
Illegally climbing the Golden Gate bridge at dawn (2011) - jcbmllgn
http://www.nopromiseofsafety.com/?p=1680
======
dkokelley
I'm really not sure how I feel about these things. On one hand, these are
great escapades, and they result in fantastic pictures. I do like seeing
"forbidden and forgotten areas". On the other hand, I would never want to
encourage anyone to do something like this. It's illegal for a reason. The
reason is not just your own safety. If he had fallen on to the road side of
the bridge, not only would he die, but he would risk the safety of others
driving across the bridge. Even in the best-case where he doesn't hit a
vehicle or cause an accident, the morning commute is screwed up because of
what on the surface appears to be another suicide.

~~~
DanBC
People committing suicide would tend to jump off the bridge into the water?
There are, very roughly, one person committing suicide per fortnight from the
Goldengate Bridge.

One idea to slow down that number o fdeaths is to install a big net. It'll
hurt when people land on it, and that might be enough to snap them out of the
impulsive decision to end their lives.

The net would cost about $45m.

Some people might feel that spending the money on mental health services and
suicide prevention services would be a better investment.

([http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/26/us/26bcjames.html?pagewant...](http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/26/us/26bcjames.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0))

Superficially it's obvious why Fresno CA has such a high suicide rate (14.8
per 100,000) - low employment, high crime, staggering drug (especially meth)
addiction. But Sacramento CA has higher rates of suicide (22.7 per 100,000),
and it's not as easy to work out why.

~~~
ryguytilidie
I'm genuinely curious how a net to go under the bridge would cost $45m. How?

~~~
lostlogin
I've only been there once, but I'm picking that harsh weather, height and the
need for attachment points outside the existing bridge make it expensive. I'm
not at all surprised that it is expensive, but I am that it hasn't been done
yet.

~~~
timr
A primary complaint, believe it or not, is that the net would hurt the
aesthetics of the bridge.

People have been pushing for a net for years, but a variety of (lame) excuses
keep conspiring against it. The reality is that there's no really good reason
to keep from doing it...just a lot of little bad ones that seem to win.

~~~
sneak
How about "it's not society's job to keep people (even insane ones) from doing
what they want with their own bodies"?

You can take this to apply to everything from the inside of one's uterus to
hurling oneself off a bridge.

~~~
lostlogin
It is societies job to look after everyone, especially the unwell. I do recall
there being a handrail, so someone believes in some safety.

~~~
sneak
Handrails are to prevent accidents by people not trying to hurl themselves
off.

You are confusing safety with coercion.

~~~
lostlogin
I get your first statement, however If someone falls off due to poor sight/bad
knees/inner ear problems or someone jumps off due to a temporary depressive
illness, I see little difference. All relate to medical problems. It's not
that I'm rabidly anti suicide - I am pro suicide rights - but I'd hardly call
a net coercion. Can you explain this for me? Grafton Bridge in Auckland has
put up Perspex screens for suicide prevention (and the safely of those under
the bridge) instead of nets.
[http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grafton_Bridge](http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grafton_Bridge)

------
base698
I have been BASE jumping for quite a while and within that community there is
a strong thread of leave no trace. It reduces the legal risk, eliminates
property damage, and keeps it open for everyone else.

Back to Joe, I found his blog and saw a picture of him setting off fireworks
on top of a crane I had just climbed and jumped in the city I used to live. I
kept thinking the increased security probably should have led to my arrest
since setting off fireworks isn't exactly stealth and if I was property owner
and found that I'd definitely be horrified enough to increase security. I
tracked him down and took him out to an antenna for him to climb and
photograph warning him what could happen if he kept posting so publicly. He
was eventually was arrested for this:

[http://www.nopromiseofsafety.com/?p=311](http://www.nopromiseofsafety.com/?p=311)

He was an interesting dude. Modified a car to have a skin of bottle caps all
over it. He does not walk to the beat of normal society's drum.

~~~
dboat
"He does not walk to the beat of normal society's drum."

...says the base jumper.

~~~
base698
We come from all walks of life. Met more than a few start up founders,
doctors, and Googlers

------
bluetidepro
Amazing things like this make me wish I wasn't afraid of heights. Even the
pictures sort of make me feel uneasy. Haha Regardless, this is incredible.

~~~
nsxwolf
You're not afraid of heights, you're afraid of falling. To me, NOT being
afraid of heights is irrational.

~~~
singlow
I love falling. It's hitting the ground that I'm afraid of.

~~~
ImprovedSilence
Flying is the art of throwing yourself at the ground and missing.

~~~
foobarbazqux
Hi Ford.

