From: dennis@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu (Thomas A. Dennis)
Subject: Re: sdf.lonestar.org:/u/df/suicide_quux
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 20:35:07 GMT

In <1992Oct10.163220.14963@udel.edu> awatson@pecan.cns.udel.edu (angela 
watson) writes:


> And for Tom Dennis:

*ahem*

> Horseshit? Maybe... I was overgeneralizing.  If "soceity" didn't
>give a shit whether people lived or died _of their own free will_ then
>you'd never heard any talk about suicide being "bad" or wrong.  Most 
>people don't give a damn whether those they don't know live or die.  But
>those who oppress or enjoy controlling other peoples lives don't want
>the oppressed to off themselves prematurely.  In their eyes, it's bad
>for business if the peons start dropping like flies.  

Society talks about how suicide is bad or wrong because it's a cheap and easy 
way of pretending to care.  The argument that society is against suicide 
because it deprives it of victims smacks of self-delusion.  Look at the things 
that "society" gets worked up about--the drug war, Ice-T's "Cop Killer", 
Sinead O'Connor ripping up a picture of the pope--and compare that with the 
amount of attention that suicide's gotten lately.  How many people have died 
from Ice-T's song, or even from crack, compared to the number of suicides in 
America this year?

> As far as laws go... No law can be passed to prevent someone from
>killing someone else IF THAT'S WHAT THEY REALLY AND TRULY WANT TO DO.  Sure,
>they might get punished or executed themselves, but that doesn't bring
>the victim back to life.  Laws can't stop everyone from doing "bad"
>things.  Laws usually catch those who screwed up and didn't cover
>their tracks well when they did something illegal.  By making suicide
>illegal, they hope to prevent those who failed from trying it again.

If I commit a murder, I can still be tried, convicted, and incarcerated.  If I
kill myself, what's the punishment?  If, for some reason, I fail to kill 
myself, what's to keep me from trying again?  It's not like I'll be worried 
about a bad police record...  On the other hand, if I'm not all that serious 
about killing myself, the laws might discourage me from making a few sissy cuts
just to make my SOs feel bad.

> There are more loose ends than just cleaning up after the dead
>body and reading the will.  Who's going to pay to support any dependants
>you left behind? Who's going to pay all the outstanding bills (if your
>estate doesn't cover them)?   It isn't easy to sell a house that someone
>recently committed suicide in (esp. if it was with a gun).  Don't kid
>yourself, wills take more than two weeks to finish with (up to months or 
>years if you screwed up your records in life or if it gets contested).

Reality check number three: how many adolescents (that high-risk group that 
well-menaing people are always trying to save from suicide) A.  have that many 
dependants to support; B. have very many outstanding bills of their own at the 
age of fourteen, or whatever; C. own houses; or D. leave last wills and 
testaments?

> Considering how little "society" seems to care for the vagabonds,
>you'd think their suicide would be encouraged.  While it would save the
>oppressors and those in power a bit of money to have these "walking problems"
>vanish overnight, they aren't about to campaign for the elimination
>of all those who need more than they can currently give.  

They don't need to have them commit suicide... crime, disease, and malnutrition
do the job.

I don't think
>the banks (and other businesses) would be too terribly happy if a million
>or so depressed people went on shopping sprees before they died (buying
>non-refundable goods and services, of course).  While they might be
>able to get some of the money back from the estates, they'd lose a fair
>amount of money in laywers fees and uncollectable debt.

Again, teenagers don't have credit for shopping sprees.

> There are people who just don't like to see other people die (or
>be miserable) for any reason.  They have their own reasons why they
>don't want people to die.  I don't have anything against them.

Well, thanks ever so much.

> At least in the US, the promotion of dangerous and toxic substances/
>actions is for the benifit of a relatively small group of wealthy individuals.

Oh, really? Ask your local convenience-store manager what effect the 
elimination of cigarette sales would do to his profits.

> Those who make money off toxic dumping and other life-threatening
>things don't care if people die, so long as the Company turns a profit. 
>Death is ok with them, so long as they get to make money off of it.  In
>their eyes, why should they care if people who are not potential customers
>are harmed (or die) from the company's actions?  So long as they can 
>avoid paying for their actions (lawsuits and increased costs), they just
>don't care.  If a significant number of a company's employees (lower ones)
>committed suicide around the same time, someone would be bound to
>start asking questions... 

What is this? Suicide as a method of getting on '60 Minutes'?

> Death of another is hard for some to cope with (depending on
>who died).  Suicide is purposeful death... it scares most to think that
>life could be so horrible of someone that they would opt for nonexistance
>over life (not including possiblities of afterlife).  

It doesn't scare or even surprise me.  If I had terminal cancer, and the 
morphine wasn't working anymore, and I was reasonably sure that cancer wasn't 
going to be cured in the next few weeks... I'd give myself an extra helping or
seven of that morphine, or maybe avail myself of the good ex-Dr. Kevorkian's 
Kill-O-Matic.

On the other hand, it does scare me a little when things like depression are 
considered terminal conditions.

> My original response was to someone saying 'Why should I have to
>explain myself? It's my life and only I can live it. No one can tell me
>that I can't kill myself (must live for their sake).'  He didn't seem
>to fully believe himself... I don't think anyone should continue to
>live "for someone else's sake" unless the other person means more to
>them than themself.  There were times that I continued on "for someone
>else's sake"... and looking back, it was a stupid thing to do. (living
>for someone else)         

I just don't think that it's a matter of living solely for oneself or solely 
for someone else.  Life is too rich and full to be restricted to utter 
selfishness OR utter selflessness.

> Please direct flames to email... ( this has strayed a bit too
>much for my liking...)  I'll be happy to continue this outside ASH.

Yeah, that's what I was going to do at first... then I remembered that bit from
your previous post about bestowing or withholding your attentions, depending on
your mood... nice try, P.K., I almost fell for it. ;-)

> Psycho kitten

> 
>-- 

--

Tom Dennis                    |  I looked into the abyss,
dennis@alexia.uiuc.edu        |    and the abyss looked into me--
tadg0614@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu     |      and we both winked.
Xref: sparky alt.suicide.holiday:2300 sci.med:18959