Golden Gate Bridge Suicide Net Plan Gets Boost

First topic message reminder :

It is hoped a net made of stainless steel cable extending below and from the side of the span will save hundreds of lives.

Officials say they have funds to build a suicide-prevention net at San Francisco Bay's Golden Gate Bridge where two jump to their deaths each month.

The bridge's board of directors will vote on Friday on the plan, which has been debated since the 1950s.

One of the obstacles - the price tag - fell away on Monday as officials announced they had $76m (£45m) for the project.

Most of the new money comes from federal transport programmes, while the rest will be paid out of the bridge's own reserves and state mental health funding.

The bridge district's plan calls for a net made of stainless steel cable extending 20ft below and 20ft from the side of the span.

Anyone who jumps from the span might be injured but would probably survive the fall, say officials.

"For whatever reason, suicidal people don't want to hurt themselves," Dennis Mulligan, the bridge district's general manager, told KTVU-TV.

"At other locations where nets have been up no individual has jumped into the net."

More than 1,400 people have leapt to their deaths from the 4,200-ft suspension bridge since it opened in 1937.

Every year, scores of people contemplating suicide are coaxed not to jump from the span.

On average, there are two suicides a month at the structure.

The Bridge Rail Foundation, which tracks fatalities on the span, said 46 people committed suicide there last year.

Backers of the suicide net were boosted in 2012 when President Barack Obama signed a transportation bill allowing federal funds to flow to the project.

http://news.sky.com/story/1288528/golden-gate-bridge-suicide-net-plan-gets-boost

Good idea, if people want to kill themselves they don't want to do something that will hurt them but not kill them, so it sounds logical.

Didge wrote:

Sassy wrote:

You actually believe that don't you?   That's soooooo sad.   Bless you Didge, one of these days you'll get help.

Yes , as stated i am one right cocky bastard and I love it, ha ha, does that bug you?

Clearly it does!

Oh hell, just laughed so much didn't do my back any good, but it was worth it.

Sassy wrote:

Didge wrote:


Yes , as stated i am one right cocky bastard and I love it, ha ha, does that bug you?

Clearly it does!

Oh hell, just laughed so much didn't do my back any good, but it was worth it.    

I would laugh too if I saw you daily, best you cover up your mirrors love!

Didge wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:

Didge wrote:


No its not rubbish as has been explained Irn, I suggest you bow out while the going is good, sassy has clearly exposed this thread had everything to do with some poor lame vendetta an even now you go on about Quill, where again this shows you thus before this thread was started id not believe him.

I am still waiting for you to counter my points and I am sure the barrier as stated will help prevent those falling through accidents, but my points has always been on those contemplating suicide, of which the success story here was human intervention


Lt me know when you want to take on these views and not rely on others

Sorry Didge. I have answered your points and it's up to you now to provide the evidence from these experts that you know about that contradicts the evidenhce already presented to you.

The board have approved the plan and it's now your move.

Well that is news to me, you kept going on about experts avoiding answering my points, where again many other experts advocate helping the vulnerable which you avoid also and as seen we shall see in time what benefit this has to vulnerable people.
So no it is your move to rebuke my points not rely on others thus proving you have little understanding here.

take your time

[/quote]

So where are these qualified experts that contradict the evidence presented by people who are well qualified in this area? That's all I'm asking you for.

You should read this article by Dr Anne Fleming. She works on the Golden Gate Bridge Suicide Barrier Task Force of the Psychiatric Foundation of Northern California. She is also the assistant clinical professor of psychiatry at the University of California, San Francisco.

Would a Suicide Barrier on the Golden Gate Bridge Save Lives?

http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/articles/would-suicide-barrier-golden-gate-bridge-save-lives#sthash.MfNmDBsC.dpuf

Anyway, it's Friday night and I'm away up the club for a few pints and a natter with the lads but find them if you can and I''ll read them with interest later when I get back.

'laters'

C U later Irn, enjoy the pint, I'm not allowed alcohol at the moment, blast it.

Irn Bru wrote:

So where are these qualified experts that contradict the evidence presented by people who are well qualified in this area? That's all I'm asking you for.

You should read this article by Dr Anne Fleming. She works on the Golden Gate Bridge Suicide Barrier Task Force of the Psychiatric Foundation of Northern California. She is also the assistant clinical professor of psychiatry at the University of California, San Francisco.

Would a Suicide Barrier on the Golden Gate Bridge Save Lives?

http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/articles/would-suicide-barrier-golden-gate-bridge-save-lives#sthash.MfNmDBsC.dpuf

Anyway, it's Friday night and I'm away up the club for a few pints and a natter with the lads but find them if you can and I''ll read them with interest later when I get back.

'laters'

Wow one view, score


i already posted those who advocate helping the vulnerable, clearly you did not read them.

yes I can read links Irn, I want you to refute my points, none of the links go on about what I stated on human prevention with the patrols compared to nets using the patrols success .

So try again tomorrow and enjoy your night out

Original Quill wrote:

lovedust wrote:

Quill: stop telling lies about me. I've done nothing to you, so if you can't be civil, just leave me in peace.

I've tried to leave you alone, LD. But every time sassy cooks up one of these threads, there you are.

lie

Look...you are the second poster on this thread.

Yes, a fact initially pointed out by me to you, which makes your cock-and-bull story I came into the thread to "attack" you - when you weren't even in the thread at the time - look rather bizarre.

Sassy wrote:

Didge wrote:


Explain Irn how that is not goading?

Quill has stated openly and on more than one occasion that he is a Director of the GG Bridge.   He posted that the GG Bridge would not be doing it, and they never had to worry about money, yet the Agenda was all about funding and sorting out the finances, and stated that they had already agreed to it in principle if the funding could be found.   Therefore, it seemed very odd that someone who has claimed over and over again that he is a Director of it, was saying the exact opposite to what was on the Agenda.   Therefore, he couldn't have received his copy.   Either that, or he's a liar.   I know which one I believe, and so do plenty of others.   Now, I'm quite sure Quill will wish you hadn't brought that up again, as he has done his level best to divert from those facts.

As an outsider and part of no "posse" - from my outside opinion only after reading and making one post on here - until your explanation, above, I was unsure whether or not this thread was in fact about suicide or Quill.

After reading your explanation above, it does seem rather like you did post this up to have a "dig" at Quill (that's not to say you aren't interested in the subject too).


Now whilst I'm saying this, and it does indeed seem likes a thread aimed at Quill rather than the subject matter, it also isn't against forum rules to do so, and I'm sure we've all, at times, made threads to dig at someone.

So what's the big fuss?

Irn Bru wrote:BREAKING NEWS

The board have approved the plan.

    

Great news... Kevin Hines survived his fall in 2001. He's been campaigning for today's result for many years, bless him.

As I explained a page or two earlier, I had a friend who would have committed suicide if not for the barriers on the Clifton suspension bridge, so the thread was never about Quill, until he came on and said the exact opposite to what the Directors were saying when he had told us so many times on Speak he was a Director and even said he was SO important they sent a taxi for him when he hurt his ankle because they couldn't hold the meeting without him.   He even said that Nancy Pelosi owed him one for saving her money.   The fact that his argument was directly opposed to what was on the Agenda, the fact that he said it would never happen when the directors had decided years ago it would, if they could finance it, and the fact that he said money was never a problem for the bridge, showed he had been lying through his back teeth about being a director.

Now, if he had said, he didn't agree with it, the thread would just have continued with the fors and againsts.   However, when shown the contents of the Agenda he said it was irrelevant, and proceeded to be bloody rude about it being posted.   A very strange thing for someone saying he was a Director to do.

eddie wrote:

Sassy wrote:

Quill has stated openly and on more than one occasion that he is a Director of the GG Bridge.   He posted that the GG Bridge would not be doing it, and they never had to worry about money, yet the Agenda was all about funding and sorting out the finances, and stated that they had already agreed to it in principle if the funding could be found.   Therefore, it seemed very odd that someone who has claimed over and over again that he is a Director of it, was saying the exact opposite to what was on the Agenda.   Therefore, he couldn't have received his copy.   Either that, or he's a liar.   I know which one I believe, and so do plenty of others.   Now, I'm quite sure Quill will wish you hadn't brought that up again, as he has done his level best to divert from those facts.

As an outsider and part of no "posse" - from my outside opinion only after reading and making one post on here - until your explanation, above, I was unsure whether or not this thread was in fact about suicide or Quill.

After reading your explanation above, it does seem rather like you did post this up to have a "dig" at Quill (that's not to say you aren't interested in the subject too).


Now whilst I'm saying this, and it does indeed seem likes a thread aimed at Quill rather than the subject matter, it also isn't against forum rules to do so, and I'm sure we've all, at times, made threads to dig at someone.

So what's the big fuss?

Bang on the money and hence my conclusion also.

lovedust wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:BREAKING NEWS

The board have approved the plan.

    

Great news... Kevin Hines survived his fall in 2001. He's been campaigning for today's result for many years, bless him.

It's absolutely fantastic Lovey, he must be really celebrating tonight.

Sassy wrote:As I explained a page or two earlier, I had a friend who would have committed suicide if not for the barriers on the Clifton suspension bridge, so the thread was never about Quill, until he came on and said the exact opposite to what the Directors were saying when he had told us so many times on Speak he was a Director and even said he was SO important they sent a taxi for him when he hurt his ankle because they couldn't hold the meeting without him.   He even said that Nancy Pelosi owed him one for saving her money.   The fact that his argument was directly opposed to what was on the Agenda, the fact that he said it would never happen when the directors had decided years ago it would, if they could finance it, and the fact that he said money was never a problem for the bridge, showed he had been lying through his back teeth about being a director.

Now, if he had said, he didn't agree with it, the thread would just have continued with the fors and againsts.   However, when shown the contents of the Agenda he said it was irrelevant, and proceeded to be bloody rude about it being posted.   A very strange thing for someone saying he was a Director to do.

Sassy I've already said, I've read the thread and had no bias or opinion one way or the other - it was almost six to one and half a dozen if the other - until Didge said this and you replied:



Didge wrote:

Explain Irn how that is not goading?


Sassy wrote:
Quill has stated openly and on more than one occasion that he is a Director of the GG Bridge. He posted that the GG Bridge would not be doing it, and they never had to worry about money, yet the Agenda was all about funding and sorting out the finances, and stated that they had already agreed to it in principle if the funding could be found. Therefore, it seemed very odd that someone who has claimed over and over again that he is a Director of it, was saying the exact opposite to what was on the Agenda. Therefore, he couldn't have received his copy. Either that, or he's a liar. I know which one I believe, and so do plenty of others. Now, I'm quite sure Quill will wish you hadn't brought that up again, as he has done his level best to divert from those facts.


That whole post was your explanation about why you made the thread with also, I believe, a very real care about the issue too.
A bit like killing two birds with one stone and without the net lol

7-Hours later:

Well, they passed it as expected.  I'm very happy.  I hope this is not the end of the concern for mental healthcare.  When I look around and see all the homeless in San Francisco, it seems that so much more could be done.

I'm glad for the most part that I have not been here, both yesterday and this afternoon.  What a pathetic display.  I don't want now to make things uncomfortable for Didge, Eds and Nems...but thank you--not for your views--those are always your own--but for speaking up and not cowing.  Seeing sass actually threaten eds, and eds standing up, was incredible.  And Didge…they do try to rasp you down, don’t they?  And they gang up on you...you were great.

I saw this thread for what it is right off, from the legend.  I decided to make a point of exposing this kind of tactic…primarily because it will happen again, perhaps to someone else who is not as comfortable at handling himself as am I.  It is one of those threads that specifically targets hate at one individual, and constitutes a kind of bullying.  But it's all undercover.  It’s the kind of thing I would expect on Flap or Cun#s Corner, but not here.  But, as just seen, we have some members who are quite adept at it.

At this point Sass and Irn have admitted that the thread was a ruse, so we need spend no more time on that topic. Irn, I do think once again you ought to consider resigning as a mod here. You're openly abusing your superior's website.

This thread has taken up 8-pages and it is loaded with falsehoods from tiny-tweak lies, to some real whoppers.  Expect to hear disclaimers from me for months and months to come, as I have to straighten out the facts.  When we encounter the matter, you can expect to hear me start: Oh, that's from the ruse thread.  I haven't tried to correct things as we went along, because (1) I wasn't here for most of the time; and (2) there was simply too much bullshit to respond to in one day, or one post.

I must say that Irn, I am overwhelmed at how much, and how easily you engage in this stuff--the lies, the distortions, the twists to make yourself right, these cyber wars generally, and etc, etc, etc.  Wow...I was under the misapprehension that you are a professional person.

As for sassy...I've been putting up with this stuff from her for 2 years.  Sass is not the brightest bulb, and she often simply reveals herself by her own over-enthusiasm with the ruse, whatever it is.  She’s inartful in these matters, and that is how I found out about her stalking and hacking.  I take her as a kind of clown...I certainly don't take her seriously.  I am big enough to stand over her and just shake my head.

I'll give you one tip that will show you where this thread went sassy-sideways: Someone point to a clear, unambiguous statement that I was ever against the GGBHTD barrier.  I've always been for it and I'm delighted it passed.  Y’all just made shit up and then believed it.  Just because I draw out the issues and implications of the arguments--for the bridge, for mental healthcare, for state and federal finances--is no indication of how I would vote, if I had a vote.

G’nite.

Good morning Quill.

I'm glad it was passed and I can also see that apart from anything else, this thread was a goad and an open invitation for a heated debate.

I'm sure we are all just happy there's going  to be a net though I'm not sure, as people have already said, it's going to really deter anyone from taking their life if they really want to die.

Good result.

eddie wrote:Good morning Quill.

I'm glad it was passed and I can also see that apart from anything else, this thread was a goad and an open invitation for a heated debate.

I'm sure we are all just happy there's going  to be a net though I'm not sure, as people have already said, it's going to really deter anyone from taking their life if they really want to die.

Good result.

Indeed, and as Quill said, maybe it will lead to more concern for mental healthcare -- like I said before, there's way too little concern over that here in the U.S. Every time there's a mass shooting, a tiny minority says, "What about the fact that people who do such a thing are crazy?" and they get drowned out by the gun debate.

lovedust wrote:
I don't think anyone's advocating just building a net and then forgetting about other forms of intervention. But a net *is* one of the things some  experts think would be helpful:

"Scientific evidence says a barrier reduces suicides, because thoughts of suicide are transient". -

Eve R. Meyer, Executive Director of San Francisco Suicide Prevention

  

WHERE is this mysterious "scientific evidence" though, love ?

ALL that I see is a press release from the Mayor's office..   

Original Quill wrote:7-Hours later:

Well, they passed it as expected.  I'm very happy.  I hope this is not the end of the concern for mental healthcare.  When I look around and see all the homeless in San Francisco, it seems that so much more could be done.

I'm glad for the most part that I have not been here, both yesterday and this afternoon.  What a pathetic display.  I don't want now to make things uncomfortable for Didge, Eds and Nems...but thank you--not for your views--those are always your own--but for speaking up and not cowing.  Seeing sass actually threaten eds, and eds standing up, was incredible.  And Didge…they do try to rasp you down, don’t they?  And they gang up on you...you were great.

I saw this thread for what it is right off, from the legend.  I decided to make a point of exposing this kind of tactic…primarily because it will happen again, perhaps to someone else who is not as comfortable at handling himself as am I.  It is one of those threads that specifically targets hate at one individual, and constitutes a kind of bullying.  But it's all undercover.  It’s the kind of thing I would expect on Flap or Cun#s Corner, but not here.  But, as just seen, we have some members who are quite adept at it.

At this point Sass and Irn have admitted that the thread was a ruse, so we need spend no more time on that topic.  Irn, I do think once again you ought to consider resigning as a mod here.  You're openly abusing your superior's website.

This thread has taken up 8-pages and it is loaded with falsehoods from tiny-tweak lies, to some real whoppers.  Expect to hear disclaimers from me for months and months to come, as I have to straighten out the facts.  When we encounter the matter, you can expect to hear me start: Oh, that's from the ruse thread.  I haven't tried to correct things as we went along, because (1) I wasn't here for most of the time; and (2) there was simply too much bullshit to respond to in one day, or one post.

I must say that Irn, I am overwhelmed at how much, and how easily you engage in this stuff--the lies, the distortions, the twists to make yourself right, these cyber wars generally, and etc, etc, etc.  Wow...I was under the misapprehension that you are a professional person.

As for sassy...I've been putting up with this stuff from her for 2 years.  Sass is not the brightest bulb, and she often simply reveals herself by her own over-enthusiasm with the ruse, whatever it is.  She’s inartful in these matters, and that is how I found out about her stalking and hacking.  I take her as a kind of clown...I certainly don't take her seriously.  I am big enough to stand over her and just shake my head.

I'll give you one tip that will show you where this thread went sassy-sideways: Someone point to a clear, unambiguous statement that I was ever against the GGBHTD barrier.  I've always been for it and I'm delighted it passed.  Y’all just made shit up and then believed it.  Just because I draw out the issues and implications of the arguments--for the bridge, for mental healthcare, for state and federal finances--is no indication of how I would vote, if I had a vote.

G’nite.

Hey Quill, I really don't know where you get this about Irn abusing Mod powers ?  

Your right, we should all just push on with the debate, but saying stuff like that surely isn't helping.

You've mentioned several times over the months that Irn should resign...why?..is that because your none too find of him?

Might I suggest you read back through the thread Bee, as there have been many studies given by well respected medical psychiatric expert bodies backing what Lovey has posted and many of them have been linked to this thread.

Quill, I will refer you to your very first post:

A suspension bridge is essentially an aircraft.  A suicide prevention device is an interruption to the flight dynamics of the bridge.  We have been arguing over this for decades.  The GG Bridge faces even higher force winds.  I have seen that Bridge where it is swaying more than 25-feet. http://seattletimes.com/html/travel/2012014206_trgoldengate06.html

Several designs have been offered. Each time it makes the news.  Each time it is rejected. It's not a simple answer.


Except a design had already been done and already been accepted, some years ago, and the only problem was the funding.


You followed that with:

Money has rarely been an issue with the Golden Gate Bridge and Highway Transit District (GGBHTD). The bridge is one of the greatest money-makers in the tourist world...everyone wants to go over and back, all summer long.


When the funding was the only thing holding up the building of the net and, thank goodness, they sorted it and last night agreed it.

Sassy wrote:Quill, I will refer you to your very first post:

A suspension bridge is essentially an aircraft.  A suicide prevention device is an interruption to the flight dynamics of the bridge.  We have been arguing over this for decades.  The GG Bridge faces even higher force winds.  I have seen that Bridge where it is swaying more than 25-feet. http://seattletimes.com/html/travel/2012014206_trgoldengate06.html

Several designs have been offered. Each time it makes the news.  Each time it is rejected. It's not a simple answer.


Except a design had already been done and already been accepted, some years ago, and the only problem was the funding.


You followed that with:

Money has rarely been an issue with the Golden Gate Bridge and Highway Transit District (GGBHTD).  The bridge is one of the greatest money-makers in the tourist world...everyone wants to go over and back, all summer long.


When the funding was the only thing holding up the building of the net and, thank goodness, they sorted it and last night agreed it.

Incorrect:


Although the funding is lined up and the net is mostly designed, it will take about three years before it is built and installed, said Denis Mulligan, bridge district general manager.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

eddie wrote:Good morning Quill.

I'm glad it was passed and I can also see that apart from anything else, this thread was a goad and an open invitation for a heated debate.

I'm sure we are all just happy there's going  to be a net though I'm not sure, as people have already said, it's going to really deter anyone from taking their life if they really want to die.

Good result.

Indeed, and as Quill said, maybe it will lead to more concern for mental healthcare -- like I said before, there's way too little concern over that here in the U.S. Every time there's a mass shooting, a tiny minority says, "What about the fact that people who do such a thing are crazy?" and they get drowned out by the gun debate.

Part of the funding came from Proposition 63 Ben, $7million of it, which they said was a very small amount from their budget that helps thousands of people with mental health problems in California, so I think just maybe, mental health issues are being taken seriously there.

Original Quill wrote:7-Hours later:

Well, they passed it as expected.  I'm very happy.  I hope this is not the end of the concern for mental healthcare.  When I look around and see all the homeless in San Francisco, it seems that so much more could be done.

I'm glad for the most part that I have not been here, both yesterday and this afternoon.  What a pathetic display.  I don't want now to make things uncomfortable for Didge, Eds and Nems...but thank you--not for your views--those are always your own--but for speaking up and not cowing.  Seeing sass actually threaten eds, and eds standing up, was incredible.  And Didge…they do try to rasp you down, don’t they?  And they gang up on you...you were great.

I saw this thread for what it is right off, from the legend.  I decided to make a point of exposing this kind of tactic…primarily because it will happen again, perhaps to someone else who is not as comfortable at handling himself as am I.  It is one of those threads that specifically targets hate at one individual, and constitutes a kind of bullying.  But it's all undercover.  It’s the kind of thing I would expect on Flap or Cun#s Corner, but not here.  But, as just seen, we have some members who are quite adept at it.

At this point Sass and Irn have admitted that the thread was a ruse, so we need spend no more time on that topic.  Irn, I do think once again you ought to consider resigning as a mod here.  You're openly abusing your superior's website.

This thread has taken up 8-pages and it is loaded with falsehoods from tiny-tweak lies, to some real whoppers.  Expect to hear disclaimers from me for months and months to come, as I have to straighten out the facts.  When we encounter the matter, you can expect to hear me start: Oh, that's from the ruse thread.  I haven't tried to correct things as we went along, because (1) I wasn't here for most of the time; and (2) there was simply too much bullshit to respond to in one day, or one post.

I must say that Irn, I am overwhelmed at how much, and how easily you engage in this stuff--the lies, the distortions, the twists to make yourself right, these cyber wars generally, and etc, etc, etc.  Wow...I was under the misapprehension that you are a professional person.

As for sassy...I've been putting up with this stuff from her for 2 years.  Sass is not the brightest bulb, and she often simply reveals herself by her own over-enthusiasm with the ruse, whatever it is.  She’s inartful in these matters, and that is how I found out about her stalking and hacking.  I take her as a kind of clown...I certainly don't take her seriously.  I am big enough to stand over her and just shake my head.

I'll give you one tip that will show you where this thread went sassy-sideways: Someone point to a clear, unambiguous statement that I was ever against the GGBHTD barrier.  I've always been for it and I'm delighted it passed.  Y’all just made shit up and then believed it.  Just because I draw out the issues and implications of the arguments--for the bridge, for mental healthcare, for state and federal finances--is no indication of how I would vote, if I had a vote.

