likely to drown because they own a pool... that's the bullshit logic that is used. (If you didn't get that reference, the person is more likely to drown because they can't swim...not because they own a pool). There are millions of firearm owners in the USA, the fraction of a percent of those commit suicide. So no it's not what makes people more likely to commit suicide. I just explained that to you with Japan, which you will clearly ignore.
People don't magically become suicidal because a firearm is present. That's the most ignorant bullshit ever, and was cooked up from the anti-gun groups.
Correlation doesn't equal causation. Never has never will.
https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2020/06/handgun-ownership-associated-with-much-higher-suicide-risk.html
https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/magazine/guns-and-suicide/
As I alluded to if Japan had more available guns in the home their suicides would go up. This is backed up by science not your "feels".
Please provide the proof behind your opinion. Oh wait, don't even bother. We both know you are full of shit.
That's literally stating that suicides by firearms are more successful...NOT that they cause people to commit suicide more.
I'll say it again, correlation doesn't equate causation.
It's not my problem you are incapable of understanding studies that have an agenda.
This is the same stupid arguments big tobacco used to say smoking didn't cause cancer.
You are fucking stupid about this and the sooner you admit the sooner you can grow a brain cell and move on.
Lol ok kid