Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

2013 proved to be a happy year for those out West.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/gol ... des-n38866" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"San Francisco's Golden Gate Bridge marked a milestone in 2013 as 46 people leaped to their deaths in what appears to be the deadliest year for suicides at the landmark, a watchdog group said on Tuesday.

Currie said police officers or others had intervened to stop another 118 people from leaping off the span in 2013.

Officials have drawn up plans to install a safety net beneath the span's sidewalks to catch people who jump but are still seeking the estimated $66 million needed to construct it. In 2011, a firm was given $5 million to design the net, Currie said.

For now, officials work to prevent suicides with law enforcement officers on bicycle patrols. At any given time, two to four officers are on the bridge's sidewalks, California Highway Patrol spokesman Andrew Barclay said."




What? They want to spend $66 MILLION for a net to help save jumpers...and somehow already spent $5 MILLION on a design?

1) Who got $5MM to design a net? Not to make it, but just design it? Cripes, no wonder some cities are going broke?

2) They assign 2-4 police officers to be on the bridge at all times to prevent suicides?

3) Why spend $66MM more on people who want to go bye-bye (and that doesn't count the maintenance expense of the net)? Seriously, you'll end up spending millions more of taxpayer money on psychiatric care on just a few hundred loopy people per decade, some of whom will probably off themselves another way anyway...that's ridiculous.

I don't necessarily share your sentiment that those who want to go the suicide route are not worth our time and money to save. Saving human lives isn't a bad thing, per se.

I wonder about the net, though, and if it could work. I know from one of the stories on this from a guy who survived his jump that the moment he jumped he instantly regretted doing it, so it's logical that other jumpers have that same regret. But I wonder if, with a net, won't some people still be able to jump into the net, and then climb out of the net and continue their fall? And then you have to worry about people who, now with a net in place, may just want to jump off the bridge and into the net so that they can say they jumped off the bridge as a joke. What if they get hurt? What will be the liability to the city. Heck, the plot of the movie "The Incredibles" was about the Supers being sued for injuring people who wanted to end their lives - what if that happens in this case too?

How many of these people jumped after the NFC Championship game??

bluehenbillk wrote:How many of these people jumped after the NFC Championship game??

Maybe they should name the net for Jack Kevorkian...

GannonFan wrote:I don't necessarily share your sentiment that those who want to go the suicide route are not worth our time and money to save. Saving human lives isn't a bad thing, per se.

I wonder about the net, though, and if it could work. I know from one of the stories on this from a guy who survived his jump that the moment he jumped he instantly regretted doing it, so it's logical that other jumpers have that same regret. But I wonder if, with a net, won't some people still be able to jump into the net, and then climb out of the net and continue their fall? And then you have to worry about people who, now with a net in place, may just want to jump off the bridge and into the net so that they can say they jumped off the bridge as a joke. What if they get hurt? What will be the liability to the city. Heck, the plot of the movie "The Incredibles" was about the Supers being sued for injuring people who wanted to end their lives - what if that happens in this case too?

I think the thinking is to stop impulsive suicides, which is supposedly what bridge suicides are. Not sure how valid that theory is, but it's a prevailing theory none the less. Obviously if they were premeditaded someone could just bring something to cut through or burn through the net or just find something that's much simpler.

As far as climbing out of the net goes, I don't think it would be too hard to design it so that it would be difficult or impossible to climb out of. People with depression are rarely people who are in good physical shape.

Pwns wrote:

GannonFan wrote:I don't necessarily share your sentiment that those who want to go the suicide route are not worth our time and money to save. Saving human lives isn't a bad thing, per se.

I wonder about the net, though, and if it could work. I know from one of the stories on this from a guy who survived his jump that the moment he jumped he instantly regretted doing it, so it's logical that other jumpers have that same regret. But I wonder if, with a net, won't some people still be able to jump into the net, and then climb out of the net and continue their fall? And then you have to worry about people who, now with a net in place, may just want to jump off the bridge and into the net so that they can say they jumped off the bridge as a joke. What if they get hurt? What will be the liability to the city. Heck, the plot of the movie "The Incredibles" was about the Supers being sued for injuring people who wanted to end their lives - what if that happens in this case too?

I think the thinking is that bridge suicides are impulsive. Not sure how valid that theory is, but it's a prevailing theory none the less. Obviously if they were premeditaded someone could just bring something to cut through or burn through the net or just find something that's much simpler.

As far as climbing out of the net goes, I don't think it would be too hard to design it so that it would be difficult or impossible to climb out of. People with depression are rarely people who are in good physical shape.

Uh oh - anyone know if D1B is anywhere near California?

East Coast baby... this one which I drive often leads the EC in suicides.

In Minnesota, it's the bridge with the boring name, The High Bridge in St Paul.

All Reagan's fault..........

Cap'n Cat wrote:All Reagan's fault..........

Reagan was only 10 years old when the design work on the bridge really got going, and he was 20 years old and nowhere near San Fran when it was being built. You'll need to blame Harding, Coolidge, Hoover, and FDR for the bridge. We wouldn't have any of these problems if they had just kept the ferry service they had originally.

The only....and I mean ONLY reason to save someone from California from committing suicide is they shouldnt be able to get out of paying taxes in their state. You elected them you deal with your states economy circling the toilet.

Any any other state if you want to kill yourself......its nobodys business to intervene, so mind your own business and leave people alone.

If you live on the east coast I completely understand where you are coming from.

biobengal wrote:East Coast baby... this one which I drive often leads the EC in suicides.

The Sunshine Skyway - I love driving over that bridge. Great view.

Years ago I walked from downtown to Sausalito across the bridge and they had "Suicide prevention hotlines" every 50-75 yards on the bridge. With my luck I'd survive the fall, almost die of hypothermia, get bitten by a shark, hit by a boat prop, then drown after my injuries.

Trip was looking at how to make it big.

Trip, you're an engineer. They're willing to pay $5M to design a net in SF. A fucking net.

You're on the wrong coast buddy.

Im calling it now.......if they put in a net somebody will jump then sue because he got net burns and bruises from the net.

California will pay