Should Suicide be Illegal?

[SuperBowser]

This is what i have been trying to say the whole time except for the last statement. those who try to commit suicide aren't punished just watched and given help until they vome out of depression

correct me if i'm wrong (i don't do law!), but suicide is not illegal in the U.K., while assisting someone is. this does not affect the care of someone who is suicidal.

 

[cF=)]

Why do we outlaw theft? It comes back to morality. Law is ultimately based off of a society's moral code.

Theft doesn't have to be determined morally wrong in order to be illegal, it already goes over someone's possible limit of action. You don't need morals, in any time, anywhere.

 

[yossarian22]

Theft doesn't have to be determined morally wrong in order to be illegal, it already goes over someone's possible limit of action. You don't need morals, in any time, anywhere.

And what is wrong with going over someone's limit of action?
You are going to degrade into using 'good' and 'bad' at some point or the other. And hence your system has morality. It might not be the absolute morality of theism, it will probably be a form of moral relativism or the other, but it is still a moral system.

 

[cF=)]

And what is wrong with going over someone's limit of action?
You are going to degrade into using 'good' and 'bad' at some point or the other. And hence your system has morality. It might not be the absolute morality of theism, it will probably be a form of moral relativism or the other, but it is still a moral system.

Are you now supporting that when we chose, as an evolved society, to follow the chart of human rights, we we're wrong? I'm simply bringing an intelligent interpretation of some of these rights we decided to allow each others. You are also spreading the same arguments you're shooting right and left in about every threads, like if every moral systems was equal to each others.

 

[yossarian22]

Are you now supporting that when we chose, as an evolved society, to follow the chart of human rights, we we're wrong? I'm simply bringing an intelligent interpretation of some of these rights we decided to allow each others. You are also spreading the same arguments you're shooting right and left in about every threads, like if every moral systems was equal to each others.

You missed the major thrust of my post. You cannot reject morality yet simultaneously tell me that I ought to do (or not do) something.

And I am not suggesting that all moral systems equal. I am saying that the moral code you subscribe to is irrelevant.

 

[ComradeSAL]

So, where do you draw the line? Assisted suicide free from the nasty strings of reality is basically giving a guy a gun knowing full well that he is going to blow his head off. How can we differentiate that from giving a guy a gun with malicious intent, knowing full well that he is mentally unstable and cannot make rational decisions?

The thing is, we can't. Barring some extreme and utterly rare mountain of circumstantial evidence, there is no way to prove that someone assisted suicide out of malicious intent.

So either assisting suicides should be legal or it should not be legal. In my opinion they should be legal because in terms of moral gray areas it should be up to the individual, not the government, to decide. Again, this is why abortion and even divorce are legal.

 

[IWontGetOverTheDam]

Okay. I just shot myself in the head. Now what. Will the police take me to jail, or will I be fined? Making suicide illegal is ridiculous. If the "crime" is successful, then what? I'm dead. Will they fine my family? If I fail, do I get a punishment? What are the terms of this proposed law?

 

[Taymond]

Laws regarding suicide don't exist to punish the offender. Laws regarding ANYTHING, in fact, do not exist to punish the defender, they exist to protect the people they affect, in this case, the individual considering suicide.

Plenty of people who consider suicide, or even attempt suicide, later regret their decisions. Impulse suicides DO happen, or at least impulse suicide attempts. People who want to kill themselves often feel alone and scared and don't know what to do. If given the opportunity to talk about how they feel with the people they care about, if given the opportunity to understand that other people are around who want to help them, those people may change their minds. They may realize they're not as alone as they thought. To claim that all suicides are not only premeditated, but also premeditated enough so as to assure there would not be regret, is absurd.

People need to learn that laws do not STOP actions, they dissuade people from doing those actions. People who really want to do something will do it, regardless of legislature. That's why there are criminals. People who really want to kill or to **** or to do illegal drugs or to commit suicide WILL do those things. People who have given enough time to considering suicide to decide that they really want to commit suicide will do so. Even if those people are stopped and given help and counseling, if they really want to commit suicide, and they still want to even with the help others have to offer, they will still do so.

