• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do Waiting Periods Work?

Waiting periods may well prevent suicides. But in any case whether waiting periods work is not something that should be decided based on the theorizing and predictions of members of message boards, it should be decided by studies.

They might do - because people will have a chance to reconsider or turn to another, less successful method of suicide.
 
If I have to get a license to drive and own a car, passing certain tests for myself and my car to do so, obey speed limits, etc., I see no reason why others can be required to get licenses to own guns, and produce them when purchasing them, be required to store them safely, limit the size of magazines, etc.

I can see a reason: you don't have a constitutional right to drive a car.

But if you want to live in a place that requires licensing to own a firearm, feel free to move to NJ. I "see no reason" why we need to impose this nonsense at the federal level.
 
They might do - because people will have a chance to reconsider or turn to another, less successful method of suicide.

"Less successful" than driving your car into a wall at 100 mph?
 
SMH

Less successful than ALL other suicide attempt methods combined.
So you would rather people kill themselves by methods other than guns. Interesting personal preference you have there, but hardly a compelling argument relative to any public policy.
 
SMH

Less successful than ALL other suicide attempt methods combined.

Wow. Japan, S. Korea, and Belgium must have a metric SHIT-TON of people trying and failing to commit suicide.
 
Wow. Japan, S. Korea, and Belgium must have a metric SHIT-TON of people trying and failing to commit suicide.

No, just that suicide attempts overall, in countries where guns are banned, are less successful than say the USA.

Can you comprehend that ?
 
I said I don't need a license to transport my new car home. I did misspeak to an extent. If I transport my new car myself, I will need a license, because that action has me using another vehicle on a public roadway. But I can certainly have it transported and there is no license required for my new car. So if the situation is to be comparable, I would need a gun license if I intend to use it in public on the way home, but not if I merely transport it home without using it. Note that carrying a gun for defensive purposes is a use of a gun. I'm willing to grant that a license be required to use a gun in public areas, as a compromise of the right.

I didn't say there was anything intrinsically wrong with the restrictions you claim are proper. I was examining those restrictions in light of the comparison you made with vehicles. If you wish to abandon that comparison now, the burden will be on you to justify your desire for the restrictions you propose.
Thanks for your response, but my car analogy is just that. Some analogies limp a bit. And as a professor told me, some have muscular distrophy. The restrictions I propose seem to be "common sense laws" (ack! I hate that phrase gun control advocates use!) similar to (analogy alert!) those used for other potentially dangerous items like drugs. In the book I recommended on another post, "Gunfight," the author outlines how gun possession was *required* post independence for fear of a British comeback, if I remember correctly, but guns were also strictly prohibited in many frontier towns, with visitors at times required to check them at the livery with their horses upon arrival. See the OK Corral fight, which was about gun control. But the bett analogy is with other countries, who seem to remain free under gun control and have far lower homicide rates. That analogy limps as well, since those countries don't have the income disparity we do and have more social services.

As I have said, the most us advocates can do,is to try to limit that carnage, slowing ownership or keeping guns away from those who shouldn't have them.
 
Ok, hidden agenda. I just bought my first rifle with my 'stimulus' check and wanted to brag. Its a Savage XP .308 if you're interested. I plan on mainly just having fun at the range, but its always useful to have a tool and skill for hunting.

Anyway, im in Florida, and we only used to have a three day waiting period on handguns. Since the Parkland shooting, when a guy passed a background check, bought a rifle, and then shot someones a year later, we now have a three day waiting period on rifles too. Which is pretty annoying. I still have one day to wait to go pick up, and thought I would ask if this waiting has any real point?


It would help prevent "spur of the moment" shootings.

Guns, especially hand guns, are really convenient. You just pick it up and pull the trigger. It's all over in less than 10 seconds.

If you have a waiting period, the shoot might become less depressed or less angry and decide not to blow his brains out or shoot his wife.

But that's if he doesn't have a gun in the first place. And that's a big "if".
 
Thanks for your response, but my car analogy is just that. Some analogies limp a bit. And as a professor told me, some have muscular distrophy. The restrictions I propose seem to be "common sense laws" (ack! I hate that phrase gun control advocates use!) similar to (analogy alert!) those used for other potentially dangerous items like drugs. In the book I recommended on another post, "Gunfight," the author outlines how gun possession was *required* post independence for fear of a British comeback, if I remember correctly, but guns were also strictly prohibited in many frontier towns, with visitors at times required to check them at the livery with their horses upon arrival. See the OK Corral fight, which was about gun control. But the bett analogy is with other countries, who seem to remain free under gun control and have far lower homicide rates. That analogy limps as well, since those countries don't have the income disparity we do and have more social services.

As I have said, the most us advocates can do,is to try to limit that carnage, slowing ownership or keeping guns away from those who shouldn't have them.

Keeping guns away from those who shouldn't have them is the most effective fix.
 
It would help prevent "spur of the moment" shootings.

Guns, especially hand guns, are really convenient. You just pick it up and pull the trigger. It's all over in less than 10 seconds.

If you have a waiting period, the shoot might become less depressed or less angry and decide not to blow his brains out or shoot his wife.

But that's if he doesn't have a gun in the first place. And that's a big "if".

Exactly, if you have a gun in the house, you're much more likely to have a successful suicide attempt than if you do not.
 
It would help prevent "spur of the moment" shootings.

Guns, especially hand guns, are really convenient. You just pick it up and pull the trigger. It's all over in less than 10 seconds.

If you have a waiting period, the shoot might become less depressed or less angry and decide not to blow his brains out or shoot his wife.

But that's if he doesn't have a gun in the first place. And that's a big "if".

I can see how a waiting period for your first purchase could prevent that, but once you own a gun a waiting period is pointless
 
Keeping guns away from those who shouldn't have them is the most effective fix.


So what effective methods would you suggest? A doctor informs the police you are depressed, and they remove your armoury until you're well again?
 
Possibly but how would you write such a law ?
Short version it would be attached to the background system. first time it’s run LEO flag is at such so waiting period applies. After that no waiting period
 
Short version it would be attached to the background system. first time it’s run LEO flag is at such so waiting period applies. After that no waiting period

I meant how would you know if it's a first purchase (or purchase of a sole gun in the house) ?
You have to require the buyer to declare what guns (if any) they have
Or declare what guns other members of the household might have ?

(I assume a first purchase is deemed the same as a subsequent purchase if you have since sold it and consequently do not have a gun).
 
No, just that suicide attempts overall, in countries where guns are banned, are less successful than say the USA.

Can you comprehend that ?

The countries I listed have higher suicide rates than the US (in one case, much higher), a much less or essentially no access to firearms. If every other method of suicide is so very inferior to firearms, these countries must have a truly crushing depression problem compared to the US.
 
The countries I listed have higher suicide rates than the US (in one case, much higher), a much less or essentially no access to firearms. If every other method of suicide is so very inferior to firearms, these countries must have a truly crushing depression problem compared to the US.

You're making the same mistake most gun owners make regarding suicides

People in Japan and the USA do not get suicidal urges at the same rate

Men and women in the USA don't get suicidal urges at the same rate
A greater proportion of women attempt suicide, in the USA, than men. Yet more men commit suicide in the USA than women. This is because they're more likely to use a gun and guns are way more successful than the combination of all other means

So more Japanese men attempt suicide than men in the USA, but the success rate is higher in the USA because men here, tend to use guns that men in Japan do not have access to.
 
Back
Top Bottom