Political Discussions
Should 'How To Commit Suicide Sites' Be Banned From The Internet?
Posted by askcherlock • 2/28/09 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Topics: banning sites, free speech, frist amendment, suicide
I know, I know, First Amendment and all that. But if you have lost a loved one to suicide, chances are they went online for some positive reinforcement which also glamorizes it. Your loved one dies and those left behind look in a cracked mirror and vomit.
User Comments
-
Since it's illegal to commit suicide, yes, they should be banned.-
Thanks, I agree, but I'm afraid it will never happen.
-
Ummm, it's illegal in the States. The U.S. isn't the whole world and the internet isn't owned by anyone least of all America. I don't agree with sites that dispense the information on philosophical grounds but, until we have a global criminal code, you can't advocate the banning of information based solely on American law. -
Al Gore owns the internet, thank you very much!! Just ask him. -
If a person wants to commit suicide, let them. It is, after all, their body. How far are we willing to go to police every aspect of our existence? -
@liberty - Well, I agree with you. But Al Gore still owns the internet! I mean after all he invented it right before he invented global climate warming change, or whatever he is calling it these days.
-
So true, in fact he stated that suicides influence global warming because decaying bodies emit noxious gases. True story.......
-
LOL I would love to read that one!
-
wouldn't they be becoming "carbon neutral"? -
Yes, they would be getting to the carbon neutral state, albeit in a stinky way...
-
-
Could you be specific as to the sites involved? The only sites that involve suicide talk are "emo" websites, but even they talk more about self injury than suicide.-
There are sites that will tell you exactly the amount of certain meds to take, for example, in order to die. Recently in my city, a friend told me of her uncle committing suicide with helium. Several days later I saw an article explaining the entire process for a fete accompli. To me, that is being complicit in what is an illegal act, as satijournal aptly pointed out.
-
-
No. If someone is going to commit suicide, they're going to do it whether or not some asshole writes an anonymous, general encouragement to everyone on a shitty website.
maddox.xmission.com/s.txt
regarding
www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=suicide
and
www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=manly_suicide-
Statistics note that you are correct. Most of the time, once a person threatens or makes an attempt, they are not far from seeing it through. If a site is designed to provide assistance by instruction, how is that different from Dr. Kevorkian?
-
-
Voodoo is right. Psychologically speaking those determined to commit suicide will find a way regardless. Those who are not sure that they want to follow through (even the slightest hesitation) typically means that they won't be convinced of it by others.
Of course, there's always the exception to the rule.
As hard and heartbreaking as it is for family members - I really do believe that a person's life and the decision to live it should be in their hands.-
I don't know, Anok. Many people teeter on the edge and there are those whose thinking has become so distorted, that they are incapable of making a rational decision. I heard a line recently that despair is the leading cause of suicide. All of us have experienced that at one time or another. Would a little push or encouragement from callous people on a website have been just enough...?
-
Coming from a person who has attempted suicide once in her life - I would say that the despair and depression alone isn't what enables a person to follow through with a suicide.
Nor does anything on a website (something that was not around when I attempted) really offer information that a person serious about suicide hasn't already considered.
The only reason I survived my own attempt was because the medication I took (unknown to me at that time) was actually a placebo prescribed to a family member who was a hypochondriac. It was labeled as actual medication, though. -
suicide has been an issue for years, yes before the internet. -
askcherlock:
If a person is close enough to the edge that they are researching the best methods to kill themselves they don't really need much of a push anymore.
-
-
I think Voodoo and Anok are about 90% percent right. It is true that a truly suicidal person will commit the act no matter what, and they will tell no one. On the other hand, many suicidal gestures are an attempt to get assistance or attention. My concern would be for the mentally ill, or impressionable people that would take some "stupid" suggestion website seriously.
Anok, I understand your point about someone's life being in their own hands, but what if the individual's decision making is compromised?-
Anok, I understand your point about someone's life being in their own hands, but what if the individual's decision making is compromised?
If by compromised you mean by serious treatable mental disorder, drug/alcohol induced, or mental retardation or other disability then no - I do not believe their actions should be left in their hands entirely.
-
-
Part of what concerns me is that many of thses sites are geared to teenagers who are so vulnerable. One incident in the news not long ago described a young man who threatened suicide on a webcam and was egged on by viewers, as though watching a movie with popcorn in their laps. Someone finally called the police, but it was too late. He died.
-
Given the international nature of the web, banning anything short of child pornography and the like is nearly impossible. If there isn't an international consensus on the issue, it's not gonna happen. That's one reason why people focus on filters for their children's internet viewing. It works better than stopping stuff at the source.
Perhaps those concerned about this issue need to establish websites with good SEO practices so people find them instead of the "How To" sites. Such sites could lead to crisis hotlines, for example. -
Good suggestion....
-
This is an interesting article on the topic of suicide...
www.newscientist.com/article/mg20126971.900-why-do-people-kill-themselves.h...
Particularly this part:
"In essence, Joiner proposed that people who kill themselves must meet two sets of conditions on top of feeling depressed and hopeless. First, they must have a serious desire to die. This usually comes about when people feel they are an intolerable burden on others, while also feeling isolated from people who might provide a sense of belonging.
Second, and most important, people who succeed in killing themselves must be capable of doing the deed. This may sound obvious, but until Joiner pointed it out, no one had tried to figure out why some people are able to go through with it when most are not. No matter how seriously you want to die, Joiner says, it is not an easy thing to do. The self-preservation instinct is too strong."
The issue I think is whether suicide sites help enable the second condition of this theory.-
You have completely captured the danger that these sites pose in your last statement. If one has that last thread of self-preservation but becomes empowered or enabled by one of these sites, they then have the impetus to see it through. My only brother committed suicide several years ago. It was his fifth attempt. After his death I spent a fews days in his home sorting things out. I went to his computer and logged on. There must have been at least fifty such sites. I felt faint, went through the gamut of emotions, and then I got angry. Prior to his final and fatal attempt, I had been able to reach him in time and get help over the course of five years, though I had been warned after his first try that one day he would see it through. Look, I'm not trying to assess blame here. I simply cannot see any sound reason to allow these sites, though I am certain it would be futile to try to eliminate them. But their very existence is predatory. Is our society so starved for vicarious pleasure that we sink to encouraging suicide online?
-
askcherlock:
1) having access to the information isn't enough to produce the will necessary to override the survival instinct, just like seeing a gay sex scene in a movie probably wouldn't be enough to convince most straight people to have gay sex. You're talking about hardwired impulses here, remember.
2) If suicide sites are enough to enable the second condition of the above theory then so is any book, movie, or music that relates any method of killing or dying. Any death that can be depicted can be duplicated; do you really want a moratorium on death in all forms on the net, or in film, books or music?
-
-
On a personal, emotional level, I would say yes, I would like suicide issues banned from the net. The dichotomy is that I would not want it banned from books, films or music. There is something personal about the net, at times like sitting in a living room with a group of folks and conversing. Then there is the Darkness At Noon group(mob)mentality which can give subliminal encouragment to issues perhaps not otherwise perceived as viable. You know the scenes from New York where someone is on a roof threatening to jump and on-lookers yell "Jump, jump," and so the person does. Approval-seeking at its lowest ebb.
Intellectually, no a ban on one issue could then lead to another and another....Personal freedoms cannot be encroached upon. At any given level we all react to issues based on personal experiences. It would be wonderful to be able to compartmentalize those feelings, but not realistic. -
I don't think they should be banned, but I think the people who create them and participate in them should be held to answer for the results just like anyone in "real life" would and charged criminally in any circumstance that would allow for that. -
The bigger, universal point is this - should anything be banned from the internet?
The answer is never.Period.-
Child pornography?
Snuff films?
-
-
All of it.
-
So is it your position, then, that those things shouldn't be illegal? Or that crime should be ignored if it's on the Internet?
-
-
My position is that the internet is the greatest invention of all mankind. It is in its infancy...just minutes into its life. The power of directly connecting every human being - individually - to one another in emmediate, intimate ways will change the course of history - for the better.
The internet is nothing more, should be nothing less, than all of man and his being open to all, billions of individuals as one. It is a universal, trancendent, god like power of unparalleled proportion. It is controlled by nothing more than deep, human interest in one another, unfiltered and unadulterated.
Right now we use it sell shit and follow vacant starletts through their empty, vacant lives but eventually, the internet will break free of the petty and engulf the sublime.
Like the proverbial butterflies wings, any chance miss step might blind the eyes of god (so to speak), and rob us all of the chance to make a better world. And the sureset way to poke god in the eye is to have one group of humans impose rules against others unilatteraly. The internet reflects life and like life, if you don't like it walk away. Or do something about it. But don't blind the world and billions in the future just because you feel its the easiest way to solve half a problem now.
You can close your eyes - but it won't go away. -
A desire to die does not just come out of thin air. The internet is not the source of this problem anymore than the telephone. There are some situations where ending your life is probably reasonable. Wouldn't it be better to make your own decision using whatever information is available? If more and more people are topping themselves perhaps this has something to do with the rottenness of their lives. For example ... if someone commits suicide because they have overwhelming student loan debts what has that got to do with some phony "illness"? Seems to me that the decline in personal liberty worldwide have gone hand in hand with this so-named 'medical' problem. Perhaps If suicide was something easily available the rates WOULD likely go up and this might bring pressure to bear on governments to stop wrecking our lives. Seems to me one of the motives behind the suicide prevention movement is to allow the state the "space" to continue hurting people without bearing moral responsibility for the misery that sometimes follows.-
Obviously you have never lost a loved one to suicide. The government has not one thing to do with it. It is a tragedy I hope you never experience.
-
Is losing a loved one to suicide any worse than losing them to a car accident, drug overdose, murder, or illness?
-
Because Anok, when a loved one commits suicide, those two worst words in the English language come into play. What if? What if I paid more attention to my son so he wouldn't have committed suicide? What if I had taken more time to talk to my spouse so they wouldn't have felt their only option was to end their life.
That, I believe is how it is worse than losing them to an accident that one has no control over.
-
-
There is much in the way of mental health services that is lacking in many regions of this country. Suicides are usually the result of a problem with brain chemistry, which is generally treatable if diagnosed. I see no reason why mental health screenings ought not to be considered a standard among adolescent schoolchildren, just as scoliosis screenings are for younger children.
-
People commit suicide for a reason(s). All of these are not necessarily obvious to others. The simple fact is suicide rates are going up everywhere. I think about doing myself in everyday. Age, injury and personal misery are MY reasons. I'm not asking anyone to approve or disapprove since it wouldn't make much difference anyway. One thing is certain "chemical imbalances" are gibberish. People become suicidal because they feel guilt or are facing impossible problems. If depression was a disease then why are people borne after 1945 much more likely to experience such feelings? The is no disease here. There are no blood tests, biopsies, x-rays or any other normal medical procedure which can locate any of the "disorders" that psychiatrists vote into existence. Look at some advertisements for anti-depressants and note the "we think it works this way" commentary. Could you imagine a structural engineer telling us that he thinks a bridge "might" stand up under traffic?
-
I agree that depression is too often addressed in simplistic terms. It is quite complex and society may not be properly equipped to deal with it. Many of us live on superficial planes, without regard to layers of character beneath the surface. We all wear a mask of one kind or another and as a society, we use labels to tell one another who that person is, what they represent and what message they carry. Nice and neat packages. Makes life so much simpler for the rest of us. Put a Post-it on your forehead with your label. And those with real inner turmoil, who don't necessarily fit into neat molds, drift away into oblivion.
-
Add Your Comment
Login to leave a message.