Legislature to help people who can be helped and might decide they prefer life will not affect people who really, truly want to die. If counseling changes their minds, then they decided that they want to live instead. No one can decide for them. All the counseling in the world can't change the mind of someone who doesn't WANT to change their mind. No one can MAKE a person decide not to commit suicide.

Suicide is only a token crime, since dissuading suicide and offering help to people considering suicide is so important. Suicide is not punished.


@cF=), I think you're making definitions about what morality is that eventually circle around on themselves. Determination of what rights a person has is the determination of what they are and are not allowed to do, what they "should" and "should not" do, related to the majority's morality. Laws change because people change and times change, and majority morality changes, as well.

Morality is just a personal decision about right and wrong, and laws and customs reflect what the majority believes to be right or wrong. You want morality to mean "religious morality," but it doesn't. Morality is the only thing that influences legislature. What the majority believes to be right is legal, and what the majority believes to be wrong is illegal.

 

[M.K]

If you have to make the decision in life to keep living or commit suicide, and you choose the latter, something must be going terribly wrong in your life that you feel it's better to be dead. Now, if you try to commit suicide and fail, I don't think it would help much that you could be prosecuted for your actions. The authorities should have the decency to consider the circumstances before deciding to take action or not. If prosecution leads to deeper depression in an individual, for example, it also leads to a heightened risk of another suicidal attempt. If the reason for prosecution is to steer someone in the right direction, than for sucide, I can only see it bringing even more anguish and reason to a suicidal individual.

 

[Knight-errant]

People who try to commit suicide aren't thinking clearly. They need psychological help to recover. Should people be stopped? Probably. Think about it: if someone was slipping out of control to a pit of lava, would you save their life? Yes. So if someone is out of control mentally and is going to take their own life should you stop them? Yes.

In both cases they're slipping towards death, the only difference between the two is one's physical and one's mental.

 

[cF=)]

@cF=), I think you're making definitions about what morality is that eventually circle around on themselves. Determination of what rights a person has is the determination of what they are and are not allowed to do, what they "should" and "should not" do, related to the majority's morality.

And you are wrong. On what do we base our laws? They are written and adapted from the chart of basic human rights. This, is the moral code we should follow.

People who try to commit suicide aren't thinking clearly. They need psychological help to recover. Should people be stopped? Probably. Think about it: if someone was slipping out of control to a pit of lava, would you save their life? Yes. So if someone is out of control mentally and is going to take their own life should you stop them? Yes.

In both cases they're slipping towards death, the only difference between the two is one's physical and one's mental.

I don't really know what the main topic when this thread's been created. Do we debate illegal suicide or illegal assisted suicide?

 

[Caturdayz]

I was just thinking about that self-immolation incident back in 2001 at Tiananmen Square... Liu Bao-Rong and Liu Yung-fang both got life sentences for trying to kill themselves... Personally I fail to see the logic in that.

 

[AgGun]

I think that it's not right because if your family is close (as in cares about you) you hurt them to by commiting suicide but it shouldent be illegal but also not included period in the laws, its more a personal desicion, i do think that mass suicides in cults should be illegal if anyone in the cult objects they should be allowed out. so to get back on topic you shouldnt have anything against you or for you on commiting suicide but also you will have the people you leave behind (if any) that will be depressed.

 

[The Executive]

I was just thinking about that self-immolation incident back in 2001 at Tiananmen Square... Liu Bao-Rong and Liu Yung-fang both got life sentences for trying to kill themselves... Personally I fail to see the logic in that.

There is a logic.

A. Jail sentences serve as punishments for their recipients. Life sentences are the epitome.

B. The Chinese government had been attempting to exterminate the Falun Gong sect for a long time prior to this incident, and these two men were the best candidates to be made examples of.

What better way, then, to imprison for life two nationally publicized members of the Falun Gong sect who were set on dying in the first place? Personally, I can't think of a way the Chinese government could have done this that would have better suited their agenda. Regardless of opinion on the matter, it makes perfect sense to them.

Reason for edit: removed comma splice.

 

[Taymond]

And you are wrong. On what do we base our laws? They are written and adapted from the chart of basic human rights. This, is the moral code we should follow.

And how do we decide what those human rights are? You have this idea that this glowing list of rights simple exists somewhere, and is readily available to us. Where is it? What's it say? If such a chart exists, why do laws change? Why are people granted additional rights? Why did we get it wrong in the first place?

The majority defines that list, it doesn't exist separate and secure. When slavery was believed to be moral, when it was believed that slaves didn't have rights, the laws reflected that. When it was believed that women didn't have the right to vote, the laws reflected that. Over time, those things changed because popular opinion on the matter changed. People started to think women could vote, that they had that right.

Even if such a shining, immutable list of human rights exist, humans don't have to acknowledge it. Clearly, we didn't always. We decided who had rights and who didn't, arbitrarily. Our laws reflected popular opinion, not what that shining, immutable list of human rights said.

 

[The Executive]

And how do we decide what those human rights are? You have this idea that this glowing list of rights simple exists somewhere, and is readily available to us. Where is it? What's it say? If such a chart exists, why do laws change? Why are people granted additional rights? Why did we get it wrong in the first place?

The majority defines that list, it doesn't exist separate and secure. When slavery was believed to be moral, when it was believed that slaves didn't have rights, the laws reflected that. When it was believed that women didn't have the right to vote, the laws reflected that. Over time, those things changed because popular opinion on the matter changed. People started to think women could vote, that they had that right.

Even if such a shining, immutable list of human rights exist, humans don't have to acknowledge it. Clearly, we didn't always. We decided who had rights and who didn't, arbitrarily. Our laws reflected popular opinion, not what that shining, immutable list of human rights said.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say he's cF=)'s probably referring to the Ten Commandments. If you believe the Bible is truth, as I do, you believe that two copies of these moral codes were written in stone on Mount Sinai; the first was destroyed by Moses shortly after conception and the second copy resides inside the Ark of the Covenant. They are not, nor were they ever shining, but they are certainly immutable. They do not necessarily define 'human rights', but they are the blueprint upon which our justice system was originally founded.

 

[Caturdayz]

The 2001 incident wasn't really linked to Falun Gong. China is a nation of oppressive fascist deceitful capitalists.

 

[The Executive]

The 2001 incident wasn't really linked to Falun Gong. China is a nation of oppressive fascist deceitful capitalists.

Fascism =/= capitalism, but yeah, you're right. They're a bunch of punks (1 billion and counting). Pray to God (or his absence, if you prefer) they never go to war with America, because it would be very, very ugly.

 

[Caturdayz]

I am sure it would be ugly, it however will not happen. Neither want to go to war with the other.

Oh and just throwing this in here: Boycott Beijing Olympics

 

[HyugaRicdeau]

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say he's cF=)'s probably referring to the Ten Commandments. If you believe the Bible is truth, as I do, you believe that two copies of these moral codes were written in stone on Mount Sinai; the first was destroyed by Moses shortly after conception and the second copy resides inside the Ark of the Covenant. They are not, nor were they ever shining, but they are certainly immutable. They do not necessarily define 'human rights', but they are the blueprint upon which our justice system was originally founded.

The Founding Fathers were mostly Deists, but not necessarily Christians. Thomas Jefferson himself was of the opinion that the Christ story would eventually go the way of Greek Myths. So I think it's a mischaracterization to say the Ten Commandments (which were never called that in the Bible, and Jesus only exhorts you to follow some of them...so much for immutability) are the blueprint of our justice system. I don't want to get into this discussion because it's only tangentially related to the topic at hand but I felt the need to point this out.

Anyway, laws exist to protect the rights of others guaranteed in the Constitution or whatever document of your country.

