336

Senior men have higher rates of suicide than average, and firearms were involved in more than three-quarters of those deaths in 2021, according to a CDC report

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee -3 points 1 year ago

It has been repeatedly and conclusively demonstrated that means reduction (which the pro-gun community won't allow) and survivability (which guns don't have) play an extremely important role in suicide prevention.

Guns are absolutely part of the issue. Unfortunately, the pro-gun community prioritises sweeping gun deaths under the rug to maintain their profits and possessions over actually protecting anyone.

[-] remotelove@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You like to talk a lot about studies and data without actually providing studies or data.

Just reading through your profile is just a mess of "it has been proven", "debunked", "repeatedly shown", etc., etc., or just the simple "no, your wrong".

Quite honestly, it's weird. While we all tend to use simple phrases during a discussion, I also like to at least provide a link or two or have a study within reach to back up my assumptions.

Your motivation is simply to piss people off, it seems.

[-] PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It's not my responsibility to spoon feed you information and you shouldn't be trusting posts on social media just because they do.

There's no better way to feed people dogshit than studies and graphs stripped of context.

[-] remotelove@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It's not about spoon feeding me information. It's about validating your own claims.

Also, links on social media are completely visible and transparent. You should know exactly what they link to and were information is hosted. A good study will generally have good sample sizes and plenty of peer reviews.

[-] PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

I have validated my own claims, to my own standard, under my own volition. That's why I hold this opinion in the first place.

You either haven't, or have chosen to dismiss the evidence because it's inconvenient to the opinions you want to hold.

Also, links on social media are completely visible and transparent. You should know exactly what they link to and were information is hosted. A good study will generally have good sample sizes and plenty of peer reviews.

It's not stupid to click the link, its stupid to let someone on the internet assure you they've provided all the context you need.

The British medical journal Lancet published a study back in 1998. It's had hundreds of peer reviews. Does that mean that if somebody links it on social media, you'll just accept it?

Because that paper was the origin of "vaccines cause autism". It has been linked millions of times by a group of people who are spreading misinformation that kills people.

Want me to send you a link next time I see one? You can strut into their midst with links to the hundreds of studies that disprove it.

I'm sure it won't be a waste of your time and I'm sure every counter argument will be made in only the best of faith.

[-] remotelove@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

This thread has just gotten boring now.

[-] PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Then you're enjoying yet another luxury that you strip from victims of gun violence.

this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2023
336 points (96.7% liked)

News

23627 readers
2508 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS