Method Maybe SN instead of shotgun?

[Danby]

I discovered that I can get SN from a certain online store that starts with A IF I have a business account. I think I can set one up; my soon-to-be ex-wife and I created a small business in a failed attempt to resell stuff online, and I could probably use that. Wondering now if I should send away for the SN while I can and keep it until all hope is lost and then use it, or go ahead with my original plan to send away for a shotgun and shells once I get to the point where I am committed to ctbing. SN would certainly be cheaper, but a shotgun would be quicker . . .

 

[sugarb]

I discovered that I can get SN from a certain online store that starts with A IF I have a business account. I think I can set one up; my soon-to-be ex-wife and I created a small business in a failed attempt to resell stuff online, and I could probably use that. Wondering now if I should send away for the SN while I can and keep it until all hope is lost and then use it, or go ahead with my original plan to send away for a shotgun and shells once I get to the point where I am committed to ctbing. SN would certainly be cheaper, but a shotgun would be quicker . . .

I think shotgun's better. That's my method and I've been researching for a while

1. There are plenty of decent shotguns for fairly cheap; 250-500$ was the low range I saw in my research. so unless SN is significantly cheaper than that and you're on a very tight budget I don't think it'd matter

2. SN comes with all the risks associated with buying any other controlled substance online; seller might be government or a scammer, product might be fake, etc. If you're discovered there's a chance you could face involuntary hospitalization for suicidal ideation which would make future CTB more difficult. All that pressure might make you more likely to CTB than you would be otherwise out of fear of being stopped rather than actually being sure. A legally acquired shotgun should not have those issues.

3. Firearms are statistically the best commonly available method.

If you shoot yourself in the head at the right angle (and there's a decently large margin of error) there will be a split second of pain (if your brain can even register it) followed by death. Zero chance of resuscitation.

If you take SN, there could be vomiting, abdominal pain, etc and it would take a while to die. Other drugs might be required to avoid the aforementioned issues and there is a risk of resuscitation.

-

in short I don't think SN being cheaper (if it is cheaper) is worth the greater chance of failure/pain/government run-ins.

 

[Danby]

Thank you! That's good advice. SN seems more complicated too. I think I will stick to my original plan.

 

[Steff1337]

Personally, even if I had a shotgun, I would rather go with SN, but that's my choice.

 

[FuneralCry]

I wish you all the best.

 

[LunarLight]

SN comes with all the risks associated with buying any other controlled substance online; seller might be government or a scammer, product might be fake, etc. If you're discovered there's a chance you could face involuntary hospitalization for suicidal ideation which would make future CTB more difficult. All that pressure might make you more likely to CTB than you would be otherwise out of fear of being stopped rather than actually being sure. A legally acquired shotgun should not have those issues.

SN is NOT a controlled substance, the seller will most likely not be a scammer, let alone government. Stop fearmongering.

 

[sugarb]

SN is NOT a controlled substance, the seller will most likely not be a scammer, let alone government. Stop fearmongering.

My mistake. Still, shotgun's much more effective and reliable and if the SN's discovered it'll most likely lead to hospitalization.

 

[LunarLight]

My mistake. Still, shotgun's much more effective and reliable and if the SN's discovered it'll most likely lead to hospitalization.

SN won't be "discovered" by anyone unless you bought from KL (Canada) who kept the names and addresses (but that was a year ago), which led to welfare checks as he was no official chemical supplier but explicitly sold SN to suicidal people. If you buy from an official chemical supplier (like Polish sources A, BM, O...) you will get NO WELFARE CHECKS. YOU'LL BE FINE. STOP FEARMONGERING. It's because of this kind of misinformation that people pointlessly worry about welfare checks and that can keep them from an as peaceful as possible death. To be clear - I'm not attacking you personally, but you're very obviously ill-informed and should not speechify about things you don't know about.
In my opinion, only those who buy from DMC could be bothered, if he's stupid enough to keep all names and addresses.

 

[sugarb]

SN won't be "discovered" by anyone unless you bought from KL (Canada) who kept the names and addresses (but that was a year ago), which led to welfare checks as he was no official chemical supplier but explicitly sold SN to suicidal people.
In my opinion, only those who buy from DMC could be bothered, if he's stupid enough to keep all names and addresses.

You literally just confirmed what I said- there have been issues in the past and there could be issues in the future. How is noting the possibility of something like that happening again, however slight, in any way "fearmongering"?

I'm informed enough to know that buying a shotgun legally without a mental record has zero risk of a check and summary hospitalization while SN has at least some risk. Other factors aside that's more than enough reason to go with a shotgun instead.

 

[LunarLight]

You literally just confirmed what I said- there have been issues in the past and there could be issues in the future. How is noting the possibility of something like that happening again, however slight, in any way "fearmongering"?

I'm informed enough to know that buying a shotgun legally without a mental record has zero risk of a check and summary hospitalization while SN has at least some risk. Other factors aside that's more than enough reason to go with a shotgun instead.

That's complete fearmongering because KL was no official chemical supplier. KL was an individual explicitly selling SN to people so that they could kill themselves. That's a HUGE difference. That's what I keep repeating till you are blue in the face.
YOU literally just confirmed what I said - only people buying from DMC could maybe get a welfare check in the future, if he's stupid enough to keep all names and addresses, because he is no official chemical supplier - he is an individual who illegally sells SN.

Furthermore, you're supposed not to advocate any suicide method, it's against the rules of SaSu.

 

[sugarb]

That's complete fearmongering because KL was no official chemical supplier. KL was an individual explicitly selling SN to people so that they could kill themselves. That's a HUGE difference. That's what I keep repeating till you are blue in the face.
YOU literally just confirmed what I said - only people buying from DMC could maybe get a welfare check in the future, if he's stupid enough to keep all names and addresses, because he is no official chemical supplier - he is an individual who illegally sells SN.

Furthermore, you're supposed not to advocate any suicide method, it's against the rules of SaSu.

You are conflating me saying "there are some potential risks with buying SN that could result in hospitalization, and a legally acquired shotgun does not have those risks" with "SN is unfeasible regardless of seller because the government will catch you".

Illegal sellers such as DMC potentially keeping names/addresses = potential risk. Official suppliers potentially fucking up somehow = potential risk.

I'm not suggesting a method. OP is deliberating between two, and I'm saying one is better than the other. That's the point of the thread.

 

[LunarLight]

You are conflating me saying "there are some potential risks with buying SN that could result in hospitalization, and a legally acquired shotgun does not have those risks" with "SN is unfeasible regardless of seller because the government will catch you".

Illegal sellers such as DMC potentially keeping names/addresses = potential risk. Official suppliers potentially fucking up somehow = potential risk.

I'm not suggesting a method. OP is deliberating between two, and I'm saying one is better than the other. That's the point of the thread.

I don't understand what you mean by "official suppliers potentially fucking up somehow" - to me that's fearmongering. But let's end the conversation now, it's obvious we won't find common ground.

Also: saying one method is better than the other is literally suggesting/advocating a method.