For suicide to be illegal, the act has to violate someone else's rights. So unless you think other people have the right to your life, making suicide illegal makes no sense.

 

[The Executive]

"For suicide to be illegal, the act has to violate someone else's rights. So unless you think other people have the right to your life, making suicide illegal makes no sense."

If you are in any way responsible for someone else's well-being (i.e. a parent/guardian or caretaker), your death does affect your charge.

 

[Crimson King]

You guys are aware suicide IS illegal already, right?

But, I think you do have a right to your own life. Suicide is a choice and quite a grave one. But, to tell someone they have no right to kill themselves, well you are saying they have no ownership of their own life.

 

[The Executive]

Knew the first point, agree with the second.

 

[Firus]

I do not think suicide should be illegal. It is your life, after all; if you've put thought into it, if you are in pain, why should the government lock you up and tell you you're not allowed to control your own life?

I would never think of committing suicide, but it disturbs me to think that the government would step in and tell you that your life is not yours to end. I think it is wrong (unless there's an extreme situation) to commit suicide, but then why is it the government's job to decide that you should live?

Ultimately, stopping suicide is just a bad idea all over. As Quilt pointed out, once the fact that you tried to commit suicide becomes public, you'll have trouble finding a job and most people will think of you as crazy. Not to mention that for the rest of your life, you'll be reminded of the fact that you tried to commit suicide, that a good portion of your life was ruined because of it, and then you'll want to commit suicide all over again, just because you tried and failed before. There may be some people that kill themselves on impulse, that just had a really bad day, and given another day or some professional help, it all would've gone away. But for those that have put thought into this, that have good reason to do it...you'll only make their life worse.

As long as a person does it privately and does not get anyone else involved, they should have the option to commit suicide.

 

[The Executive]

I do not think suicide should be illegal.

It's illegal on principle. I doubt anyone who's actually committed suicide has ever been charged; it's a waste of time and money to do so. If we were to just turn a blind eye to it, things would be bad. Imagine if suicide was an accepted part of your culture, like in Japan. It's a very real problem for them, because even if you think offing yourself when the going gets tough is "honorable" in today's global market that just translates to loss of productivity for your country. Their suicide rates are astonishingly high, and it's affecting their economy.

 

[Firus]

It's illegal on principle. I doubt anyone who's actually committed suicide has ever been charged; it's a waste of time and money to do so. If we were to just turn a blind eye to it, things would be bad. Imagine if suicide was an accepted part of your culture, like in Japan. It's a very real problem for them, because even if you think offing yourself when the going gets tough is "honorable" in today's global market that just translates to loss of productivity for your country. Their suicide rates are astonishingly high, and it's affecting their economy.

You're right that if we turn a blind eye to it and accept it, the suicide rates will rise, and that would be a bad thing. I don't think it should be accepted if it were to be legalized, but I guess that eventually it probably would be.

It's mostly the principle of the thing, to me; the fact that some people deem it to be one of the worst crimes, and that making it illegal is basically telling people they're not allowed to take their life if they wish. Realistically, it has to be illegal though, you're right.

 

[Pluvia's other account]

Bump, this thread seems to be the one for suicide in general, rather than just assisted suicide like the other one.

Should it be illegal? Should it be legal? Ultimately, would it make any difference?

When you want to kill yourself, none of that stuff goes through your mind. You couldn't care less about any of that. Being illegal isn't going to stop anybody.

I think it's legal over here btw.

 

[Firus]

Bump, this thread seems to be the one for suicide in general, rather than just assisted suicide like the other one.

Should it be illegal? Should it be legal? Ultimately, would it make any difference?

When you want to kill yourself, none of that stuff goes through your mind. You couldn't care less about any of that. Being illegal isn't going to stop anybody.

I think it's legal over here btw.