G’nite.

  

NO SURPRISES about Sassy's pathetic and juvenile behaviour here, is there, peeps !?!

ANYBODY with eyes saw her harassing and then openly stalking Quill, Nems, FTL, Elizel and me from the beginning of our entry onto this site.. Sassy's main motivation for these attacks and attempted character assassinations always seemed to me to be a base desire on her part to chase away her enemies from here..

IRN doesn't seem to mind backing his old chum Sass' in her puerile and pestilent little cyber-bullying attempts at times, either ~ I have to assume it's just a game for him, in much the same way that BA and smelly' seem to consider their own rancid antics as so much 'sport'.

AND of course, can't forget Stephenmarra ~ brought on here by Sassy for reinforcements early this year, as he already sees her enemies largely as his enemies as well. He's only here to do his master's bidding, as shown by his lack of participation outside of attacking people and posting the odd song threads. UNTIL I brought up his lap dog antics a couple of months ago, whereupon he started dipping his toes into other threads..

PERSONALLY, my way of dealing with Sassy and Stephen's harassment games has been to block them for three or four months already ~ only commenting on quoted items where it's obvious they're after serious comments, and not out to trap certain other members on here.   

Actually Bee, Eds was never threatened, as she is a friend it's not something I would even consider, Irn and I admitted to no such thing, in fact we showed the opposite and it was Quill that turned it away from the original thread, and then Quill started on Lovedust and JD, so you are barking up the wrong tree.

And the one who is not bright is Quill, who keeps claiming all these things and then gets tripped up things come up in the news that shows him up for what he is, a complete Walter Mitty and delusional.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Didge wrote:
Excellent points and agree and why I think that any money should go to any help out there that can be there for them, as none of us can begin to imagine what many of them go through, but we should at least have as much systems in place for them to feel they are not alone.

I actually think the Aussies have it right on this one, what with "Are you OK? Day" -- that is one of the most compassionate campaigns I've ever heard of.

I see that idea spreading within Aussie society as well -- not that I know it well, of course, but Australian YouTube personality Caitlyn Hill once talked very casually about how she'd been "a bit depressed" and I thought about how that is something a lot of Americans would feel like they had to keep to themselves.

https://www.ruokday.com/

  

TWO good reference points to start with :

Beyond Blue

http://www.beyondblue.org.au/

The Black Dog Institute

http://www.blackdoginstitute.org.au/

 ::-3:: 

lovedust wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:BREAKING NEWS

The board have approved the plan.

    

Great news... Kevin Hines survived his fall in 2001. He's been campaigning for today's result for many years, bless him.

The Guardian had a very moving piece on it this morning Lovey:

safety barriers eligible for federal funds. Photograph: Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

San Francisco's iconic Golden Gate Bridge moved a big step closer to getting an oft-debated suicide barrier after bridge officials on Friday approved a $76m (£45m) funding package for a net system that would prevent people from jumping to their deaths.

The bridge district's board of directors voted unanimously in favour of the funding for a steel suicide net. The funding sources are $20m (£12m) in bridge toll revenue, $49m (£29m) in federal money and $7m (£4m) from the state.

A tearful Dan Barks, who lost his son, Donovan, to suicide on the bridge in 2008, said after the vote that he was almost speechless. "A lot of people have done so much incredible work to get this accomplished," he said.

He rose from his knees and shared a tearful embrace with Sue Story of Rocklin, whose son Jacob jumped off the bridge in 2010.

"We did it, Dan! We did it! It's no longer the Bridge of Death anymore," she said.

At least some of the money still requires additional approval. The bridge's board, however, has now taken its final step in adopting the net.

"The tragedy of today is that we can't go back in time, we can't save … the people who jumped off the bridge. But the good thing, with this vote today, we can vote in their memory," board member Janet Reilly said. "We will save many lives who have followed in their footsteps – and that's what so extraordinary about today."

The Golden Gate bridge, with its sweeping views of the Pacific Ocean and San Francisco bay, has long been a destination for people seeking to end their lives. Since it opened in 1937, more than 1,400 people have plunged to their deaths, including a record 46 suicides last year, officials said.

Officials have been discussing a suicide barrier on the bridge for decades. The bridge's board voted in 2008 to install a stainless steel net, rejecting other options, including raising the 4-foot (1.2 metre)-high railings and leaving the iconic span unchanged.

Two years later, they certified the final environmental impact report for the net, which would stretch about 20 feet (six metres) wide on each side of the span. Officials say it will not mar the landmark bridge's appearance.

But funding for the project remained a major obstacle.

A significant hurdle was overcome two years ago when President Barack Obama signed into law a bill making safety barriers and nets eligible for federal funds.

House minority leader Nancy Pelosi of California in a statement Friday praised the bridge's board and assemblyman Tom Ammiano, who has been a staunch supporter of a barrier.

"The Golden Gate bridge is a source of immense pride to San Francisco, but for too many families in our community, it has also been a place of pain," Pelosi said. "A suicide prevention barrier offers a critical second chance for troubled men and women acting on often impulsive suicidal thoughts. Together, we can ensure this magnificent landmark stands as a faithful companion for all San Franciscans, awing and inspiring visitors for generations to come."

Most jumpers suffer a grisly death, with massive internal injuries, broken bones and skull fractures. Some die from internal bleeding. Others drown.

Kevin Hines, who miraculously survived his suicide attempt after jumping off the structure in 2000 at age 19, urged the board before its vote to "not let one more family sit in eternal pain in perpetuity because of politics."

He later broke down after the unanimous vote approving the funding.

"I feel like a giant weight has been lifted off my shoulders, all of our shoulders. I feel free," Hines said. "I feel a sense of hope that I haven't had in a very long time. It's not over yet. We will be here until that net is raised and no more people die."

