8 ms·
Of course, but the same is true for alcohol, and prohibition doesn't exactly seem to work there. In all cases encouraging individual responsibility and providi
by fidotron 12y ago
Of course, but the same is true for alcohol, and prohibition doesn't exactly seem to work there.
In all cases encouraging individual responsibility and providing frameworks to help people get their shit together when things do go bad seem to be more viable in the long run.
This is related to why I find things such as the anti-suicide nets on the Golden Gate Bridge slightly perverse. You really need to be asking why people want to do it rather than just taking the means away.
- lmm 12y agoDo people who're caught by the nets make further attempts? The reality of jumping off something tall could plausibly make a difference to people.
- fidotron 12y agoDo people still jump if the nets are there? Surely they just go and find somewhere else. The only people that seem to claim it would make a difference are those that jumped off something without protection, somehow survived, and in the process had the epiphany, but that seems ever so slightly unlikely to occur if there's a net in the way.
- pyre 12y agoSuicide is a more general problem than substance abuse. Providing frameworks to help people would not be 100% effective and a 'lapse' on the suicide front is something that one is less likely to be able to recover from than a lapse on substance abuse. So I don't see why anti-suicide nets are 'perverse.'
- zevyoura 12y agoThis New Yorker article[0] makes a pretty compelling case that the Golden Gate nets would be very effective; it's somewhat of an unusual case in that it's such an iconic suicide destination. [0]http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2003/10/13/031013fa_fact?currentPage=all http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2003/10/13/031013fa_fact?cu...