Exposing Angus Crawford and the BBC for accidently promoting an SN source and some other stuff.

[RainAndSadness]

So there has been a new BBC report about SN. Angus Crawford went to Ukraine to confront someone who sells SN legally to their customers. It's the same reporter who confronted the founders and called us pro-suicide in several articles. [1] [2][3][4]

In that article, they do two things. They confirm that "the poison" source has a high purity. They also tell their viewers where to find that poison - in Ukraine. Very important details. So I did a little test to investigate if someone who isn't a member of this forum and has absolutely no idea which source that article is referring to, could find out alone on that report where to buy SN.



So what did I find out? Well. First of all, they mention in that report that Kenneth Law has been arrested for selling the same poison. Okay, let's start there. I do a quick Google search for his name and I found out very quickly what's the name of the substance that he sold to people, thanks to this article here.



Okay. Now I have a name of the substance. If I search the name of the substance in Google with the location of that seller that's been mentioned and confronted in the BBC article, I can find the source. It's the fifth result in Google if you include the ad.



If you use the chemical formula to search for the substance, it's the fourth result in Google, again, including the ad.



I'm not telling you where to buy that substance, that's not the point of this thread and I have censored the name of the substance for that reason. I'm pointing out the hypocrisy here. This journalist has accused us of promoting that substance, which isn't true by the way, but you just wrote an article where you tell us where to find SN basically, like your article was the missing piece to the puzzle and anyone who is suicidal and not a member of Sanctioned Suicide will be able to find the source now that ships to the UK if they apply some deductive skills. No article, not even Tantacrul, has done that so far. You also confirmed a high purity substance with an actual lab. That's very helpful for people who didn't know before if the substance was actually potent enough to serve it's purpose. So you exposed non-SaSu members to a potentially lethal and effective way to kill yourself. And I'm sure all the suicidal people out there will appreciate that you did all the investigative work for them.

I mean, what's even the point of this BBC report? Does it bring us any new valuable information, anything important or helpful, which is kinda important if you do journalism? No, all he does is harassing someone from Ukraine. Oh, and of course, that article also tells us that regulating the substance doesn't work because people can still obtain it from other sources in other countries.. So again, that brings us back to the question if regulating the substance in your country even serves any suicide-preventing purpose or is it simply an easy way to score some political points without actually addressing the reasons why people commit suicide in the first place? The BBC is still focusing too much energy and time on the symptoms of suicide ideation when they should look into the causes of suicide ideation, as I've pointed out in previous thread l. And where could you possibly find out about the reasons why people want to commit suicide? Oh yeah, in this forum, by reading all these posts here, which you didn't do because we're all just pro-suicide here, right.... Again, this forum would be a very useful resource to improve people's lives and prevent suicide if you took us and the people who used it seriously but it's of course easier for Angus Crawford to fly to Ukraine and talk to some random person, instead of holding their own goverment accountable, which doesn't care for its own people. Maybe, that's the problem? Just a guess... But that's how much he cares about suicide, doing useless journalism which doesn't benefit anyone. It's really funny though, they fly to Ukraine to confront someone who abides by local rules, they tell us where to buy his product while doing so, for an audience that's in the UK and therefore has no legislative power in Ukraine to regulate the substance and therefore prevent further sales but instead all the people who had a difficult time finding a source for SN in the UK know where to get it now. Was that the plan? Yikes. This is simply neglecting journalistic standards in exchange for your five minutes of fame and a fancy headline. That's pretty much it and I'm not the only person saying that.

Here is a scientic article outlining the exact same issue and calling out the media for irresponsible reporting when it comes to Kenneth Law and his products.

The Kenneth Law Media Event – A Dangerous Natural Experiment

econtent.hogrefe.com

What are they saying?







Just some important snippets. The article goes on and I recommend reading it to understand why the coverage is problematic from an anti-choice suicide-prevention perspective, which I obviously disagree with but the hypocrisy among all people who have reported on this forum and the substance still exists. These reporters aren't even following their own moral compass. I think the last sentence is especially damning as it clearly highlights that they don't really care about suicide prevention if it conflicts with the potential to produce some nice headlines. I think the bigger picture here is that these journalists are hypocrites. They will point the finger at us and claim we're promoting a substances and pretend a rise in the use of that substance for end-to-life purposes is our fault but is that even true? There is no evidence for that. This forum is relatively unknown and that also applies to the method. I have highlighted in the past that these SN suicides are pretty rare compared to other methods that are used every single day. See these articles here where I have debunked the so-called "concerning suicide trend" around SN.

Debunking the SN hysteria.

The media found another topic to talk about. They have once again covered SN, raising the alarm about a "disturbing trend". There have also been some scientific papers[1][2] reporting about SN suicides. I'm not gonna address the reason why SN is appealing as a suicide method in this thread...

sanctioned-suicide.net

The SN hysteria continues in 2024.

As you know I'm trying to debunk the hysteria surrounding SN and just recently I stumbled upon an interesting article again. So, according to this article, Colorado is trying to ban the sale of concentrated SN. Okay. That state has a population of 5.8 million. What drastic numbers of people...

sanctioned-suicide.net

The amounts of suicide that happen with SN and the constant reporting on SN are out of proportion. And the article I've linked above also mentions that Google trends and the popularity of the substance directly correlates with the reporting.



And trust me, when the entire media apparatus blasts a substance for months non-stop, even mentioning it's name, that has much more of an impact on actual suicide numbers than our forum. And the media didn't just bring SN to the mainstream, they also brought us into the mainstream. We are a niche forum and we used to be relatively unknown until the NYT put us on the frontpage and until Tantacrul made a video about us that's at almost 5.4 million views, which is the reason why there is an entire Wikipedia page dedicated to this forum now. Let's not forget that we have been under constant exposure since 2021. That has increased the reach of this forum, it has increased our registration numbers and it has boosted our membership count to 45k and it has increased the amount of people who have access to ressouces now that helps them make decisions. That wouldn't have happened without the relentless reporting and let's not forget that the NYT actually named this forum, which made it super easy for people to find us and that also contradicts with the journalistic guidelines that's been laid out in this article. The way how our forum has been covered have been constant violations of those ethical guidelines. That's a fact. The NYT has been criticised from mental health experts for blasting this forum. I hate to say it, but if you advertise the forbidden fruit - and that's how they have portrayed this forum for years - that isn't going to scare people away. It will make them come to us - voluntarily, because there is a need for a website like ours. That's another fact. There are people out there who are done being told what they can and can't do with their own lives and in this forum, we have a different approach to this subject. I have said it in 2021 and I will say it again.

Every time you mention that there is a place out there, in the distant corners of the internet, that allows people to talk about deeply personal struggles without censorship and the moralising undertone, a platform that recognises individual autonomy and the right to decide what happens with your own life (which you essentially treat like the forbidden fruit of the 21th century by the way) you will increase the member count of this forum - deal with it.

So what's my take away on this? They're making it worse, as ususal. They made it worse when they exposed our forum to the public, which was supposed to be a niche forum, only to be found if you specifically searched for it. And the exact same thing applies to the coverage on SN. If you blast that substance in the media 24/7, you don't need to be surprised if a lot more people will use it to exercise their right to die but you certainly don't get to blame us for any alleged trends when you give that substance so much attention. And flying from the UK to Ukraine and confronting some random person instead of holding your own goverment accountable for not actually improving people's lives is peak irony. I can't wait for the next ground-breaking report from the BBC when Angus Crawford flies down to Africa to find another poor person minding his own business he can hold responsible for why people in the UK commit suicide...

That will definitely address the real problems of people living in the UK and definitely improve the lives of so many suicidal people. I'm sure they will be so grateful for all the funds going into these visits in the US and Europe for these totally valuable and newsworthy 10 second interviews...

 

[heisenberg]

amen

 

[Naked Weapon]

Your response is more cogent and well-thought-out than anything the BBC just put out. What did they think they were achieving other than pseudo-righteousness? It's irresponsible journalism no matter which way you slice it.

 

[onbekend]

Wow. BBC being worth over 5.7 billion dollars and literally promotes an SN source that they claim to be against. Excellent job as always, BBC... No wonder their abbreviation is associated with porn, fucking posers.

 

[QueerMelancholy]

It always makes me laugh my ass off when they use pictures of the "victims" in these articles only to make people angry. All they want to do is make people angry. More angry. Rage sells. Rage gets clicks. Rage gets more eyes. I just don't get why these people post pictures of the "victims" in these articles other than that. It's such a sad thing to think these people who have made a decision and are gone now are being used as a weapon against other people. These poor people who were probably suffering for a long time alone in the world or in their own minds.

It honestly makes me sick to see it. Families especially don't seem to even care until it's too late and by that time when it is too late they don't know what to do with their grief and their guilt so they lash out against other people. I get so sick of seeing "victims" being paraded around in articles to rage bait and used as a weapon against people when their family, their support system (if they had any), and their local government failed them.

These people need to wake up and look in the goddamned mirror. If you care then care now, don't wait to start caring when you all you have left to care about is memories. And stop using your dead family members as a fucking weapon.

Per usual Rain is doing great work. Love you for that! Keep it up. There's too much ignorance in this shitty world we all live in.

 

[Circles]

Like I said in another thread is that I honestly don't understand their logic. Cause people who ctb by SN are a minority compared to the overall methods used in most suicides. Do they honestly think that just by making SN harder to obtain or stop it completely that suicides in general will stop? Are they going to start banning ropes, sharp objects, cars, trains, bridges or buildings? After all these years about seeing shit like this I am still bewildered.

And ever since the fixthe26 hogwash, I can understand the grief that these families feel but at the end of the day they want to look for a boogeyman to blame cause they can't accept the fact their family members chose to die on their own accord. Even if there were people here who encouraged suicide as they claim, no one here forced them to buy the SN or drink the SN. And instead of blaming others so often maybe they should self reflect that maybe just maybe the families are to blame to some degree. I grew up in a dysfunctional family and it's one of my main reasons why I want to die. Blaming others for how your family may have fucked up along the way and may have been one of the reasons why their family members killed themselves is honestly the height of shame.

 

[Goku Black]

Rain, you just never ever miss when it comes to comprehensive breakdowns around this. I still feel very weirded out when they put up pictures of the "victims" faces on their articles each and every time.

Cause people who ctb by SN are a minority compared to the overall methods used in most suicides. Do they honestly think that just by making SN harder to obtain or stop it completely that suicides in general will stop?

I think it's because it's easier to target since it is a chemical that can be restricted but people are still finding ways around it today compared to other methods.

This is also why I've thought about how many people have found out about sn without finding the forum to begin with and then ctb without ever having made an account here, I seriously wouldn't surprised be that the first time some people have ever heard of SN was from one of these articles, before even coming here.

 

[FluffyCat]

Don't take this the wrong way, I think your response is very well thought out and couldn't agree with it more but do you think it is right to announce to everyone who might visit this site which exact result and source to search for? The censoring does very little to actually hide the result. You could just say that using the keywords from the BBC article makes it very easy to find the source they are talking about.
There is plenty of new people that come here immediately asking for a source.

But yeah super irresponsible article from BBC, wouldn't be surprised if it spikes the number of visitors here again since it makes it easy to find SaSu using some keywords from the article. Not that they'd even need to find this site as the article gives them both the method and a source.

 

[Goku Black]

Not that they'd even need to find this site as the article gives them both the method and a source.

Precisely, it's not even a necessity for anyone to come here before finding out about the method.