Ultimately, it does. As The Executive pointed out, Japan has not only legalized suicide but accepted it, and it's affecting their economy. Not that people wouldn't commit suicide either way, but if you didn't have to be as secretive about it or if, after a while of being legal, it becomes accepted, you're a lot more likely to commit it. You might even feel encouraged to commit suicide. Being illegal will stop people. And even if it doesn't stop the person, the fact that other people are urged to stop someone from taking their life increases the odds that they won't be able to go through with it.

If you've REALLY made up your mind about committing suicide, you think it's the best option, then the legality isn't going to stop you. You just have to make sure you can complete it. But in certain cases, it can stop you.

 

[M.K]

Illegality, in my opinion, should be based upon the harm that one can do to the people around him or her instead of to themselves. Sure, it is illegal to smoke crack cocaine, but where the cops bust you is when you start to sell/trade it to others, resulting in the indirect harm of the receiver. Suicide is taking matters into your own hands, and if you are EVEN contemplating commiting suicide, there must be some major things wrong in your life that the legal system will only add to. Basically, if you fail to successfully kill yourself in a suicide attempt, there shouldn't be another horrible consequence waiting for you on the other side of recovery. You should receive therapy and understanding, not jail time and punishment.

 

[Firus]

Illegality, in my opinion, should be based upon the harm that one can do to the people around him or her instead of to themselves. Sure, it is illegal to smoke crack cocaine, but where the cops bust you is when you start to sell/trade it to others, resulting in the indirect harm of the receiver. Suicide is taking matters into your own hands, and if you are EVEN contemplating commiting suicide, there must be some major things wrong in your life that the legal system will only add to. Basically, if you fail to successfully kill yourself in a suicide attempt, there shouldn't be another horrible consequence waiting for you on the other side of recovery. You should receive therapy and understanding, not jail time and punishment.

Yeah, as long as you're not making a public display and jumping off of a building or doing a murder-suicide, it's not affecting anyone else so it's not really bad for anyone except yourself, which I think should be in your control.

And I also agree on punishment. If you fail to commit suicide, not only do you have the pain of what pushed you to suicide, but the fact that you failed and god knows where that's going to land you with finding a job, etc. The last thing you need at that point is to be punished even more.

Unfortunately, as much as I'd like suicide to be completely legal and socially acceptable (to some extent) so if you fail you're not looked down upon the rest of your life, it doesn't work out realistically.

 

[Pluvia's other account]

But in certain cases, it can stop you.

I actually think it would have the opposite effect, making people more determined that everything works perfectly.

Unfortunately, as much as I'd like suicide to be completely legal and socially acceptable (to some extent) so if you fail you're not looked down upon the rest of your life, it doesn't work out realistically.

I don't think it should be accepted like "Hey it's ok, go ahead", I think it should be accepted more like "Hey, you're not alone, it's ok to talk to someone about it", like it is here.

 

[Tim_The_Enchanter]

I believe that suicide should always be an option that a person should be allowed to make if they so choose. If said person is unable to kill them self due to some physical disability, then assisted suicide should be an option. However, I do think the procedure for assisted suicide should be monitored and regulated to avoid allowing a murderer to claim assisting in the deceased's elected suicide.

 

[AltF4]

In principle, I don't have any issues with someone being allowed to kill themselves. They ought to have the freedom to do it.


That being said, there are some serious logistical issues that have to be considered with allowing suicide. There are lots of loopholes that one can go through that could allow someone to get away with murder. The purpose for outlawing suicide is not so much as to prevent people from killing themselves, but rather to close some of these loopholes.

If suicide were legal, then you would be able to assist someone in it. So then in order to get away with murder, all you need is to get the victim to sign a paper saying that they wanted to die and are having you do it. Then you kill them. You could either threaten the person into signing the paper, or just trick them.

Plus, what about changing minds? What if someone really does want to commit suicide but changes their mind at the last second? What then happens to the assistant who goes ahead with the suicide anyway. Is he a murderer? What if the person told the assistant to go ahead with it, even if he changes his mind at the last moment? There's too many issues.


The easiest line of action is to outlaw suicide. Obviously you're free to do it, no matter what the law is. But now we don't have any silly issues with assisting and such.

