Why isn't a suicide machine offered as a public service?

[Lil Frier]

Suicide is legal in many countries.

While this thread doesn't mention a specific country or region, I assume the person DOES mean his location, which I am going to guess is the United States. If that is correct, then the legislation on the matter in foreign lands is irrelevant. If the author means his question to be in a general sense (as in internationally), then it's whatever, and the answer becomes a simple "it is, in some places."

 

[Mursilis]

It strikes me as odd that we have an overpopulation problem

It strikes me as odd you believe myths.

 

[sm625]

The human race would never have gotten this far if people didnt choose to trudge onward even despite terrible pain and suffering. Any country that did offer such a death machine would be a country in need of an invasion to destroy it. The immorality of it would be beyond measure. Dont forget you also destroy a major source of empathy and motivation to help people. Our culture is undergoing a constant attack on empathy. It is being engineered out of the species. That is why questions like this are even being asked. 50 years ago, no one would even ask such a question, because everyone knew the answer back then.

 

[Juddog]

The human race would never have gotten this far if people didnt choose to trudge onward even despite terrible pain and suffering. Any country that did offer such a death machine would be a country in need of an invasion to destroy it. The immorality of it would be beyond measure. Dont forget you also destroy a major source of empathy and motivation to help people. Our culture is undergoing a constant attack on empathy. It is being engineered out of the species. That is why questions like this are even being asked. 50 years ago, no one would even ask such a question, because everyone knew the answer back then.

This is a joke answer right? Invading a country to destroy a suicide machine? There is no way you can be serious...

 

[Gunslinger08]

I support euthanasia for incurable physical conditions. It is my belief that all mental disorders can be treated in some way, so I think that you can't be "of sound mind" and choose to end your own life until you are enduring considerable physical suffering that will not be relieved until death.

As stated earlier, we do not have an overpopulation problem. That is a myth - at least for now. With birth rates dropping considerably in developed nations and the rapid industrialization of the 3rd world, I wouldn't be surprised if we never reach a point of overpopulation. This decrease in birth rate will ultimately affect us in other negative ways, though.

As far as abortion, it's not something that I can support. I'm sure my opinions have been altered by the general societal stigma around it, but it just feels like the wrong thing to do - not for any particular religious reasons.

 

[smackababy]

It strikes me as odd you believe myths.

You believe overpopulation is a myth? While we aren't really experiencing it as a problem now, the life expectancy for humans has increased vastly; much past the point of being able to contribute to society.

Overpopulation will be what collapses modern society. Eventually, we will have the technology to cure most natural causes of death and prolong human life to the point we don't have enough room or food.

 

[BudAshes]

It strikes me as odd you believe myths.

The universe is huge, where we live isn't. Food is the least of our worries. We don't have problems making enough food. The issue is standard of living. Technology and social media has spread our life style and now billions of people are finding out what they've been missing. On top of this need for resources, we are polluting like crazy and we are just starting to get a glimpse of the damage invasive species can create.

The heart of the matter is that modern human society is a natural disaster. We are of nature and we are causing mass species extinction, chemical changes in the air and water, and mass changes to the surface of the planet. Like any disaster the earth, and the life on it, will adapt. That which is most capable of surviving the man kind disaster will survive, and those that aren't will die off. Unfortunately I doubt it will be in ways that are pleasant to most of humanity. Mosquitoes, ticks, rats and cockroaches all seem to flourish around modern industrial society, meanwhile things like Pandas, Tigers, Elephants or Polar Bears will disappear like endless species before them.

 

[OverVolt]

Because people can bounce back from hardship.

 

[Juddog]

Because people can bounce back from hardship.

You can't bounce back from a terminal illness.

 

[smackababy]

You can't bounce back from a terminal illness.

Euthanasia is starting to become legal in more states I believe. Now, this isn't a machine you pop in a quarter, but we are getting there.

 

[shortylickens]

I disagree. The option should be available to anyone of sound mind whether they have a terminal illness or not.

For example, if you lost both of your arms in a freak washing machine explosion you might feel that your quality of life was too low to want to continue living even if armlessness is not a terminal condition.

If I lost my sight or hearing I might feel that way. It's not just "depression" when there is no way to ever hear music again.

Couldnt the argument be made that anyone who wants to kill themselves be of not sound mind.

 

[sm625]

This is a joke answer right? Invading a country to destroy a suicide machine? There is no way you can be serious...

My point is that any state that would codify such a thing would be a grossly immoral and corrupt state. And such a corrupt state would invariably be committing dozens of acts the US would consider a threat to its security. Such a state would get wiped off the map. Imagine a country where they ate their own babies. It's about that same level of moral depravity. Some people obviously cannot see that, perhaps due to the moral depravity that's been programmed into them.... But this is serious stuff. Wars have been fought for much much less I can assure you of that.

 

[Juddog]

My point is that any state that would codify such a thing would be a grossly immoral and corrupt state. And such a corrupt state would invariably be committing dozens of acts the US would consider a threat to its security. Such a state would get wiped off the map. Imagine a country where they ate their own babies. It's about that same level of moral depravity. Some people obviously cannot see that, perhaps due to the moral depravity that's been programmed into them.... But this is serious stuff. Wars have been fought for much much less I can assure you of that.

Wow you're seriously delusional. There is no way the US, or any other country, would invade another country because they offered a suicide service, and such a country wouldn't offer any kind of thread to the security of the US.

 

[nickbits]

I would welcome such a machine...