Bidding on the job is expected to start next year, with completion of construction expected in 2018.

The motion for Friday's vote came from board member and former bridge district director John Moylan, whose grandson, Sean Moylan, jumped off the bridge to his death earlier this month.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/28/golden-gate-bridge-san-francisco-suicide-net

Great news it was passed. I look forward to Sassy's continued interest in the safety provision on America's bridges.   

Anyone that thinks this thread wasn't started to have a go at Quill is either stupid or very naïve.

Nems wrote:Great news it was passed. I look forward to Sassy's continued interest in the safety provision on America's bridges.   

Anyone that thinks this thread wasn't started to have a go at Quill is either stupid or very naïve.

What? Do you expect Sassy to monitor that bridge everyday from now Nems?

Sassy was all in favour of implementing safety on that bridge and according you yourself, so are you ...both of you and some of the rest of us are happy about the decision, do why invent stuff about anyone having a go at quill ?

He is the one who twisted this and brought our names into the ' sassy posse ' and as you don't like sassy or me in particular ,you will happily involve yourself in any silly vendetta against us,


Stick to being happy about the bridge decision Nems, if that's your only concern....

But your laughing emoticon suggests you might not be genuinely happy about the safety measures after all.

Well, it appears that by approving the net for the GG Bridge they might have started help for others. As I said, my friend was saved by the barriers they put on the Clifton Suspension Bridge, but they are possible to get over, this morning:

Bristol mum's appeal for safety nets on Clifton Suspension Bridge

EVER since her son dived from the Clifton Suspension Bridge while under the influence of the horse tranquilliser ketamine, Shielmor Twomey has been determined that the same fate does not befall someone else.

Straight after his death in January 2010 the Bristol mother began a determined campaign to get ketamine reclassified from a class C to a class B drug – and earlier this year celebrated victory when the Government agreed to the reclassification.

But the determined mum's campaign didn't stop there – she is now asking for more anti-suicide measures to be installed on the Clifton Suspension Bridge.

Ms Twomey, who lives in Henbury, would like to see safety nets installed and an extra emergency telephone at the centre of the bridge.

She feels that Bristol should follow in San Francisco's example – where officials are close to approving a safety net for the Golden Gate Bridge – America's biggest suicide spot.

She would also like an extra phone line installed at the centre of the bridge – there are already two at each end – which connects straight to the Samaritans.

"I would like these new measures installed to help save lives," she said.

"The suspension bridge is an important part of Bristol and we should be leading by example.

"If we can prevent someone from taking their own life I believe we should do all we can."

Ms Twomey has started a Facebook group called Stop! Don't Jump – Clifton Suspension Bridge UK to encourage people to share their thoughts and feelings.

Clifton Suspension Bridge Master David Anderson told the Bristol Post: "The Clifton Suspension Bridge Trust takes the safety of people on the bridge very seriously, and continuously reviews the safety measures provided.

"Safety barriers were installed 15 years ago which had an immediate beneficial impact in preventing people climbing on the structure, and this has significantly reduced the incidence of suicide. There are no immediate plans for safety nets or additional telephones on the bridge, although the feasibility and benefits of such additional measures will be considered further."

Read more at http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/Bristol-mum-s-appeal-safety-nets-Clifton/story-21174790-detail/story.html#O8IVoHJiamsACDkK.99

So the approval of the installation on the GG Bridge might set a trend, and other lives might be saved on other bridges.

Sassy wrote:Might I suggest you read back through the thread Bee, as there have been many studies given by well respected medical psychiatric expert bodies backing what Lovey has posted and many of them have been linked to this thread.

Suggest starting at the 'Su icides Mounting' NY article, Bee.

Sassy wrote:Actually Bee, Eds was never threatened, as she is a friend it's not something I would even consider, Irn and I admitted to no such thing, in fact we showed the opposite and it was Quill that turned it away from the original thread, and then Quill started on Lovedust and JD, so you are barking up the wrong tree.

And the one who is not bright is Quill, who keeps claiming all these things and then gets tripped up things come up in the news that shows him up for what he is, a complete Walter Mitty and delusional.

Who said you threatened me?   

Theres's an interesting comment from Michael Blumenfield MD here:

"Many studies have shown that reducing a lethal means can reduce suicide statistics. When non-lethal gas was substituted for coal gas, which was previously known to be the cause of 1/3 of suicides in England, the suicide rate fell 25%. Building a suicidal barrier at the Duke Ellington Bridge in Washington D.C. reduced the number of suicides in a seven year period from twenty-three to one. The suicide rate from the nearby Taft bridge that doesn’t have a suicide barrier did not increase. Similar examples are sited from Augusta, Maine, Bern, Switzerland and Bristol, England."

eddie wrote:

Sassy wrote:Actually Bee, Eds was never threatened, as she is a friend it's not something I would even consider, Irn and I admitted to no such thing, in fact we showed the opposite and it was Quill that turned it away from the original thread, and then Quill started on Lovedust and JD, so you are barking up the wrong tree.

And the one who is not bright is Quill, who keeps claiming all these things and then gets tripped up things come up in the news that shows him up for what he is, a complete Walter Mitty and delusional.

Who said you threatened me?   

Quill's post at 3.57 this morning:

Seeing sass actually threaten eds, and eds standing up, was incredible.


See what I mean about hlis lies and twists?

He also asserted that Irn and I have said this thread was a ruse, when, not only have we ever said it, we have said it was not and we were disputing the facts he was wrong about and because of what he told us, should have known he was wrong about. The rubbish he said we posted, was the agenda, giving the information of what the Directors had agreed over the years and how they had found the money.