------
oldcigarette
In railfanning we don't look kindly on people who trespass to great the
'perfect shot' because they just end up screwing things up for everyone else
with ever increasing rules, surveillance and fences. Please think about the
consequences of your actions when doing something like this.

~~~
base698
Same for BASE jumping. I had a talking too with the guy from this blog. He was
eventually arrested, but after getting a few things we were jumping locked up.

There is a history of tar and feathering (with cold tar) people that ruin it
for everyone else.

------
incision
If you like this sort of thing, you might appreciate Vitaly Raskalov [0].

0: [http://englishrussia.com/2013/03/22/on-top-of-the-
pyramide/#...](http://englishrussia.com/2013/03/22/on-top-of-the-
pyramide/#more-122040)

~~~
joshfraser
I was offered the chance to do this in Egypt. I was told that it was totally
safe as long as I brought along enough bride money in the event that we got
caught.

~~~
wololo
how much?

~~~
joshfraser
$20

------
shawabawa3
> In a choice between a 300-foot-fall to water and a 30-foot-fall to concrete
> the winner is discernable if not immediately clear

I'm guessing the correct choice is the concrete, but for some reason I feel
like I would still prefer to go for the water...

~~~
nathanb
This is why I love the TV show Mythbusters: they routinely demonstrate how our
intuition on these matters is wrong.

(A 30-foot fall onto concrete might still kill you, but a 300-foot fall into
water will definitely kill you. And if the fall onto concrete doesn't kill
you, it will be much easier to get you the medical attention you need if
you're not floating in San Francisco Bay).

~~~
Xcelerate
Huh, I never saw the Mythbusters show. Why would a 300-foot fall into water
definitely kill you? I know the world dive record is 172 feet. And terminal
velocity for a human is about 120 mph. I imagine if you make yourself flat for
most of the fall you could lower that speed and then right before you hit the
water take a "pencil" position. Would you not at least have some chance of
surviving that?

~~~
nathanb
Water is noncompressible. Maybe the word "definitely" was misused because
there's always the possibility for a fluke, but my understanding is that at
terminal velocity hitting water is functionally equivalent to hitting
concrete.

Look up the "hammer drop" episode of Mythbusters if you want to see the long
explanation.

The second point still stands, though. I'd rather fall onto the concrete,
where I could get help quickly and if I knocked myself out but survived I
wouldn't drown.

~~~
glurgh
In a 300 foot fall, you're not reaching the bottom at terminal velocity.
Mythbusters have in fact gone over this a few times and the results are a bit
different - falling from such a height onto more or less anything is almost
certainly lethal. Given equivalent height, even at terminal velocity, you're
still slightly better off falling into water.

~~~
base698
You're still going about 80 mph. Just from memory it's roughly 20 mph/second
until you hit 4 seconds where it's reduced to 10 mph/second due to air
resistance. The greatest chance you'd have is to impact shallow water with
mud. This has saved at least three people, of which there are fairly
spectacular Youtube videos.

------
gesman
This is lovely and amazing!

90% of chance of law enforcement to be in touch with you soon, unfortunately.
This is akin posting Youtube video of yourself breaking legal speed limits.

~~~
Ricapar
Just FYI:

    
    
        Date: February 24, 2011
    

If they haven't given him a call by now, they probably don't care at this
point.

~~~
ultimoo
I wonder whether the statute of limitations applies to such things. I hope it
does.

~~~
aroch
It'd be trespass and other crimes on federal properly, so 5 years, no?

~~~
devb
How is it federal property? It's owned and operated by an independent quasi-
governmental organization.

~~~
aroch
The bridge is classified as a national monument, which would protect it as
federal property.

~~~
devb
I can't seem to find a single thing online that supports your statement,
either concerning the monument part or federal jurisdiction of the bridge.

~~~
devb
Further, it does not appear on this list:

[http://www.cr.nps.gov/archeology/sites/antiquities/Monuments...](http://www.cr.nps.gov/archeology/sites/antiquities/MonumentsList.htm)

I'm assuming you made an error.

------
yason
I caught myself wondering why climbing the bridge has to be _illegal_.

You can't practically damage the bridge. You will mostly just hurt yourself if
something happens. Theoretically the worst that could happen is you could fall
onto a car but the damages incurred by a dead climber would be peanuts for any
insurance company — people crash their cars by themselves alone all the time.
And that could already happen because climbing being illegal doesn't stop the
people who want to climb the bridge, as demonstrated in the article.

Of course, there's there "could" track where anything "could" happen thus it
must be declared illegal before it happens, but you can extend that thinking
to nearly everything until living just becomes impossible. For example, it
"should be illegal to climb the big rocks on the shores because you could fall
on an innocent party on a boat".

