That’s only because they have separated suicide from the category of mental illness. Mass killings are 64% suicide – but why is suicide separated from mental illness?
There is mental illness that is treated. There is mental illness that is untreated.
Suicide is not reasonable in these cases. How is it not mental illness?
Granted, the justification for separating the two MAY have some validity for public policy. Mental illness is stigmatized enough as it is, and adding “mass gun deaths” to the stigma doesn’t improve the situation.
So in that sense, I support the split of “not mental illness, merely suicide with unexpected companions”.
But really though. It’s a form of mental illness just the same, even if it’s more pragmatic to say it isn’t. [and I agree it’s more pragmatic to say that it isn’t].
I don’t play politics. I’m not trying to score points for one team or another. Mental illness is a problem all by itself, whether there is a gun or no gun.
Was I wrong to attempt to downplay the political question?
Probably. Personally, I don’t care as much if everybody gets a gun, nobody gets a gun, some people get guns as I do about the issue of mental illness.
That’s why I wrote about it.
You were perfectly on topic. I wasn’t. I’m frequently out of context. I even made a thesaurus that’s out of context: http://www.amazon.com/Out-Context-Cross…/dp/B00KFOQIG6
This makes me a strange one to talk to. smile emoticon
I took your dismissal of the article as a dismissal of the importance of discussing mental illness.
I believe there is something redeemable any topic, even one with a bad beginning.
I was trying to find the redeemable part and discuss it.
That was likely my error.
I didn’t care who wins or loses a debate. I don’t debate. I discuss.