That's what Quill does, bald faced lies, diversion, condescention as if he know more than you do about anything, especially when it is shown that he not only doesn't, but has stated in the past a reason why he should.

lovedust wrote:
Theres's an interesting comment from Michael Blumenfield MD here:

"Many studies have shown that reducing a lethal means can


reduce suicide statistics. When non-lethal gas was substituted for coal gas, which was previously known to be the cause of 1/3 of suicides in England, the suicide rate fell 25%.  Building a suicidal barrier at the Duke Ellington Bridge in Washington D.C. reduced the number of suicides in a seven year period from twenty-three to one. The suicide rate from the nearby Taft bridge that doesn’t have a suicide barrier did not increase. Similar examples are sited from Augusta, Maine, Bern, Switzerland and Bristol, England."

Wow!..23 suicides down to just the one in a 7 year period because of the barrier in Washington ...that really does speak for itself LD eh.

Sassy wrote:

eddie wrote:


Who said you threatened me?   

Quill's post at 3.57 this morning:

Seeing sass actually threaten eds, and eds standing up, was incredible.


See what I mean about hlis lies and twists?

He also asserted that Irn and I have said this thread was a ruse, when, not only have we ever said it, we have said it was not and we were disputing the facts he was wrong about and because of what he told us, should have known he was wrong about.    The rubbish he said we posted, was the agenda, giving the information of what the Directors had agreed over the years and how they had found the money.

That's what Quill does, bald faced lies, diversion, condescention as if he know more than you do about anything, especially when it is shown that he not only doesn't, but has stated in the past a reason why he should.    

I read and replied to that post and never saw he said you threatened me?
I must've missed that.

Well I certainly never saw you threaten me lol, whatcha gonna do come and gimme a birch slap?   

eddie wrote:

Sassy wrote:

Quill's post at 3.57 this morning:

Seeing sass actually threaten eds, and eds standing up, was incredible.


See what I mean about hlis lies and twists?

He also asserted that Irn and I have said this thread was a ruse, when, not only have we ever said it, we have said it was not and we were disputing the facts he was wrong about and because of what he told us, should have known he was wrong about.    The rubbish he said we posted, was the agenda, giving the information of what the Directors had agreed over the years and how they had found the money.

That's what Quill does, bald faced lies, diversion, condescention as if he know more than you do about anything, especially when it is shown that he not only doesn't, but has stated in the past a reason why he should.    

I read and replied to that post and never saw he said you threatened me?
I must've missed that.

Well I certainly never saw you threaten me lol, whatcha gonna do come and gimme a birch slap?   

Ye, puts yer fists up lol!!!!! Truly thats the way he works, setting friends against friends. Some are stupid enough to fall for it. Thankfully, he was too subtle this time and you never even noticed it! That's really funny  ::hndbg::  

And yet still sassy is going on about Quill and not talking about people vulnerable.

More evidence this was nothing more than a pathetic attempt to goad and attack a poster!

Didge wrote:And yet still sassy is going on about Quill and not talking about people vulnerable.

More evidence this was nothing more than a pathetic attempt to goad and attack a poster!

We've already talked about the vunerable people and how it looks like this decision is going to help people campaigning about the Bristol Bridge. If Quill is stupid enough to say I threatened Eddie, I not going to ignore it. Try your shit stirring spoon on someone else, rather that someone who doesn't give a damn. I was talking to Eddie about a particular sentence, which related to us, so do one.

Joy Division wrote:

lovedust wrote:
Theres's an interesting comment from Michael Blumenfield MD here:

"Many studies have shown that reducing a lethal means can


reduce suicide statistics. When non-lethal gas was substituted for coal gas, which was previously known to be the cause of 1/3 of suicides in England, the suicide rate fell 25%.  Building a suicidal barrier at the Duke Ellington Bridge in Washington D.C. reduced the number of suicides in a seven year period from twenty-three to one. The suicide rate from the nearby Taft bridge that doesn’t have a suicide barrier did not increase. Similar examples are sited from Augusta, Maine, Bern, Switzerland and Bristol, England."

Wow!..23 suicides down to just the one in a 7 year period because of the barrier in Washington ...that really does speak for itself LD eh.

Yep JD, the more people realise that stopping suicide at a place that attracts people to do it, doesn't mean that they go somewhere else to do it, the more people will be saved. As I said, already started a campaign in Bristol where my friend nearly killed herself, the barriers there stop some, but a net would stop the more determined.

lovedust wrote:
Theres's an interesting comment from Michael Blumenfield MD here:

"Many studies have shown that reducing a lethal means can reduce suicide statistics. When non-lethal gas was substituted for coal gas, which was previously known to be the cause of 1/3 of suicides in England, the suicide rate fell 25%.  Building a suicidal barrier at the Duke Ellington Bridge in Washington D.C. reduced the number of suicides in a seven year period from twenty-three to one. The suicide rate from the nearby Taft bridge that doesn’t have a suicide barrier did not increase. Similar examples are sited from Augusta, Maine, Bern, Switzerland and Bristol, England."

Common sense isn't it? If someone decides to kill themselves they have, as the saying goes 'to screw their courage to the sticking point'. If they then find that they will only hurt themselves and maybe live their lives in a wheelchair, the 'courage' goes and they don't go on anywhere else.

I see nobody can actually show this is actually going to deter people from attempting suicide, or how where there was human intervention will now be lost and how they helped people.

I feel this is going to have a bad affect and other methods will rise because of this, at least before there was some sort of control, now the problem will be pushed elsewhere

Sassy wrote:

Joy Division wrote:



Wow!..23 suicides down to just the one in a 7 year period because of the barrier in Washington ...that really does speak for itself LD eh.

Yep JD, the more people realise that stopping suicide at a place that attracts people to do it, doesn't mean that they go somewhere else to do it, the more people will be saved.   As I said, already started a campaign in Bristol where my friend nearly killed herself, the barriers there stop some, but a net would stop the more determined.

