Method Fastest and most reliable methods?

[Oliver]

Besides being euthanized or shooting yourself, jumping is the fastest and most reliable method, right? (if done from sufficient height of course)

 

[locked*n*loaded]

The lethality % is equivalent to "reliability". I don't necessarily agree with some of the rankings on this chart, but it is what it is. For example, I don't see being hit by a train as producing a 96.2% chance of lethality. If "peacefulness" in death is important to you, take heed of the "Agony" numbers, also. Lower numbers are more peaceful, at least according to this chart.

 

[Ferdinand Bardamu]

The lethality % is equivalent to "reliability". I don't necessarily agree with some of the rankings on this chart, but it is what it is. For example, I don't see being hit by a train as producing a 96.2% chance of lethality. If "peacefulness" in death is important to you, take heed of the "Agony" numbers, also. Lower numbers are more peaceful, at least according to this chart.

View attachment 132750

>Shotgun to head 99.0%
Christ, the survivors...

 

[locked*n*loaded]

>Shotgun to head 99.0%
Christ, the survivors...

Yeah, that might be the worst one to actually survive. Perish the thought.

 

[Unknown21]

If we are talking about reliability and speed, we must mention cyanide.

 

[aaaaaaaaaaaaaaa]

The lethality % is equivalent to "reliability". I don't necessarily agree with some of the rankings on this chart, but it is what it is. For example, I don't see being hit by a train as producing a 96.2% chance of lethality. If "peacefulness" in death is important to you, take heed of the "Agony" numbers, also. Lower numbers are more peaceful, at least according to this chart.

View attachment 132750

Where is this chart from?

 

[Oliver]

Where is this chart from?

Good old "Lostallhope", I think. I don't know if the side still exists.
But I don't agree a 100% with those numbers. Like, if you jump from a sufficient height (150feet+) it's obviously 99% lethal. Hit by train? If the train is going 70+mph and you hit it head first, then it obviously 99% lethal as well. He is taking all kind of factors, which might have made the attempts less lethal into account. How can agony be so high also? People who have survived being shot in the head said that they didn't feel anything. A bullet travels faster than pain signals, so you shouldn't be able to feel being shot in the head. Also there should be very little/no agony involved in jumping from a very tall place, since you would die instantly, so I don't agree completely with the charge, although it's probably a good "general" overview.

 

[locked*n*loaded]

Where is this chart from?

Not 100% sure. It's been circulating around SaSu for quite some time, way over a year ago, and I saved it. Don't quote me on it, but it *may* be out of the PPH. I'm not sure and can't check, as I lost my PPH copy due to a computer crash.

 

[DreamEnd]

Not 100% sure. It's been circulating around SaSu for quite some time, way over a year ago, and I saved it. Don't quote me on it, but it *may* be out of the PPH. I'm not sure and can't check, as I lost my PPH copy due to a computer crash.

No it's from lostallhope.com

 

[locked*n*loaded]

Where is this chart from?

No it's from lostallhope.com

There ya go.

 

[_Gollum_]

Good old "Lostallhope", I think. I don't know if the side still exists.
But I don't agree a 100% with those numbers. Like, if you jump from a sufficient height (150feet+) it's obviously 99% lethal. Hit by train? If the train is going 70+mph and you hit it head first, then it obviously 99% lethal as well. He is taking all kind of factors, which might have made the attempts less lethal into account. How can agony be so high also? People who have survived being shot in the head said that they didn't feel anything. A bullet travels faster than pain signals, so you shouldn't be able to feel being shot in the head. Also there should be very little/no agony involved in jumping from a very tall place, since you would die instantly, so I don't agree completely with the charge, although it's probably a good "general" overview.

I think the site's down but you can still browse it via web archive. I'm also not sure where he's getting these figures from, some of them seem questionable (or just need to be described more).