 

[Naked Weapon]

Don't take this the wrong way, I think your response is very well thought out and couldn't agree with it more but do you think it is right to announce to everyone who might visit this site which exact result and source to search for? The censoring does very little to actually hide the result. You could just say that using the keywords from the BBC article makes it very easy to find the source they are talking about.
There is plenty of new people that come here immediately asking for a source.

But yeah super irresponsible article from BBC, wouldn't be surprised if it spikes the number of visitors here again since it makes it easy to find SaSu using some keywords from the article. Not that they'd even need to find this site as the article gives them both the method and a source.

To be a pessimist, I can't imagine it will matter whether the source is poorly censored for very much longer. After all this traction it's only a matter of time before it disappears, right? I can't imagine we'll see anything else pop up soon either; it was fun while it lasted but I have a feeling we might be nearing the end of SN being a realistic option.

 

[FluffyCat]

To be a pessimist, I can't imagine it will matter whether the source is poorly censored for very much longer. After all this traction it's only a matter of time before it disappears, right? I can't imagine we'll see anything else pop up soon either; it was fun while it lasted but I have a feeling we might be nearing the end of SN being a realistic option.

Yeah, I'd imagine the site could get shut down after getting this much popularity but since it is based in Ukraine they might just not care or maybe just limit the shipping to Ukraine.

Personally I don't think SN is going anywhere, we just rely on it way too much to cure meat and there are just not many very good alternatives. It might get more restricted but there will be always a way to get it in my opinion. So all of these articles "exposing" SN are not doing much apart from exposing people who might not know about it to a method.

 

[Goku Black]

Personally I don't think SN is going anywhere, we just rely on it way too much to cure meat and there are just not many very good alternatives.

Well, the one that's usually mentioned in fatalities is the "99%" AR/ lab grade sn, that one can be restricted to some degree because of its application in industrial and lab work so chemical suppliers will probably restrict this one to businesses and license holders, the one that's needed to cure meat is at a much lower percentage in purity.

it was fun while it lasted but I have a feeling we might be nearing the end of SN being a realistic option.

I still think that depends what part of the world you are in and how much coverage sn has received and if there are any deaths locally linked to sn for health departments to warrant taking action against it if it was previously freely available to anyone who had enough money to buy it BUT I will say that for the most part, SN being an option will be very limited going forward..

 

[littlelungs]

I just don't get why these people post pictures of the "victims" in these articles other than that. It's such a sad thing to think these people who have made a decision and are gone now are being used as a weapon against other people. These poor people who were probably suffering for a long time alone in the world or in their own minds.

Seriously, though. For me personally, if anybody uses my name or image to blast SS, the right to die, or uses it for any anti-choice scare tactic/talking point, when this was a decision I made for myself and by myself after suffering relentlessly for over 20 years from physical illness and the consequences of severe trauma and trying everything within reach to improve my life circumstances, they may as well just spit on my grave while they're at it. I feel for these poor people so much, and for so many reasons. May they rest in peace.

Every anti-choice argument I've seen has fallacies up the ying yang – two favourites being the slippery slope fallacy and appealing to emotion – because it's all they've really got. Taking away the more peaceful means of ending suffering for those who choose to do so does not actually solve the root problems as to why many people end their own lives in the first place, such as chronic, degenerative and/or incurable illnesses, poor access to quality healthcare and resources (and no, being repeatedly brushed off, treated like a hypochondriac or a malingerer and being left to rot because doctors can't find a blatantly obvious cause for your symptoms, or being dragged to the hospital by the police, being condescended to and drugged by medical personnel until you can't even remember your own name anymore before being released back into the exact same circumstances you came from without any further/consistent help or resources, for instance, doesn't count) and adequate social and financial support. You can spend all the time you want pulling weeds, but unless you get them by the roots, they're just going to keep coming back.

 

[Yuki_03]

FUCK PROLIFERS
PROLIFER QUE VEO
PROLIFER QUE PATEOO

 

[Relic]

I mean, what's even the point of this BBC report? Does it bring us any new valuable information, anything important or helpful, which is kinda important if you do journalism? No, all he does is harassing someone from Ukraine.