 

[moonbogg]

Easy to frown on such a device until its you or your loved ones who are suffering, just waiting for the end.

 

[piasabird]

Suicide is still considered murder in some states. The last doctor that was helping people commit suicide, went to jail for doing so. So is this a pro murder agenda?

I guess it is how you look at it.

We don't really have an overpopulation problem. Just move to Alaska.

 

[piasabird]

So what we need to do is have a suicide credit on our taxes. You commit suicide and your survivors get to collect the credit when they file taxes. If we could encourage old people to kill themselves they could leave more of their money for their children. Just think of the health care savings.

Here we go with the slippery slope thing again. So what happens if the government says everyone must commit suicide at age 65? Making suicide legal is one step away from making it mandatory.

Remember the movie Soylent Green or whatever the movie was called? You need to go watch that.

http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/soylent-green/

Be careful what you ask for.

 

[Eureka]

Suicide is always an option for someone who is dedicated enough to do it. Relatively painless suicide is an option for most.

However, the idea of producing such a machine is, in itself, promoting that suicide is an acceptable practice. It should not be. There are people who are depressed in their current situation, and these machines would just give them an easy way out. I'm sure we all know someone who at some point could have been depressed enough to do it, had there been an 'easy' option. But it is not an option to be taken lightly.

We put enough stigma and safeguards into suicide that someone who has to do it must think things through before they commit. And most people, when faced with that thought processes, will back away. Suicide should not be promoted in any way, as we should make every person feel like they have a chance at getting better, rather than pushing them to an easy death. For someone who is of sound body but unsound mind, there is always a chance of getting better.

Euthanasia is an entirely different topic.

 

[OverVolt]

You believe overpopulation is a myth? While we aren't really experiencing it as a problem now, the life expectancy for humans has increased vastly; much past the point of being able to contribute to society.

Overpopulation will be what collapses modern society. Eventually, we will have the technology to cure most natural causes of death and prolong human life to the point we don't have enough room or food.

There is still plenty of efficiency to be squeezed.

 

[Eureka]

You believe overpopulation is a myth? While we aren't really experiencing it as a problem now, the life expectancy for humans has increased vastly; much past the point of being able to contribute to society.

Overpopulation will be what collapses modern society. Eventually, we will have the technology to cure most natural causes of death and prolong human life to the point we don't have enough room or food.

Life expectancy is also a myth. People lived well into the 60s for many centuries... however the average is skewed when you take into account infant and young mortality. If you didn't die young, you could well live to the same age people live now.

Overpopulation is a misnomer for a number of other issues. In terms of bulk food production, we already have enough to feed the world's population. It's distribution and climate that's affecting population issues. Waste is also another big issue... it's not just people but how much waste we create per person. Generally education and wealth distribution results in lower population growth as well. We'll need to fix those long before we need to fix actual overpopulation.

 

[piasabird]

In some countries they have moved to fish farming because it consumes fewer resources than farming or livestock. South Korea and other countries are trying this. Even China is into this. One fish they started farming in South Korea is the King Flounder. They are shipping it to the southern USA live for a profit.

If people can afford to live in houses that are way too large, then we are not overpopulated. We just need to manage our resources better.

More advanced societies, as a norm have a lower population growth. In some areas population growth is shrinking.

Another thing they do in more heavily populated areas is to promote and organize high rise apartments any where from 3 to 30 stories or so. Otherwise you just get urban sprawl and slums. When the government and the people and the construction companies cooperate in land development the results can be favorable and more land can be saved for farming. Cities can actually be planned.

In Seoul they developed the are along the river that flows through the city by widening the river area and building retaining walls and making it like a park and recreation area. It was a major construction project for the common good.

 

[smackababy]

Suicide is still considered murder in some states. The last doctor that was helping people commit suicide, went to jail for doing so. So is this a pro murder agenda?

I guess it is how you look at it.

We don't really have an overpopulation problem. Just move to Alaska.

If you're referring to Kevorkian, he went to jail for actually administering the fatal doses, not the assisted suicides he performed. His practice claimed he was merely setting up the patients with the ability to administer a fatal dose of morphine or some other method to commit suicide. However, one of his sessions were video taped and he himself administered the lethal dose, not the patient. That was enough cause for him to be jailed for manslaughter I believe. He lost his license to practice medicine and went to prison for awhile. He's out now. Don't know if he is still killing people, but last I heard, he was still advocating it. I can't think of any more recent cases off hand. You might be talking about a different case.

 

[disappoint]

"Why isn't a suicide machine offered as a public service?"

The short answer is because it is destructive. The long answer is here: http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2351923

 

[disappoint]

The human race would never have gotten this far if people didnt choose to trudge onward even despite terrible pain and suffering. Any country that did offer such a death machine would be a country in need of an invasion to destroy it. The immorality of it would be beyond measure. Dont forget you also destroy a major source of empathy and motivation to help people. Our culture is undergoing a constant attack on empathy. It is being engineered out of the species. That is why questions like this are even being asked. 50 years ago, no one would even ask such a question, because everyone knew the answer back then.

How right you are.

This is a joke answer right? Invading a country to destroy a suicide machine? There is no way you can be serious...

I don't think he is joking at all. But I can see why it would seem that way to you. I can see a lot of things very clearly now. Or maybe it just seems that way because the ideas are my own. Funny how things work out that way.

 

[sm625]

I've been reading some things on this subject that make me want to clarify my position. I fully support a family being allowed uninhibited freedom to make and carry out these choices, with their family doctor. But the State should not be involved.