Express your nature.

Upload, Share, and Be Recognized.

Join with Facebook
or join manually

Old Comments:

2008-03-29 09:54:09
ONLY thirty-seven people died in the last thirty-seven years from head on crashes on the Golden Gate Bridge, and you think we should spend money on some sort of guard rail? Whatever system deployed has to be portable, because the lanes change on the GG bridge as the traffic varies: in the morning commute, there are two more lanes for southward traveling traffic into San Francisco, and in the evening, there are two more lanes Northward, for traffic to flow out of SF. How many millions of dollars more do you propose California should spend to prevent an average of one death per year (this in a state that is laying off teachers in order to trim our budget)? I'll give you another point to ponder as you determine a cost/benefit analysis for this project: Wouldn't the money for a lane barrier be better spent on better suicide prevention barriers and nets to catch the suicides that jump from the GGB? I know that a lot more than 37 people have leapt to their deaths from the GGB in the last 37 years.
2008-03-29 03:35:21
The need for a guard rail between the center "suicide lanes" is pretty clear; this week a car crossed over into the oncoming lane, injuring 7 people. Since 1971, 37 people have been killed in similar accidents. Oh, yeah. Nice picture.