I agree with you sass, people may still visit those suicide spots, bit if they can't jump because of safety measures , then it will definitely deter some from going another route....and as daft as this might sound I think some people visit or actually take their own life at these suicide spots BECAUSE they feel some sort of comfort knowing others have taken their lives there, so it might make them feel ' less alone' when jumping ,if  you know what I mean?

Joy Division wrote:

Sassy wrote:

Yep JD, the more people realise that stopping suicide at a place that attracts people to do it, doesn't mean that they go somewhere else to do it, the more people will be saved.   As I said, already started a campaign in Bristol where my friend nearly killed herself, the barriers there stop some, but a net would stop the more determined.

I agree with you sass, people may still visit those sluice spots, bit if they can't jump because of safety measures , then it will definitely deter some from going another route....and as daft as this might sound I think some people visit or actually take their own life at these suicide spots BECAUSE they feel some sort of comfort knowing others have taken their lives there, so it might make them feel ' less alone' when jumping ,if  you know what I mean?

How will it though?
If now this place is not possible to use, then this place will not even be contemplated with someone on the verge of desperation, it will just be once where vulnerable people did once use, now instead a person attempting will plan other methods. At least there was once a chance to prevent this with human intervention with patrols, now that is lost, a person would seek easier roots to try, where now no patrol may stumble across them.
This only has two benefits, preventing accidents and those who experience the trauma, but will not have any success in deterring anyone who wishes to attempt suicide.

I suggest you learn to read, as on this thread many studies by very reputable mental health experts all over the world have shown the exact opposite. But I do realise you will take no notice of them because you can't possibly say that someone knows more than you, so frankly, any other posts of yours of the above nature will be taken for (in Quill's phrase) cow, and not worth the time it takes to read them.

Sassy wrote:I suggest you learn to read, as on this thread many studies by very reputable mental health experts all over the world have shown the exact opposite.   But I do realise you will take no notice of them because you can't possibly say that someone knows more than you, so frankly, any other posts of yours of the above nature will be taken for (in Quill's phrase) cow, and not worth the time it takes to read them.

Many studies count for didley squat when here they are based as seen off human intervention, where now it is nets instead, facts are facts, the fact is where something is not accessible it does not mean it will deter someone attempting suicide. many other studies back my view in helping those vulnerable.
You offer nothing to refute my points but badly rely on what others say, that is a complete copout.
The reality is in America, this method only represents around 2-5%, so it is not even in the 5 most used methods.
Again this will only benefit accidents and those who suffer seeing such traumas, there is little to no evidence to claim this will deter people intent on killing themselves, even more so now it will not be a place they can use.

You offer bugger all to the debate, aprt from starting this to attack a poster. As seen, every time you cannot think for yourself and just go off what you think others believe, the best prevention is with helping vulnerable people in the first place, as you cannot take away all methods they will choose, something it seems goes way above your pay grade

Didge, suicides in Britain fell by 25% when Britain switched from coal gas to a less lethal form. Noone is suggesting *all* the people who contemplated suicide on the GG won't go on to attempt suicide by other methods, but some won't. The people conceive a GG death is painless, for example, won't go on to kill themselves by obviously painful methods.

lovedust wrote:
Didge, suicides in Britain fell by 25% when Britain switched from coal gas to a less lethal form. Noone is suggesting *all* the people who contemplated suicide on the GG won't go on to attempt suicide by other methods, but some won't. The people conceive a GG death is painless, for example, won't go on to kill themselves by obviously painful methods.

That does not mean it was this that created the downfall in suicide attempts, you see this is what is poor about people who place connections when other factors may well have played apart in the decrease in attempts, it may well have more to do with how a country is doing.
So again such methodology is flawed when it fails to take many other aspects into account and why such methodology is both dangerous an naive. It falsely associates something which may have no affect at all.
There will always be plenty of methods to choose from, thus the best method will always people helping those vunerable

Didge, it has already been pointed out that part of the funding came from Proposition 63, $7mill, which they considered to be a small amount of their budget. Proposition 63 is aimed at helping people with mental health difficulties and those contemplating suicide in California, so other people are getting lots of help already..

Sassy wrote:Didge, it has already been pointed out that part of the funding came from Proposition 63, $7mill, which they considered to be a small amount of their budget.   Proposition 63 is aimed at helping people with mental health difficulties and those contemplating suicide in California, so other people are getting lots of help already..

Oh dear, again you keep repeating yourself and not counter my points, just because some agree which I am of course happy they are doing this as it will prevent accidents and save people trauma, it again does not prevent people attempting suicide, because as seen people who jump represent one of the least chosen methods.
So you are so off what is even being discussed, in that people poorly assume as you do, the nets will help decrease attempted suicide.

It won;t, as seen, it will just not even been contemplated as a means to try!

This post was made by Didge who is currently on your ignore list. Display this post.

There's only so much waffle and bollox anyone can take, and I'm not take Didge's any longer.

Didge wrote:

lovedust wrote:
Didge, suicides in Britain fell by 25% when Britain switched from coal gas to a less lethal form. Noone is suggesting *all* the people who contemplated suicide on the GG won't go on to attempt suicide by other methods, but some won't. The people conceive a GG death is painless, for example, won't go on to kill themselves by obviously painful methods.

That does not mean it was this that created the downfall in suicide attempts, you see this is what is poor about people who place connections when other factors may well have played apart in the decrease in attempts, it may well have more to do with how a country is doing.
So again such methodology is flawed when it fails to take many other aspects into account and why such methodology is both dangerous an naive. It falsely associates something which may have no affect at all.
There will always be plenty of methods to choose from, thus the best method will always people helping those vunerable

OK: What other factors were in play to explain the correlation between the 25% downturn in the number of total suicides in Britain and the switch from coal gas to a less lethal form of gas, when previously a third of all the suicides in Britain had killed themselves with the use of coal gas?