> How do you reconcile that with many people that attempted suicide due to some illness like depression

I believe that depression should be treated seriously as a mental illness. But treat the depression, and not the choices made while depressed (i.e. suicidal ideation, suicide attempts), which are symptoms of depression. It's not like we treat so seriously any of the other choices made while depressed like over/under-eating, alcoholism, impulsive purchases, etc.

> So it's used as a argument against having easy to access firearms

Personally I believe in restricting access to firearms because they are usually used to kill other people. If someone wants to use their gun to take their own life, rather than take their guns away, I'd like to spare them and their family the mess, and give them a way to die peacefully and quietly in a supine position.

A permanent solution to a temporary problem still leaves the problem solved.

I usually say "No, death is not the solution, death just removes the problem.".

What it does is replace your problem with problems for a bunch of other people.

I don't quite understand this. Postponing my death won't solve the problem; it's inevitable. The real question is, whose time takes priority—others' or mine?

This is a good point. I guess the only counter argument is that, so far, in general, postponing elective death also leads to a bunch of solutions to other problems over the course of a life, even if the original problem is unsolvable.

People forget that the other problems are created by life itself. There is no way out by playing its game. You cannot escape the problem making machine by using it: it will only produce more problems.

But the truth is that I'm not convinced that death is the "the winning move is not playing it". You see death is life: in order to die you must be alive first.

That's why lately I'm thinking unconsciousness is the way out, but I'm not sure about that too.

The end of the universe is created by pre-life physics. I think it's unknown to humanity at this point whether a sufficiently advanced technology can deal with that.

Louis CK has a great bit about suicide.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fr7z1YiAWiI

"It will solve all your problems... Once!"

What if they change their mind again? Years later, they might have a fleeting thought: "I could have died back then."

The point is, the mind changes constantly; it's its nature. What should one do?

Personally, I'd rather avoid the rollercoaster of "I'm happy I didn't die" and "I should've died."

Which is why there should be a waiting period.

> How do you reconcile that with many people that attempted suicide due to some illness like depression, and then later very much we're glad they didn't die

You don't have to, it's not your business, it's their right to make that choice and no one else's. "My body, my choice" applies to suicide even more than abortion, if you don't control your own life and body you can't call yourself a free man.

I disagree with dismissing someone's decision because they have a mental illness like depression too. Depression and other issues don't always respond to treatment, and even when they do it's often after trying different treatments for months! I've been through very dark times with depression, OCD, and much more. I live a life of luxury now that most of the country would envy with a wonderful wife. If I knew I had to face a year or too of my past issues again and I would get to spend the last 40 years in my wonderful life again afterwards I don't think it would be worth suffering like that for a year. Some issues like OCD really are that bad. If someone with a mental illness wants to die, offer to help, but respect their decision if they don't accept.

The only people who regret suicide are the ones who survive. Subjectively on success, you stop, and removing any and all future possibilities is the entire point. Suicide prevention has nothing to do with the subject, but everything to do with everyone else. You feel bad if someone else dies with unfulfilled potential. So should lawmakers empathize with the suicidal or their loved ones? I tend to think Assisted Dying laws should focus on who has a right over someone else's life (parents? children? siblings? friends? councilors? colleagues? employers?), and be about under what situations they get to block suicide assistance. Rather than the existing situation where the laws are all about granting an individual the right to die, and making it harder for people to exercise their innate right to die by their own hand.