Homicide-suicide cases in Switzerland and their impact on the Swiss Weapon Law

Homicide followed by the suicide of the offender is a well-known phenomenon. In most cases, it takes place in the context of the so-called "family tragedies." A recent series of such family tragedies in Switzerland prompted an intensive debate in the media and the Swiss government concerning the Swiss Weapon Law, in particular the requirement to keep personal army weapons at home. The present study of Homicide-Suicide cases in Switzerland, thus focuses on the role played by guns, especially military weapons, in such crimes. We investigated retrospectively 75 cases of Homicide-Suicide, comprising 172 individuals and spanning a period of 23 years in western and central Switzerland. Our results show that if guns were used in 76% of the cases, army weapons were the cause of death in 25% of the total. In 28% of the deaths caused by a gunshot, the exact type of the gun and its origin could not be determined. Thus, the majority of Homicide-Suicide cases in Switzerland involve the use of guns. The exact percentage of cases were military weapons were involved could not be defined. In our opinion, a stricter weapons law, restricting access to firearms, would be a factor of prevention of Homicide- Suicide cases in Switzerland.

[Ethics, empiricism and uncertainty]

Accidents can lead to difficult boundary situations. Such situations often take place in the emergency units. The medical team thus often and inevitably faces professional uncertainty in their decision-making. It is essential to communicate these uncertainties within the medical team, instead of downplaying or overriding existential hurdles in decision-making. Acknowledging uncertainties might lead to alert and prudent decisions. Thus uncertainty can have ethical value in treatment or withdrawal of treatment. It does not need to be covered in evidence-based arguments, especially as some singular situations of individual tragedies cannot be grasped in terms of evidence-based medicine.

The tragedy of the commons in evolutionary biology

Garrett Hardin's tragedy of the commons is an analogy that shows how individuals driven by self-interest can end up destroying the resource upon which they all depend. The proposed solutions for humans rely on highly advanced skills such as negotiation, which raises the question of how non-human organisms manage to resolve similar tragedies. In recent years, this question has promoted evolutionary biologists to apply the tragedy of the commons to a wide range of biological systems. Here, we provide tools to categorize different types of tragedy and review different mechanisms, including kinship, policing and diminishing returns that can resolve conflicts that could otherwise end in tragedy. A central open question, however, is how often biological systems are able to resolve these scenarios rather than drive themselves extinct through individual-level selection favouring self-interested behaviours.