• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    193 months ago

    And this is why we can’t have nice things; it sounds terrible, but there should be a limit for how responsible we as a society need to be for the actions of individuals.

    • mars296
      link
      fedilink
      193 months ago

      I would argue there are limits. An art piece being used as a suicide booth falls into the category of not being essential enough that it must remain openly accessible to the public. A bridge or train tracks being used for suicide should not be closed off.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      False.

      We can’t have nice things because corporations and the wealthy take an ever increasing share of a limited pool of resources and waste them on nonsense for themselves.

      Also, if you design and build something and then the suicide rate increases, and then you remove that something and the suicide rate decreases, it throws entirely into question how much free will actually exists and whether the idea of “personal responsibility” even makes any sense.

      And regardless, suicide is an inherently somewhat transient and impulsive choice. All the stats show that suicides are more likely to happen when you give someone easy opportunity (think guns), and just because someone attempts to kill themselves, doesn’t mean they will again. Yes there are natural high points in a landscape that people will be tempted to jump from (look at the cliffs of Dover for instance), but that doesn’t mean we need to build artificial ones in the middle of a depressing concrete jungle with millions of people.

      Personally I really like the vessel and the architect behind it, and do wish I could have gone up it when I was there, but I also do think that in hindsight, it is an inherently problematic design that should not have been approved.