In this particular case I agree with The Devil. The man wanted to die so let him.

However, let's think for a moment: Would the police, fire crews and other people present have behaved in the same way if it had been a 10 year old child who fell into the water?

Did I miss something?

Unfortunately yes, the fact that most Americans have become sanctimonious hypocrites.

If they knew they were not allowed to do water rescue, they shouldn't have shown up. Overall, this is creepy. What is the point of having fire, rescue, if they are not going (allowed) to do their job?

This is what society has come down to. Compassion, humanity, dignity, kindness and common sense are relics of the past for a large segment of the population. Makes me wonder how bad it will be in another 20-25 years. People don't even recognize wrong anymore, not even when it comes in the form of a human being committing suicide in front of a multitude of witnesses standing around twiddling their thumbs. This is a few miles down the road past being a "troubling incident." Hope I'm never in a position where I would need to rely on the kindness of strangers as apparently there is little to be found. May I ask whom one is supposed to call if one is in San Francisco and is in need of help with this type of circumstance?

Old saying: Be careful what you wish for, you just may get it.
Budget cuts, personnel cuts, equipment cuts, tax cuts, draconian legislation, impersonal regulations, lack of oversight, bipartisan politics, etc. Expect to see more of the same.

As far as the personnel not doing their jobs? They did what they were ordered to do. If they had attempted a rescue, they may well have been abandoned in the treacherous waters themselves--as it is, they already were.

It is their JOB to rescue people right?

I hope I never need the assistance of those fire fighters or police.

water rescues should be done by the coast guard NOT the fire dept.In this case the coast guard did arrive but they obviously brought the wrong kind of boat for a shallow water rescue. contrary to what the article says the water was not too shallow for a boat it was just too shallow for the boat that the coast brought.

Do you people complaining know how dangerous it is to get in 54 degree water without a wetsuit. If they didn't have the equipment, it's foolish to put their lives at risk over someone that is suicidal.

Do you think the city would have paid the healthcare expenses of a fireman or policeman who jumped into 54 degree water knowing it was against policy? When people are given a choice between staying employed or being fired, most people choose to stay employed. Some of you need to get off your high horses. It's easy to say what you would do when you weren't involved and have nothing at stake.

richard-795963

Did I miss something?

Unfortunately yes, the fact that most Americans have become sanctimonious hypocrites.

Very well said!!!!

Pathetic or should I say disgustingly apathetic....the reporting, the emergency services, the politicians and the witnesses.

What about the "Good Samaritan Law?"

If they showed up and watched they were voyeurs and not policemen/firemen and they then were subject to that inconvenient law.

Thank you to those "real" policemen and firemen that showed up when those planes went down in DC and NYC in that nippy water................they fortunately were not hampered by "Policy"

In my youth, I was an EMT and a volunteer firefighter. I can say with certainty that when the departmental policy conflicted with was was RIGHT, I put the departmental policy aside, risking my own life to assist my fellow citizens.

@JPJohnson: If you read the article it took 54 minutes for the man to become incapacitated and drown. That is EASILY enough time for a firefighter to grab a rope, swim out to him, and be pulled back to shore by his fellow squad members. Your comment underscores what is wrong with America, and absolutely defies logic and common sense. The media storm surrounding the city's refusal to insure his attempt to save a man's life would have resulted in politicians changing their minds rather than be remembered as callous and unfeeling individuals come November.

Too shallow for a boat
The Coast Guard was called to the scene, but the water was too shallow for a boat, Alameda police Lt. Sean Lynch said. Police officers didn't have the gear for the cold water and couldn't risk being pulled under.

"Too shallow for a boat ????" What the hell kind of boat draws almost five to six feet of water ("up to his neck....) The Coast Guard has three basic boats they may use in a body of water that size. The 47 foot Motor Life Boat draws less than 5 feet of water; The 25 foot Defender Class (even less) and the RB-M (much less yet) among others who's hulls can navigate shallow waters. Even if they beach themselves attempting the rescue, they could be pulled off! Jesus Christ, all kinds of excuses for the Coast Guard and the A- Hole City of Alameda! The city borders a large body of water so whom ever (city council?) takes something as important as Water Rescue Training and Gear away from the Emergency Service. What a bunch of friggin Morons! There should be severe consequences for the city and the U.S.C.G.

........the draught on the 47 footer is four feet six inches! And that's the big boat!

I don't have time right now to look it up, but how long can an average man live in 54 degree water before his intercostal muscles seize and he drowns???

Look, I've had cold water aquatics training....it isn't a cakewalk. Very cold water saps your core temperature very quickly, doesn't matter how good a swimmer you are. If someone had tried to go in and save this man, they could've easily drowned before they got back to shore, depending on the circumstances.

I'm not trying to excuse everybody who watched this man drown, but then again, he WAS suicidal. Ask anyone who works in EMS and they'll entertain you all day with stories about violent suicidal people. IF this man had the will to stand our there until he drowned (which would NOT be the way I'd go if I felt that desperate!), then he likely would be combative or hard to rescue. I certainly wouldn't recommend an untrained civilian attempt this!

Of course, as Jherek opined, if this were a young child who found themselves in trouble, but certainly not suicidal, then I would think human altruism would overcome any other sensibilities and there would be brave souls who would try and rescue the child. But that's a different scenario.

The real problem is not necessarily the perceived lack of empathy, but rather a serious lack of priority when it comes to public safety funding. We have all the money to go to war, but our municipal governments are having a hard time funding our PD, FD, EMS, schools, etc.....

I understand the water was dangerously cold. But the firefighters watching, as well as ordinary citizens, are human beings. Instead of standing around because of policy, the group there could've assembled and found some way to safely rescue the man. There is safety in numbers. Yell to the man - encourage him to come back on his own. Find a raft or some floating device nearby and paddle out to him. Find a rope. Call in a freaking helicopter. Something could've been done. This is the creepiest story I've read in a long time. We humans have great ability to spring in to action and find a way to save lives no matter how impossible it seems. Why that didn't happen here just doesn't add up.

JPJohnson wrote:

Do you people complaining know how dangerous it is to get in 54 degree water without a wetsuit. If they didn't have the equipment, it's foolish to put their lives at risk over someone that is suicidal.

Are you kidding me? 54°! We used to body surf in water in the mid-50°s without a wetsuit. Sure, it was cold, but nobody was dying. And you're saying if somebody jumped in 54° water to save someone's life they'd be risking their own life? Jump in, grab the guy, and dead? Not a chance! If you don't want to be a hero, I understand, but don't fabricate danger to justify your inaction.

Heck, I was watching the Deadliest Catch last night and guys were diving to the bottom of a tank to grab crab for $250. 35° and no wetsuit.

@ a handful of trouble

Feel better? OK wrong city, so sue me. You seem to be indicative of what is wrong with the people in that area if you think the most troubling aspect of this story is that I got the city wrong. Oh gee, my bad! My geographical capabilities are just fine. You, on the other hand, might have a much larger problem. Hey , if you scroll down a little, you can chastise Comman Man too, get your jollies off.

As far as I'm concerned, it's not worth a firefighter having wet socks to save this suicidal man's life, much less risking hypothermic water temperatures.

Save the lives of those who want to be saved. Expecting a good person to risk their life in order to save that of someone who wants to end their own is ludicrous imho.

As a former firefighter, I have to jump in here! No one in my region would have allowed this man to die in this way. If nothing else, we would have roped off and tied to a swimmer - who would have gone in NAKED vs. letting someone die in front of us. I can say with complete assurance, at least 50% of the firefighters I know would have gone in the water. The other 50% would have stood in reserve on the end of my lifeline. Pain and distress is temporary. Living with the nightmare of WATCHING someone die is forever! Exposure to 54 degree water for 2 minutes while under exertion is no big deal!

What is wrong here is a culture of Bu!!spit. Sounds like this group meant to make a political point at the expense of someone who was expendable.

Heads must roll for this one!

I don't get it.. tie a rope to your waist and go out there and get the guy... he may have been drunk or medicated... Sad.

lyn, your 1st statement is correct.....