You just know that before he goes to sleep, he is laughing at the people for being so stupid and killing themselves. His point is to make a career, nothing else.

It's really funny though, they fly to Ukraine to confront someone who abides by local rules, they tell us where to buy his product while doing so, for an audience that's in the UK and therefore has no legislative power in Ukraine to regulate the substance and therefore prevent further sales but instead all the people who had a difficult time finding a source for SN in the UK know where to get it now.

British government can easily apply pressure on Ukrainian government as one of the main weapons suppliers, if things get that far. He is apparently working on it.

 

[RainAndSadness]

Thanks for the feedback everyone!

Don't take this the wrong way, I think your response is very well thought out and couldn't agree with it more but do you think it is right to announce to everyone who might visit this site which exact result and source to search for? The censoring does very little to actually hide the result. You could just say that using the keywords from the BBC article makes it very easy to find the source they are talking about.
There is plenty of new people that come here immediately asking for a source.

But yeah super irresponsible article from BBC, wouldn't be surprised if it spikes the number of visitors here again since it makes it easy to find SaSu using some keywords from the article. Not that they'd even need to find this site as the article gives them both the method and a source.

Yeah but I've already censored as much as possible. Here is the deal, if I make a claim, I want to back it up with evidence, especially when I'm calling out the media. And that's the difference between me and these people who oppose this forum, they will just make up shit and if you ask for evidence, they refuse to provide anything. I'm not like that. When I make a claim, I will back it up if possible, I've always been transparent like that. I have to, otherwise they will say I'm lying, as they've done again and again. And I'm done being portrayed as a dishonest asshole when I'm the only one who has a spine in this entire conversation.

And this journalist here has written several articles in which he calls us pro-suicide, which is merely slander at this point and he gave someone a platform who sent death threats into our direction. This journalist is a mess and I'm not gonna sit on something like this and ignore it. I just have to call it out.

Also, if someone really finds that source because I've highlighted the problems with that article, that's fine with me. Just take a brief look at the FT26 Twitter account and you'll see they openly talk about that substance, all the time. They name it all the time. The media does too. I already said sourcing isn't the purpose of this thread. If someone finds our forum through an article that talks about this place, they most likely already know the name of that substance and with the help of the BBC, they know where to buy it now.



By the way, best example of misinformation. Associating a "trend", which I already debunked in this forum, without providing evidence and also claiming that we promote methods. Really. Discussing methods isn't the same as promoting it because that would mean there is no criticial debate around them. There is and the negatives of all methods are openly discussed. That's not promotion.

And look. I have repeatedly defended the right to buy that substance because I believe in individual autonomy. I believe in freedom and your right to make your own choices. In my opinion, we don't need a nanny state telling us what we're allowed to purchase and consume. That also applies to SN. So if someone obtains that product because of this thread, I'm not going to lose sleep over it because my words and my actions are consistent. It's the journalists and anti-choicers who believe this product should get banned worldwide, who believe that people who sell this product should face prison and who believe that people who run this forum should face prison too. Their words and their actions don't line up. They've been promoting that product for years now, making it popular and subject of the mainstream discourse, as I've explained above. And the BBC accidently advertising that source is just one of many mistakes they've made along the way. And that's the point of my thread: hypocrisy. There is a very important mismatch between their actions and their words. I'm 100% consistent here, okay. And I've been always consistent in my beliefs. If you're an adult, you have a right to make your own decisions and you have a right to decide for yourself how you plan your life and when you want to end it.

That's the concept of individual autonomy and it seems to me out of all these journalists and anti-SaSu activists, I'm the only who truly believes in it. That's why I have defended the right to transition (trans rights) and the right to have access to abortion (reproductive rights) as human rights because both fundamentally touch individual autonomy and that's one of the most fundamental rights we give to people. And my position on the right to die, your right to decide when you want to check out, is merely an extension of my belief in individual autonomy, it's just another human rights issue that I feel passionate about. I'm not working backwards from my conclusion. I have ideals and principles and I defend them, even when it's controversial because I believe I'm doing the right thing. That's what it means having a spine. You can't say about any of these journalists who have never even explained or justified or in any other way substantiated why we're pro-suicide or why this forum is inherenly harmful or how this forum is actually the problem and not how we as society treat suicidal people. I have laid out my position over and over again, and I think I'm perfectly capable to explain with basic logic and reasoning why I have certain positions not because I'm pro-suicide but because I'm compassionate about human rights.

 

[sanction]

Is this about the MDS source that people have been talking about on this forum in recent months?? Or is it about a different source??

 

[Naked Weapon]

Is this about the MDS source that people have been talking about on this forum in recent months?? Or is it about a different source??

Yes, this is the MDS source. Not surprising given how prominently advertised it was on here.

 

[sanction]

I have a feeling it was this forum that mainly drove this sort of worldwide popularity of SN (for CTB users). Does anyone think so too??

This forum is like a popular underground CTB site/ community

 

[leloyon]

I don't know anything about the guy who they made an article about, however I just want to point out that I found the source and his website, for all intents and purposes, appears to be for chemicals that preserve meats, there is no indication on the site that it is used for suicide.

On top of that, they provide no evidence that he promoted anything on there. Funny how this is a public forum and yet there isn't a single screenshot of these so-called "poison sellers" openly advertising their goods.

Also funny how they have to tell the public constantly about the small forum and advertise it as a place where you can learn how to commit suicide and connect with sellers of such products. If those claims were true, they're doing more advertising for the forum than anyone who has actually participated in the community.

It seems they want to go after anyone selling a legal chemical just because they're hysterical about it. Wait for me to tell them about the terrible shop that sells implements of grizzly murder, dismemberment, weapon-making, and suicide... the DIY store! They sell deadly axes, hammers, screwdrivers! You can buy saws to chop people into bits with! Pipes you can make bombs and guns with! Even gas canisters and fuel! Hell, they have a vast selection of ropes that one can use to hang themselves with! Why won't someone clamp down on these terrible merchants of death?!

 

[Relic]

Personally I don't think SN is going anywhere, we just rely on it way too much to cure meat and there are just not many very good alternatives.

They will get rid of it in food. What will change is the "best before" date and some manufacturing processes. But there are many other industries that cannot exist without it. Countless home chemists will be just SOL without it. Small businesses can currently have it apparently, but more regulations are going to make life difficult not only for them, the regulators will get some real work they are not really looking forward to.

 

[Cakeisalie]

The reporter's approach is absurdly ridiculous and super biased, extreme sensationalism, why didn't he ask about "we know that you sell sodium nitrite, the same "poison" to which it is added in several foods mainly meat", I feel disgusted by this reporter, next time they should ask a car salesman like, "We know that you sell a deadly machine,the cause of thousands of deaths and accidents around the world"pathetic article, and now I'm sure that the rate of CTB will increase, the amount of SN sales also in countries where the sale is easy to acquire, this article had a single purpose to beat the record of imbecile Tantacrul, the "victims" are used only to manipulate the general public and say look this man is indeed a villain.

 

[DarkThoughts]

How are they even allowed to defame him like this?

 

[FluffyCat]

Yeah but I've already censored as much as possible. Here is the deal, if I make a claim, I want to back it up with evidence, especially when I'm calling out the media. And that's the difference between me and these people who oppose this forum, they will just make up shit and if you ask for evidence, they refuse to provide anything. I'm not like that. When I make a claim, I will back it up if possible, I've always been transparent like that. I have to, otherwise they will say I'm lying, as they've done again and again.

Oh, I definitely see your point, backing up your claims with evidence is essential. Unfortunately those opposing this site do not care about evidence or being transparent. No matter what they ignore the voice of the individuals they are trying to "protect". Articles riddled with misinformation about this forum and methods will probably continue being written until there is a change in public sentiment about suicide. It is just a far too easy source of clicks and engagement thanks to being such a controversial topic. Trying to disprove all of the misinformation about the forum that mainstream media regurgitates is a losing battle, they have a reach far too wide compared to this kinda niche forum (not that we shouldn't try, I can't believe you already debunked so much misinformation - it must be tiring).

