Kid survives Golden Gate Bridge jump

Sports Journalists Forum – Media, Newsroom & Reporting Talk

Help Support Sports Journalists Forum:

Smallpotatoes

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2002
Messages
14,979
http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-national/20110311/news.teensurvivesgoldengatejump/

He just had a broken tailbone and a torn lung.
I wonder if anyone else has survived the jump.
 
Dozens of people die each year from jumping? How is that walkway not made jump proof?
 
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases. Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change.
He "wanted to look cool," apparently.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/03/10/BA101I8RMI.DTL&tsp=1

I guess he had a pimped-out coffin already chosen.

Not Mensa material, that's for sure.
 
I believe there was even a documentary made about peopling jumping from the bridge a couple years ago, no? I remember reading a review of it by Ebert, but it was an independent film, and they don't make it out here that often.
 
sgreenwell said:
I believe there was even a documentary made about peopling jumping from the bridge a couple years ago, no? I remember reading a review of it by Ebert, but it was an independent film, and they don't make it out here that often.

Its broken into nine pieces to watch on YouTube. Also, I never ever watch OWN or Dr. Phil but was over at Ms. BYM2's place yesterday and Dr. Phil was interviewing the creator of the film. eerie timing.
 
There's a movie out, I believe it's called "The Bridge", which videotapes about 15 people jumping off Golden Gate Bridge.

It is a powerful film.

They interviewed one of the survivors. He said that he contemplated suicide for weeks, but as soon as his feet left the bridge, he regretted jumping. He was mangled pretty badly but recovered.

A broken tailbone and a torn lung, and nothing else, is a miracle. From what I read, to have any chance at surviving, you have to hit the water just right.

About two dozen people have survived IIRC. One person survived, recovered then went out and finished the job. Only person to jump off the Golden Gate Bridge twice.
 
You have to be a special kind of crazy to survive that jump, recover from what must have been horrific injuries, then go and repeat the feat, knowing there's a chance that, once again, you will fail to die and you will suffer horribly.

I guess you could say the second-time-lucky jumper took.....a leap of faith.

yeahhh.jpg
 
Now mothers all over the Bay area are saying: "If Johnny jumped off the Golden Gate Bridge, would you?"
 
Dumb question, but is it the height or the impact that messes up your body that much?
 
NickMordo said:
Dumb question, but is it the height or the impact that messes up your body that much?

The impact. You're going about 75 mph when you hit the water, which basically makes it as hard as asphalt.
 
One of the first Mythbusters episodes dealt with the myth that one of the bridge builders survived the fall because the hammers attached to his tool belt broke the surface tension of the water.

They couldn't replicate the result, but force of the impact on the test dummy was unreal.
 
Double J said:
You have to be a special kind of crazy to survive that jump, recover from what must have been horrific injuries, then go and repeat the feat, knowing there's a chance that, once again, you will fail to die and you will suffer horribly.

I guess you could say the second-time-lucky jumper took.....a leap of faith.

yeahhh.jpg

Boooooooo
 
Tad Friend had a tremendous story in the New Yorker about jumpers on the Golden Gate Bridge.

http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2003/10/13/031013fa_fact

The whole thing - which talks to survivors, about guardrails, about the romance of the bridge - is chilling. But this is the passage about what actually happens.

In the four-second fall from the bridge, survivors say, time does seem to slow. On her way down in 1979, Ann McGuire said to herself, “I must be about to hit,” three times. But the impact is not clean: the coroner’s usual verdict, suicide caused by “multiple blunt-force injuries,” euphemizes the devastation. Many people don’t look down first, and so those who jump from the north end of the bridge hit the land instead of the water they saw farther out. Jumpers who hit the water do so at about seventy-five miles an hour and with a force of fifteen thousand pounds per square inch. Eighty-five per cent of them suffer broken ribs, which rip inward and tear through the spleen, the lungs, and the heart. Vertebrae snap, and the liver often ruptures. “It’s as if someone took an eggbeater to the organs of the body and ground everything up,” Ron Wilton, a Coast Guard officer, once observed.
Those who survive the impact usually die soon afterward. If they go straight in, they plunge so deeply into the water—which reaches a depth of three hundred and fifty feet—that they drown. (The rare survivors always hit feet first, and at a slight angle.) A number of bodies become trapped in the eddies stirred by the bridge’s massive stone piers, and sometimes wash up as far away as the Farallon Islands, about thirty miles off. These corpses suffer from “severe marine depredation”—shark attacks and, particularly, the attentions of crabs, which feed on the eyeballs first, then the loose flesh of the cheeks. Already this year, two bodies have vanished entirely.
 
I remember that New Yorker article, it was tremendous. The Bridge I also highly recommend as a film.

The one thing I'll always remember -- even though there's a decent chance it was simply written for effect -- was the jumper who said, I am going to walk to the bridge and if anyone smiles at me along the way, I will turn back and not jump. Anyone who's lived in SF would understand why that's such an arresting and entirely conceivable sentence. SF is one of my favorite places on the planet, but I could never live there again. Too many people are too miserable in paradise.

I don't want to turn this into an anti-SF rant but I have so many stories. I'll just say the movie is worth watching.
 
SCS, I moved to the Bay Area on Jan. 1, 1972 and lived there more on than off for almost two decades.

It's a broad generalization, but Bay Area residents have an incredibly overinflated opinion of themselves and their standard of living; are quick to criticize others who don't agree with their viewpoints and at the same time, unwilling to see their own faults; and almost unapproachable in public, almost to a fanatical paranoia.

I lived in one apartment complex in Pleasant Hill for four years and only spoke with two other people in that entire time: brief pleasantries with the woman who shared a kitchen wall and a grievance with the woman who lived downstairs who complained that I "turned the lightswitch in the bathroom on too loudly."

Contrast that to the first 12 hours in Raleigh, where all eight other occupants not only came up to say hello, but helped unload the U-Haul van and provided me with food and drink on a hot and sticky July afternoon.

It's typical around here -- north Georgia -- to strike up idle conversations with strangers in line at the grocery store just to pass the time. The last time I was out there in 2001, I made a comment out loud to no one in particular on BART during rush hour and you would have thought I was a serial rapist. Nobody looks anybody in the eyes. The idea of actually smiling is probably worthy of a lawsuit. They sneer and snarl and boast about their soy diets and their exercise regimens and how nothing can compare to where they live.

I moved to Walnut Creek in ninth grade, and only had a few close friends -- most of those also transplants from other areas. I just figured back then it was just a clique thing.

I made a special effort to get back for the 25th reunion -- was on the first plane out of Atlanta following 9/11 -- and the people who still live there don't know anything outside of their own little world, and basically don't care.

When they were 16, I assumed it was immaturity. Now that they're in their 50s, I realize they're permanently stuck up.
 
Maumann, clearly you get it. As soon as you mentioned the unapproachable in public thing, I was going to post about trying to talk to someone in any checkout line in SF. I'm glad other people have noticed that, too.

And the thing is, I still have a lot of friends in the Bay Area, and many of them are quite easy to talk to one-on-one or over dinner, etc. But there isn't one of them who's doing anything but keeping their lips pursed in the Safeway checkout line.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top