Should they build a suicide barrier on the Golden Gate Bridge?

Question

I just saw a movie called "The Bridge" about all the suicides that take place at the Golden Gate and it was shocking to watch all those people leaping to their deaths. FYI, they jump from 250 ft high and hit the water at 75 mph which is like a truck hitting a concrete wall. Coroners describe their internal organs as being crushed to a pulp by their broken ribs. Average number of jumpers is 1 every two weeks and the grand total now is well over 1200 people ages ranging from 80 to 14. It is the most popular location to commit suicide in the world. Yet, San Franciscans refuse to build a barrier (ala Eiffel Tower, Empire State building) because it would not look aesthetically pleasing. Do you think they should build a barrier, even if it "uglies" the bridge up a bit? Or should we not tarnish a famous art-deco landmark for the sake of a few dozen jumpers every year?

Most of you have said they will simply go elsewhere to commit suicide. However, here's another statistic I forgot to mention that is very telling:

"In 1978 Seiden published a study called "Where are they now?" of 515 people who were prevented from jumping off the bridge. He found that only 6 percent went on to kill themselves.

The Eiffel Tower in Paris, the Empire State Building in New York, the Arroyo Seco Bridge in Pasadena and the Bloor Street Viaduct in Toronto were notorious suicide magnets until barriers were erected. Tellingly, when a suicide barrier was appended to the Bloor Street Viaduct -- after 480 deaths in 85 years -- people didn't drift to another bridge and create a new suicide magnet.

"When suicide becomes difficult," Meyer says, "people do not switch to another method. They tend to get help.

If I knew I could save 94% of 1218 people from dying by uglying up the Bridge a little, I would.

Answer 1

Well, if people want to kill themselves they will do regardless of whether or not the bridge is available. 1,200 is an insane amount of people though. I did not know this fact and I will not feel so happy next time I cross the bridge.

Answer 2

I heard there has been many failed attempts at it....I forget what website I was just on but it said that they were trying to work out Suicide Barrier Plan #8...Buts its going to cost anywhere from 15-20 million dollars. I don't see us tax payers should pay that much to save a few hundred lives...Theres also a stat out there that says if suicide is interrupted, that 94% wont reattempt it, they'll go get help for their issues. But when word gets out about a suicide barrier, new suicidal people will find another way to kill themselves! I vote no barriers on the Golden Gate!

Answer 3

I was just there on Monday (on the bridge that is) and I know your data is acurate. However they do have a suicide barrier where there is land...which does "uglies" the bridge up there....once i got to the open area it was wonderful. But if they build a barier they are just going to go to a different bridge in the bay area, or run into the cars on the bridge. If people want to commit suicide they are going to do it regardless of where they can or can't. At least they will die in a beautiful place and maybe have one last glimpse of hope.

Answer 4

As everyone has pointed out, if someone wants to jump off the bridge, they will find a way. An ugly barrier won't stop them.

Someone commits suicide in the US every 15 minutes. Perhaps rather than spending money on a barrier, funding should be given to suicide prevention, counseling programs, and research into spotting and treating at-risk people.

Answer 5

I think we should not build a barrier that makes the bridge look unpleasant.

Comparing with the number of people who used the Golden Gate Bridge and the number of people jumped off from it over the past 70 years, that suicide number is tiny. Tens of millions of people had used the bridge before. But among all these people, only about 1,200 of them had jumped off the bridge.

Let say that 50,000,000 had used the bridge in the past 70 years. The calculation of 120/50,000,000 gives us the suicide rate of 0.00024%. That means for every 416,666 users of the bridge, there is only 1 person jumping off the bridge. That number is not a big number comparing to the number of people got killed by gun shooting in San Francisco.

I would rather spend the money on suicide prevention programs than to put a barrier on the bridge. Suicide prevention programs are the actual "barriers" to suicide.

If people want to kill themselves, regardless of you building a barrier or not, they would still find ways to kill themselves.

They can still jump off high rise buildings, burning down their own house, driving into a train, or buy guns to kill himself while also killing others.

The environmental and economic impact is less severe when comparing a person jumping off the Gold Gate Bridge to a person burning himself dead at home, while destroying his own house and neighborhood houses.

Answer 6

An average of 1 every 2 weeks? Wow, i didn't know that. As with your question, I don't think that they should build a barrier either. I mean, if someone is really committed to kill themselves, they will find a way. So personally I don't think a barrier will lessen the number of suicides.

btw, when and where was this movie broad casted? Or is it on video? I would like to see it also.

Answer 7

No. They would then simply climb a tower and jump. If you are fit enough to get over a rail, you are likely fit enough to climb a tower high enough to jump over the rail. I have transported 2 GG Bridge jumper survivors. Guess what their thought was on the way down? Oh *^#$...what have I done?

Answer 8

Everytime I go to SF I walk across that bridge and marvel at the incredible view and the cold air. I would hate to think of anything preventing me or anyone else from that view. Why spend millions of dollars when people will climb around it?

Answer 9

Why not make it your life's goal to patrol that bridge, stopping people from committing suicide?