I truly was of the opinion that we should avoid sharing sources to protect impulsive individuals and to protect the suppliers (obviously MDS being an example of it failing and now probably gaining more attention thanks to the article). I imagine all this media attention and unintentionally selling a product that is also used for suicide could weight down on seller's conscience (maybe it could be even traumatic if there is a specific case connected to the supplier). I don't like the moral implications of unintentionally profiting from suicide even if it is by choice of the buyer.

And I'm done being portrayed as a dishonest asshole when I'm the only one who has a spine in this entire conversation.

I have seen some threads about the opposers of this site trying to dox and harass you. I respect you immensely for standing up for our community even through all the backlash and undeserved hate.

That's the concept of individual autonomy and it seems to me out of all these journalists and anti-SaSu activists, I'm the only who truly believes in it. That's why I have defended the right to transition (trans rights) and the right to have access to abortion (reproductive rights) as human rights because both fundamentally touch individual autonomy and that's one of the most fundamental rights we give to people. And my position on the right to die, your right to decide when you want to check out, is merely an extension of my belief in individual autonomy, it's just another human rights issue that I feel passionate about. I'm not working backwards from my conclusion. I have ideals and principles and I defend them, even when it's controversial because I believe I'm doing the right thing. That's what it means having a spine. You can't say about any of these journalists who have never even explained or justified or in any other way substantiated why we're pro-suicide or why this forum is inherenly harmful or how this forum is actually the problem and not how we as society treat suicidal people. I have laid out my position over and over again, and I think I'm perfectly capable to explain with basic logic and reasoning why I have certain positions not because I'm pro-suicide but because I'm compassionate about human rights.

I find it kinda funny how there is usually a correlation between them disputing the pro-choice discussion here and also being opposed to other pro-choice topics that have something to do with individual autonomy like abortion or LGBT rights.

 

[lifewasawillowtv]

What is actually wrong with these jokers. They think that calling individuals out who sell sources will magically eradicate suicide, it's actually ridiculous at this point. Like you said, all it's done is made it easier for people to find it. It's so ironic how they blame SS but they're actually the ones making it easier for people to find SN sources because people on here are actually quite cagey about it (and for good reason it seems), despite all their talk on us being a forum that "encourages death". One of the main reason I found out about SS in the first place was the stupid BBC report on it- they are the ones leading people here, they are the ones doing what we on the forum are being blamed for doing. But of course people are still going to blame SS, stupid fucking pro-lifers.

 

[Cain.Wong]

BBC just made a new report saying smartisan demands shutting down pro suicide website.

Thanks to BBC, I found here. But man! They are just arrogant and selfish.

 

[lifewasawillowtv]

BBC just made a new report saying smartisan demands shutting down pro suicide website.

Thanks to BBC, I found here. But man! They are just arrogant and selfish.

Oh yeah, cus the Samaritans are soo damn helpful aren't they. Leave you on hold for 45 mins and offer the most fake, useless, unhelpful advice. My god I hate it here.

 

[whywere]

100% agree with you on this and a very good job to boot @RainAndSadness .

Walter

 

[wCvML2]

In the report, they explicitly say that welfare checks are ineffective in suicide prevention, but why not do it anyway to get brownie points... sigh.

David had a 'mixed' reaction to the welfare check. He said: 'I was really pleased that there is now welfare (checks) but it is completely ineffective.

David added that there is advice online about 'how to avoid having the poison confiscated. or being sectioned'.

He said: 'The words to say to police to convince them there is nothing to see here.'

Not only do they say how to find the SN source, but they also mention what to do when the police come...

 

[evenlesshope]

Unbelievable.

They posted on instagram too, but disabled comments.