I would be inclined to reserve the illegal status for activities that actively
affect other people. Stealing, mugging, murdering, manslaughtering,
kidnapping, etc. Conversely, accidents just happen.

~~~
mabhatter
Because if the general public was doing it 50% or better would be squished.
Public employees have to clean your guts up off the pavement each time it
happens. It's not "victimless" after the same old guy has scrapped 30 people
off the bridge and has mental health issues.

------
dfc
_It is the most photographed landmark in the country_

I am sorry but that is BS. I could not find any statistics about "photographed
landmarks" but a quick check of any measure of tourism and this seems
extremely unlikely. For starters San Francisco's tourism does not come close
to NYC.

~~~
DanBC
([http://www.nbcnews.com/id/43240059/ns/travel-
travel_tips/t/m...](http://www.nbcnews.com/id/43240059/ns/travel-
travel_tips/t/most-photographed-places-earth/))

> _Mining data from 35 million Flickr photos, scientists at Cornell University
> made some surprising discoveries: Not only did the world 's most
> photographed cities (and the most captured landmark in each) emerge, but
> also so did the most common angles for shooting each place._

There are some American cities in the top twenty-five; and some Californian
cities there; and San Francisco is listed at number 3, but for Union Square,
not the Golden Gate Bridge.

This[1] AOL page has another list of US sights.
([http://news.travel.aol.com/2009/08/27/must-snaps-americas-
mo...](http://news.travel.aol.com/2009/08/27/must-snaps-americas-most-
photographed-landmarks/)) - they say it's the Coit Tower.

[1] A bafflingly bad page! Here's the tiny text-reading box on my display.
([http://imgur.com/aRPqWr5](http://imgur.com/aRPqWr5))

~~~
dfc
Why did you say "there are some American cities...and San Francisco is listed
at number 3" and not mention:

    
    
      1st most photographed city: New York
      Landmark: Empire State Building.
    
    

Updated:

Found the source[1], the golden gate bridge did not make their list of top 7
in san francisco. Which could be due to the methodology but it is important to
note that there is a problem of selection bias in the article, which may
artificially inflate SF's prominence. Its worth pointing out that for NYC
landmarks the apple store was ranked higher than liberty island (AKA statue of
liberty). Francophiles can rest easy, the Eifel Tower crushed the competition.

[1] [https://www.cs.cornell.edu/~dph/papers/photomap-
www09.pdf](https://www.cs.cornell.edu/~dph/papers/photomap-www09.pdf)

------
milliams
Awful choice of font colour.

~~~
apexys
Better than pure white though. Too much contrast is problematic for some
people.

~~~
milliams
On my screen however, I literally couldn't read it without selecting all the
text.

~~~
nathanb
Consider: [https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/color-
toggle/](https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/color-toggle/)

------
Ricapar
He missed the part of the story where he has to get back down!

~~~
martin-adams
Maybe he's still there.

------
js2
Performance art from the Williamsburg Bridge:

[http://gothamist.com/2011/11/19/video_see_the_williamsburg_b...](http://gothamist.com/2011/11/19/video_see_the_williamsburg_bridge_a.php)

If you enjoy these sorts of stories, you'll love watching Man on Wire --
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_on_Wire](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_on_Wire)

------
quackerhacker
Mesmerizing. Apart of the glitz, I think of living in a city, is exploring.

When I was young with friends in SF (we were around 12), I remember the most
adrenaline pumping thing we did was walk in the muni tunnel off I think Duboce
(back in 01', so I'm not sure of the right names) and we'd always climb to
roof access in the condo where they lived.

------
lcrs
There's a lovely little book by John Law which includes climbing this bridge,
back in the 70s:
[http://www.furnacepress.com/publications/law.html](http://www.furnacepress.com/publications/law.html)

------
bjourne
Why does every photographer have to use that "make colors look like xbox
games" effect on their photos? I much rather look at unprocessed photos that
have not been distorted by color enhancing filters.

------
nazka
Someone has an idea to find what camera he used? I tried to find it on flickr
and google.image but there is nothing. I really like how it captured the
colors and the light.

------
barce
You can get a permit for this and do it legally:
[http://www.parksconservancy.org/visit/tours/golden-gate-
brid...](http://www.parksconservancy.org/visit/tours/golden-gate-bridge.html)

~~~
aray
Looking at those photos it seems like they just have a staged segment where
you can get a "climbing the tower" picture taken, not actually climb the
tower.

[http://www.flickr.com/photos/parksconservancy/sets/721576304...](http://www.flickr.com/photos/parksconservancy/sets/72157630405662316/)