 

[Firus]

I don't think it should be accepted like "Hey it's ok, go ahead", I think it should be accepted more like "Hey, you're not alone, it's ok to talk to someone about it", like it is here.

Yeah, that's how I would want it. Not encouraged, like if the going gets tough, "Oh, just commit suicide!" is offered as advice. Just accepted enough so people won't think you're crazy and never give you a job because you tried. Because that's unfair. If you tried committing suicide, you clearly have a lot of pain and/or problems in your life, so you shouldn't pile something else upon that if they fail.

In principle, I don't have any issues with someone being allowed to kill themselves. They ought to have the freedom to do it.

That being said, there are some serious logistical issues that have to be considered with allowing suicide. There are lots of loopholes that one can go through that could allow someone to get away with murder. The purpose for outlawing suicide is not so much as to prevent people from killing themselves, but rather to close some of these loopholes.

If suicide were legal, then you would be able to assist someone in it. So then in order to get away with murder, all you need is to get the victim to sign a paper saying that they wanted to die and are having you do it. Then you kill them. You could either threaten the person into signing the paper, or just trick them.

Plus, what about changing minds? What if someone really does want to commit suicide but changes their mind at the last second? What then happens to the assistant who goes ahead with the suicide anyway. Is he a murderer? What if the person told the assistant to go ahead with it, even if he changes his mind at the last moment? There's too many issues.


The easiest line of action is to outlaw suicide. Obviously you're free to do it, no matter what the law is. But now we don't have any silly issues with assisting and such.

You bring up a lot of good points. I didn't even think about loopholes and such. So yeah, in just about every way there is, it's senseless to legalize suicide. You get rid of loopholes if you outlaw it, and if it were socially acceptable, then it could hurt the economy and too many people would commit it because it would be as big of a decision as quitting a job. It can be serious sometimes, but if you really aren't happy at the moment you'll be very inclined to do it.

To legalize suicide would just be too problematic. But I still think that it shouldn't be considered a horrible crime--it came up in a conversation with my friend and he thought it was a really bad crime. It's your life. How can you say that it's one of the worst crimes there is?

 

[DuskMarthWater]

Hmmm...I was rather confused on this topic for a minute. Then I read AltF4's post. That cleared it all up. I was going to say that making it illegal would make no sense, because if you commit suicide, you're dead and the law does not apply to you, being something for living people only. But then...if you didn't make it illegal, there are the loopholes which AltF4 just described, and I agree with his reasoning on it. So...I guess in a logistical sense, making suicide illegal is a smart thing. But in the sense of it's a law and it will bring you consequences if you break it, well...do I even have to explain that part? It sounds more like a fail-safe type law then one to prevent you from actually committing suicide.

The verdict of this post, then, is that suicide should be illegal. Not for the victim's own benefit, obviously, but to prevent other crimes from occuring. You still have your own choice to do it which is the cool thing of life. You get to choose all your decisions, though I would not recommend choosing suicide EVER.

And I don't think your friend was referring to suicide being a horrible crime in the physical sense. That's probably something tied in to his religious beliefs.

 

[Firus]

And I don't think your friend was referring to suicide being a horrible crime in the physical sense. That's probably something tied in to his religious beliefs.

What do you mean "in the physical sense"?

It was like a "how severe is a certain crime" type of thing and he thought it was one of the most severe. Perhaps it is his religious beliefs, but still--to rate it as a more severe crime is insane, in my opinion.

 

[Stroupes]

"Should Suicide be Illegal?"

What are they going to do, arrest your corpse?

 

[marthanoob]

Freedom to do what one will with oneself takes precedence over rationale.

 

[Tim_The_Enchanter]

"Should Suicide be Illegal?"

What are they going to do, arrest your corpse?

Are we making jokes now? Maybe we should give the death penalty to people who attempt suicide.

 

[cF=)]

Are we making jokes now? Maybe we should give the death penalty to people who attempt suicide.

That's SO counter-productive