434 2 #1 October 13, 2008 SAN FRANCISCO — After decades of debate, and unknown numbers of lost lives, the board that controls the Golden Gate Bridge took a major step toward building a suicide barrier on Friday, voting to erect a net under the span. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/11/us/11suicide.html?_r=1&ref=us&oref=slogin Do you think this will prevent/save anyone from taking their own life? Shouldnt people be able to take their own life if they really wanted? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #2 October 13, 2008 the secondary question is should locals have to pay $40-50M for it when they're repeatedly stated their opposition to the net, or any other barrier. If it's going to be done, the net is the best of the choices, as it won't interfere with the view. Many of us find that view inspiring to life. One proposed funding method was charging pedestrians/bikers to cross, even though the cost of collection will dominate the revenue. Another interesting tidbit is that the vote was supposed to happen 2 weeks from now, but they jumped the gun, probably to avoid hearing from the opposition. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jclalor 12 #3 October 13, 2008 If you would like a different perspective on GG bridge jumpers, watch "The Bridge" An often hard to watch documentary. The film maker filmed the vast majority of jumpers over a one year period and did interviews with friends and family of the jumpers. he even interviewed one surviving jumper. The film was very controversial as he lied to the bridge authorities and said he was making a film showing the contrast between " nature and the bridge" He also never told the families he had video of their loved ones that jumped while doing the interviews. While it's hard to say if a barrier would prevent people from choosing another method, it would surly reduce the numbers. ( almost one a week) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #4 October 13, 2008 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>One proposed funding method was charging pedestrians/bikers to cross, even though the cost of collection will dominate the revenue. That way jumpers pay for their own recovery. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #5 October 13, 2008 Quote If you would like a different perspective on GG bridge jumpers, watch "The Bridge" An often hard to watch documentary. The film maker filmed the vast majority of jumpers over a one year period and did interviews with friends and family of the jumpers. he even interviewed one surviving jumper. The film was very controversial as he lied to the bridge authorities and said he was making a film showing the contrast between " nature and the bridge" He also never told the families he had video of their loved ones that jumped while doing the interviews. While it's hard to say if a barrier would prevent people from choosing another method, it would surly reduce the numbers. ( almost one a week) Ironically, I recently found myself on Utube watching a bunch of jumpers before all this stuff was released. Isn't it bizzare to think a 250ft fall could net a living result? They say 98% are successful. Then there was a lady who jumped, survived, nursed to health and then jumped successfully. This guy would have made a good freeflyer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGDOMNiRuDs I read it's about 1 every 2 weeks, but either way, it is a lot of people, astonishing. I do think people who want to commit suicide are drawn here, but that they will anyway, they will just go to the next "romantic" place to do it. Ps. I wonder if the number of jumpers will increase after Obama is elected? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 622 #6 October 13, 2008 This video is the best one. We're going to need suicide barriers on everything. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #7 October 13, 2008 Quote This video is the best one. We're going to need suicide barriers on everything. This one is better IMO. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwpDqyRSyt4 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #8 October 13, 2008 And a happy ending... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1u8Dv9CX0Y&NR=1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
akarunway 1 #10 October 13, 2008 Quote Quote If you would like a different perspective on GG bridge jumpers, watch "The Bridge" An often hard to watch documentary. The film maker filmed the vast majority of jumpers over a one year period and did interviews with friends and family of the jumpers. he even interviewed one surviving jumper. The film was very controversial as he lied to the bridge authorities and said he was making a film showing the contrast between " nature and the bridge" He also never told the families he had video of their loved ones that jumped while doing the interviews. While it's hard to say if a barrier would prevent people from choosing another method, it would surly reduce the numbers. ( almost one a week) Ironically, I recently found myself on Utube watching a bunch of jumpers before all this stuff was released. Isn't it bizzare to think a 250ft fall could net a living result? They say 98% are successful. Then there was a lady who jumped, survived, nursed to health and then jumped successfully. This guy would have made a good freeflyer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGDOMNiRuDs I read it's about 1 every 2 weeks, but either way, it is a lot of people, astonishing. I do think people who want to commit suicide are drawn here, but that they will anyway, they will just go to the next "romantic" place to do it. Ps. I wonder if the number of jumpers will increase after Obama is elected? Not enough IMO. I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #11 October 13, 2008 'The Bridge' is responsible for reopening the discussion of barriers on the bridge. Long discussed, but always tabled. Official stats were maintained in the past, but after the 1000th jumper, they stopped, since it seemed to result in a darker form of the race to have the first baby of the year. Meanwhile, there has also been a decades long debate/discussion about putting up a barrier on the lanes of traffic, since every so often there is a horrific head on collision on the bridge. There are 6 narrow lanes, and depending on time of day, 4 go south or north. Simple cones separate the two directions. But as the bridge is narrow by modern standards, it's difficult to implement a movable barrier that fits, and still does the job. And of course the cost. But the end result is right now the bridge commission proposes to spend $50M trying to save people who want to kill themselves, while continuing to ignore those who are getting killed, but want to live. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #12 October 13, 2008 I suppose that biting the bullet to have 6 decent-sized lanes - 3 north and 3 south - with just a painted "no traffic" median lane in the middle, has been rejected? Just curious. (Yes, I understand why the alternating 4 lanes...) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #13 October 13, 2008 QuoteI suppose that biting the bullet to have 6 decent-sized lanes - 3 north and 3 south - with just a painted "no traffic" median lane in the middle, has been rejected? Just curious. (Yes, I understand why the alternating 4 lanes...) you mean widen a 70+ year old bridge (and national icon) from 62ft of road to 84ft (7 x 12ft)? Not even feasible - the main stays for the cable suspection are just outside the lanes - the pedestrian walkways go outside the pillars. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #14 October 13, 2008 QuoteQuoteI suppose that biting the bullet to have 6 decent-sized lanes - 3 north and 3 south - with just a painted "no traffic" median lane in the middle, has been rejected? Just curious. (Yes, I understand why the alternating 4 lanes...) you mean widen a 70+ year old bridge (and national icon) from 62ft of road to 84ft (7 x 12ft)? Not even feasible - the main stays for the cable suspection are just outside the lanes - the pedestrian walkways go outside the pillars. Nonsense - it's San Fran. Obviously, they will want to reduce the size of the cars and only allow "earth friendly" traffic that will fit the new eco-lane width traffic augmentation. It would be fully funded with supplemental licensing fees on Hummers, full sized trucks, and SUVs. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
headoverheels 291 #15 October 13, 2008 I was thinking something similar, like limiting all vehicles over a certain width to a designated lane. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #16 October 13, 2008 the lanes are already narrower than current standards - 62ft for 6 lanes - 10ft/lane, rather than the normal 12ft. So no easy gains there. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 622 #17 October 13, 2008 You want easy? I got one for ya...One word. (or three) Earthquake. (big one) problem solved. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #18 October 14, 2008 it's already survived a few of those. And fortunately, they aren't a nearly annual occurrence like a hurricane. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 622 #19 October 14, 2008 sure...rub salt in it! and we get those pesky tornados too! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #20 October 14, 2008 I think if people want to off themselves.. they should have that right. I would prefer they get the help they need.. but when they want to leave this plane of existence I dont think anyone has the right to stop them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #21 October 14, 2008 Quote Quote I suppose that biting the bullet to have 6 decent-sized lanes - 3 north and 3 south - with just a painted "no traffic" median lane in the middle, has been rejected? Just curious. (Yes, I understand why the alternating 4 lanes...) you mean widen a 70+ year old bridge (and national icon) from 62ft of road to 84ft (7 x 12ft)? Not even feasible - the main stays for the cable suspection are just outside the lanes - the pedestrian walkways go outside the pillars. Get rid of teh walkways, that way people can't walk on and jump.....2 birds - 1 stone Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #22 October 14, 2008 Quote I think if people want to off themselves.. they should have that right. I would prefer they get the help they need.. but when they want to leave this plane of existence I dont think anyone has the right to stop them. Maybe they should have to schedule the event and sell tickets.... then they can improve the bridge in whatever way. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bfilarsky 0 #23 October 14, 2008 Quote You want easy? I got one for ya...One word. (or three) Earthquake. (big one) problem solved. Nah, its not likely to go down in an earthquake because its a suspension bridge. Rigid bridges are the ones that have problems in earthquakes. Suspension bridges just need a little wind http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0Fi1VcbpAI Note also how much movement the bridge can make without falling apart. No way a truss bridge could do that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
someday 0 #24 October 14, 2008 won't matter the ACLU is fighting for signs to be put up on the nets that say, "use higher exit point ""Track to avoid nets" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #25 October 14, 2008 Quote Quote I suppose that biting the bullet to have 6 decent-sized lanes - 3 north and 3 south - with just a painted "no traffic" median lane in the middle, has been rejected? Just curious. (Yes, I understand why the alternating 4 lanes...) you mean widen a 70+ year old bridge (and national icon) from 62ft of road to 84ft (7 x 12ft)? Not even feasible - the main stays for the cable suspection are just outside the lanes - the pedestrian walkways go outside the pillars. No - I misread the post I replied to ... sorry .... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites