Golden Gate Bridge Suicides

[Scandinavian27]

We could install a Stalinist dictatorship and keep everyone under 24/7 surveillance too. That would certainly reduce suicides. But it would be stupid.

Sounds exactly like a George Orwell 1984 type of scenario.

 

[jasoncran]

No government can ensure that all people do the right thing al the time. If you doubt it just go visit Cuba.

Incidentally, people do not have the right before God to kill themselves. I don't believe it's the governments job to stop them, but that doesn't make suicide right, or a right.

i know that about cuba, cuba is real close to where i live. my dad recalls the missile crisis.

let me put this in proper picture would you all visit this town if say the beach had 10 shark bites a yr? and no life guards?

daytona beach and my hometown. no lifeguards to pull you all from the rip tide.hey the govt isnt there to rescue you. swim at your own risk.

 

[RoadDebris]

No amount of life guards can stop sharks from doing what sharks do. If you don't want to get bit by a shark don't go to the beach. You don't need a government program to protect you from hungry fish.

 

[jasoncran]

No amount of life guards can stop sharks from doing what sharks do. If you don't want to get bit by a shark don't go to the beach. You don't need a government program to protect you from hungry fish.

funny. they warn you when they see them.

so no amount of military might is going to save you from the islamist might as well disband the military. of course the govt cant do it all. i could also take that thinking of yours apply to the drug wars, and murder. newsflash the law doesnt stop crime, but rather provides a means to punish the offender when caught and also keeps the honest man honest.

and have you actually lived near the ocean? one is more likely hear to die from the rip tides then anything which i alluded to more lifeguards saving that person from that then sharks. but hey what do we need educate ourselves on rip tides before since the free market doenst have any in business to teach that.

i am curious the govt regulates a lot you dont even know about. sports.ul, car safety standards, yup the very headlights and colors on tail lights and turn/reverse lights are mandates from the govt, been that way since long before obama. brake fluid and the front disc and rear drum or disc brakes, dot 3,4,5 are all specified by the feds. abs and srs and seat belts are as well. door latches, but hey we dont need them to do that since before in the days of henry ford candles were used in the model a and that car had no front brakes.

thoughts?i could go on what the govt does with the commerical vehicles but we dont need air brakes functioning on those do when they have mountians in california and and that stick shift can stop the truck. let the driver next to that truck be warned that he has no brakes,just uses the tranny to stop.

and i doubt that theres a problem with california dot enforcing those regs. we have them here. no body complains about that.

 

[Nick]

I'm a bit of a libertarian. I don't believe it's the government's job to be our mother. Freedom isn't free and it isn't always pretty, but it's a heck of a lot better than the alternative.

Are you sure about that?

 

[Pard]

I'm sorry, I fail to see what security or a fence or a net will do to stop people from killing themselves.

People who are hellbent on killing themselves (basically anyone who goes through with it) isn't going to see a rent-a-cop or a 10 foot fence or a net and go "Oh well, no suicide for me, I guess I'll just go home and enjoy life now..." They see the rent-a-cop and book it over the railing, or they climb the fence, or they land in the netting and then crawl tot he edge and then jump from there.

And if some how you do get a safety system that prevents anyone from throwing themselves off the bridge guess what? They'll just go to a new spot and then Cali. will have a new #1 place to kill yourself.

Deterring the means doesn't deter the crime. You ought to know that Jason. The only way to deter the crime is to teach and to help. Every state already has the means for helping the suicidal. If someone doesn't go to that help than there isn't much that can be done without, like Road said, installing some sort of Stalin-esque government.

And that will not work either. You are probably not aware that the USSR stopped counting suicide rates back in the 70s when they were double that of the next highest country. They were estimated to have only climbed until the wall came tumbling down.

 

[Nick]

I'm sorry, I fail to see what security or a fence or a net will do to stop people from killing themselves.

People who are hellbent on killing themselves (basically anyone who goes through with it) isn't going to see a rent-a-cop or a 10 foot fence or a net and go "Oh well, no suicide for me, I guess I'll just go home and enjoy life now..." They see the rent-a-cop and book it over the railing, or they climb the fence, or they land in the netting and then crawl tot he edge and then jump from there.

And if some how you do get a safety system that prevents anyone from throwing themselves off the bridge guess what? They'll just go to a new spot and then Cali. will have a new #1 place to kill yourself.

Deterring the means doesn't deter the crime. You ought to know that Jason. The only way to deter the crime is to teach and to help. Every state already has the means for helping the suicidal. If someone doesn't go to that help than there isn't much that can be done without, like Road said, installing some sort of Stalin-esque government.

And that will not work either. You are probably not aware that the USSR stopped counting suicide rates back in the 70s when they were double that of the next highest country. They were estimated to have only climbed until the wall came tumbling down.

I mostly agree with you. Certainly, the central part of reducing suicide rates is education and social support. Absolutely.
But a deterant fence is also another step.
I agree, if someone really wants to do something, then they'll find a way to do it. But does that mean that we shrug our sholders and say "they're going to do it anyway, let's not bother to try and stop it. Let them carry on killing themselves"? I, for one, don't want to be that person.

 

[Pard]

Oh no, of course not! We ought to seek to help them, but a deterrence isn't the means. A deterrence will make them go somewhere else, somewhere more secluded (maybe), somewhere where people won't be reaching out to pull them back in.

Basically, deterrence is not the means of helping them. Expanding on the education and support is. Not just educating the suicidal, mind you, but everyone. People ought to be able to recognize depression before it reaches a point where the person sees suicide as the only means out of their specific problem.

I do agree, the "They're gonna do it anyway" mentality is wrong, but it seems to me that helping by establishing various means of deterrence is the lazy way out of the problem. Deterrence is passive and it doesn't catch people, it pushes them elsewhere. (Kind of like in the movie Flubber. The only way to catch the goo was with a hand, anything else and it just bounced on to a new place.)

 

[jasoncran]

I'm sorry, I fail to see what security or a fence or a net will do to stop people from killing themselves.

People who are hellbent on killing themselves (basically anyone who goes through with it) isn't going to see a rent-a-cop or a 10 foot fence or a net and go "Oh well, no suicide for me, I guess I'll just go home and enjoy life now..." They see the rent-a-cop and book it over the railing, or they climb the fence, or they land in the netting and then crawl tot he edge and then jump from there.

And if some how you do get a safety system that prevents anyone from throwing themselves off the bridge guess what? They'll just go to a new spot and then Cali. will have a new #1 place to kill yourself.

Deterring the means doesn't deter the crime. You ought to know that Jason. The only way to deter the crime is to teach and to help. Every state already has the means for helping the suicidal. If someone doesn't go to that help than there isn't much that can be done without, like Road said, installing some sort of Stalin-esque government.

And that will not work either. You are probably not aware that the USSR stopped counting suicide rates back in the 70s when they were double that of the next highest country. They were estimated to have only climbed until the wall came tumbling down.

the army educates all servicemembers on suicide.not working. seriously. they wont admit that but the rates wont drop.

 

[Pard]

And somehow a fence/net/security will stop them? They are US trained military personnel. They are trained to overcome fences and nets and security! The only means of deterring them is an intervention.

My psych. class dealt with suicide and the various "types" of suicidal people.

-You have the ones that are out for attention, they don't actually do it, they just crave the attention it gets them.

-You have the straight up suicidal people who do it because they are in a funk and they feel like there is no way out and living isn't a compelling option.

-You have the show offs who, for some twisted reason, feel that by killing themselves in a grand way they will be heroes/remembered/ect..

-And finally you have the "trying to escape..." type of suicidal people. They do it because they honestly feel that they are being chased or something and that death is better than what will happen if they are caught. These types shouldn't be confused with the second kind, as the second kind does it out of depression and these guys do it out of delusion.

I'd assume that most military types probably fall into the 2nd or 4th group (leaning more to 4th).

Of those groups the only ones who'd be deterred by a fence/net/security would be the ones who are just in it for attention and the show offs. The show offs want to be one of those 1000+ who have killed themselves on the Golden Gate (or anywhere famous) and if they cannot get it there then they will probably walk away. They may try it elsewhere but often times once they are met with a wall they stop.

The attention getters will be deterred, but who cares, they don't really pose a threat to themselves, unless they slip by accident.

The other two groups, and these two make up the VAST majority of suicidal people, will not be deterred by anything short of a intervention.

So it doesn't really seem like a deterrent is going to be very effective. Using statistics and averages I'd say that of those 1000+ who killed themselves off the Golden Gate, only maybe 10 were the show offs (the % who are show offs is so minuscule, something like 1%)

 

[jasoncran]

And somehow a fence/net/security will stop them? They are US trained military personnel. They are trained to overcome fences and nets and security! The only means of deterring them is an intervention.

My psych. class dealt with suicide and the various "types" of suicidal people.

-You have the ones that are out for attention, they don't actually do it, they just crave the attention it gets them.

-You have the straight up suicidal people who do it because they are in a funk and they feel like there is no way out and living isn't a compelling option.

-You have the show offs who, for some twisted reason, feel that by killing themselves in a grand way they will be heroes/remembered/ect..

-And finally you have the "trying to escape..." type of suicidal people. They do it because they honestly feel that they are being chased or something and that death is better than what will happen if they are caught. These types shouldn't be confused with the second kind, as the second kind does it out of depression and these guys do it out of delusion.

I'd assume that most military types probably fall into the 2nd or 4th group (leaning more to 4th).

Of those groups the only ones who'd be deterred by a fence/net/security would be the ones who are just in it for attention and the show offs. The show offs want to be one of those 1000+ who have killed themselves on the Golden Gate (or anywhere famous) and if they cannot get it there then they will probably walk away. They may try it elsewhere but often times once they are met with a wall they stop.

The attention getters will be deterred, but who cares, they don't really pose a threat to themselves, unless they slip by accident.

The other two groups, and these two make up the VAST majority of suicidal people, will not be deterred by anything short of a intervention.

So it doesn't really seem like a deterrent is going to be very effective. Using statistics and averages I'd say that of those 1000+ who killed themselves off the Golden Gate, only maybe 10 were the show offs (the % who are show offs is so minuscule, something like 1%)

no the solution that the pc seperation of church thing wont let happen is too openly state GOD will heal the hurts.
i had ptsd, and GOD took it. i have hated fireworks,any horror movie, abhor violence for the sake of violence(still do),or sudden loud noises. some of this has been taken from me.not to mention emotionally numb.

my shrink,on prestridge stated that he was going to do it no matter what anyone was going to do.

 

[Pard]

"Intervention" is the P.C. way of saying "get God"

It's the term I used in psych class, and I was literally copying my notes, almost word for word. Psych. people don't want to admit it but often times "intervention" is the only cure!

Good ol' God!

 

[RoadDebris]

Just say no to nanny-state hypocrisy.

 

[jasoncran]

Just say no to nanny-state hypocrisy.

no the military? the epiptomy of that!

 

[RoadDebris]

@Jason, wha?

 

[jasoncran]

@Jason, wha?

you do realise that the military in many way is a big nanny state.it has socialised medicine, stores with price controls and also has rules and regs that i just hinted at the same logic here and your screamed STALIN!

i can punish you for:
lying to me
kissin in uniform
drinking off duty while the co or first sergeant or any nco says no drinking
getting a tan that cause you to miss duty
stds
if overweight i can tell you what to eat
out of shape, force you to get in shape
to name a few.

 

[RoadDebris]

you do realise that the military in many way is a big nanny state.it has socialised medicine, stores with price controls and also has rules and regs that i just hinted at the same logic here and your screamed STALIN!

i can punish you for:
lying to me
kissin in uniform
drinking off duty while the co or first sergeant or any nco says no drinking
getting a tan that cause you to miss duty
stds
if overweight i can tell you what to eat
out of shape, force you to get in shape
to name a few.

I don't know who's military you're talking about, but here in the good ol' USA our warriors are all volunteers. They agree to lay aside some of their rights so the rest of us can keep ours. I happen to appreciate that.

Doesn't have anything to do with the stupid idea of child-proofing the Golden Gate Bridge, though.

 

[jasoncran]

I don't know who's military you're talking about, but here in the good ol' USA our warriors are all volunteers. They agree to lay aside some of their rights so the rest of us can keep ours. I happen to appreciate that.

Doesn't have anything to do with the stupid idea of child-proofing the Golden Gate Bridge, though.

the united states army

i have twenty yrs service. if you doubt that i can post that as proof. i have been subject to this. its needed yes but its the ONLY reason i dont want massive govt control.
i know personally whats its like. i have been in the national guard/army since 1991. and that is how its run. the military owns you far more then they tell you. its for that reason i cant be full time as its hard to be an indivual in the army. i like being a civilian.i went back in to the guard for some extra $$ and have served in combat. do you recall where i mention never have i seen suicides in all my twenty yrs in the military? its meant as a joke also that i said that. i wouldnt change the way the army and or all branches do thing as i know why but it is what it is.the reference to socialised medicine is the military healthcare/va as its free to me, but the taxpayers pay for it. the price controls is the reference to this entity and i use them a lot. www.aafes.com. the entity is run by an either and airforce or army general.

 

[Pard]

Jason,

He just agreed that it's OK for the military because members of the armed services voluntarily lay down some of their rights in order to protect everyone else's.

 

[RoadDebris]

Are you sure about that?

About what, that I'm a bit of a libertarian, the Nancy Pelosi isn't my mother, that freedom isn't free, that it's not always pretty, or that it's better than totalitarianism?