UNBELIEVABLE - almost. Yet, it should not surprise us that this could happen in San Francisco; the epicenter of the "politically correct", no commonsense movement.

This is the city that has outlawed McDonald's happy meals (and the opportunity for people to make their own decisions about what they feed their children) because big brother city counsel in its infinite, "benign" wisdom realizes that we, the little people, who aren't even close to being as well educated nor enlightened as they, don't have brains enough to make intelligent decisions without their kind guidance and oversight of our lives.

Who do the firemen and their commanders think they are kidding? They were "handcuffed"? Oh, give me a break; these are men and women who are supposed to be there to save peoples' lives - not sit back and watch and allow some some B. S. city policy to rewrite their brain's program for commonsense and their duty as fire fighters.

Every fire fighter there who sat back and allowed themselves to be dictated to by such an insane, truly insane, "policy" should be fired and the people who put it in place should be prosecuted for gross negligence and incompetence - if not facilitating and contributing to manslaughter.

If I had been there and one of the spectators, I would have jumped in the water and knocked the fool out if I had to and brought him to sure - yet 70 people stood around like bumps on a log - what in world has become of us that this could ever happen. God help us and protect us from the politically correct policy makers and their butt covering apologists.

Concerned HUH?!?!?!?!?

You seriously think this was some group plan, they actually chatted over candles and blood stained daggers about what they could say during the event?

Heads would have rolled if they broke the rules they were strapped with decades of life altering drama of photo ops and courtrooms, because out of the entire audience, only the Firefighters could do anything.

What was wrong with the general public? How many caring giving civilians were there mumbling that Firefighters get paid to help??????????

lynlagro,

Stupid? Wow, you must be able to read the minds of the dead.

In the real world, you have no idea what than guy was going through, and you clearly have no clue what its like to be at the end of your rope so to speak.

I have seen this very thing in person, in the winter, in the Ohio River during a flood. Our Firefighters in Indiana went out there in my neighbors boat and the guy was rescued, and he told police his wife had just committed suicide and he found her and freaked out and drove his car into the river.

Is it hard to breathe up there on that pedestal judging others lynlagro?

I bet you go to church too....

FailuretoCommunicate communicated my thoughts perfectly.

BTW, the Ohio River is in Kentucky, and the VOLUNTEER firefighers from Union Township in Indiana did not worry about jurisdiction, or equipment, or policy, or anything else, they just found a gassed up boat and DID THEIR JOB.

I think I will send them a donation right now.

I think someone should have rowed out to him and asked him whether he was trying to commit suicide. If he says Yes, then it's OK to let him drown and not bother getting your socks wet...

Anyone with any real heart and spirit would try to find a way to get to the guy and try to save him. PERIOD. It doesn't take friggin' Bruce Willis.

What we have here is a bunch of hypocritical jerks (cops and firefighters worst of all) finding an excuse to push a political agenda at the expense of someone's life. It's unbelievable, but it's not.

We Americans suck.

And you know for a fact what each and every person out here would do in this situation? I don't believe you represent everyone out here.

Well, he did make a valid point. People talk real big about saving this guy's life - yet when faced with reality these same people will often change their tune if not stay silent.

So, I gather a human life is not worth saving anymore be they suicidal or not? So much for humanity then.

Hmmmm. Not if they are suicidal. Save those who want to be saved. I The truly humane thing to do is to let the person die if they want, and not insist that other people who actually want to live should risk their own lives to save him.

It's not your place, it's not your decision. Maybe some day you will have the opportunity to save a life (even a suicidal one) - but I choose not to negatively judge these firefighters for their lack of action in this particular case.

Earnest - I don't think it had anything to do with money, at least from my experience. My department was made up of what were called "paid volunteers". What this means is we received between $500 and $3000 per year to give about 700 hours per year in service to our community. My group gave from their heart for the good of our community.

That is my problem here. These guys (as a matter of conscience) should have given some effort. Granted, I wasn't there and only know what is printed in this story. Perhaps they tried something not mentioned here. I could only hope this was the case. I don't want to dump a load of blame on the rescuers, but the way the story is presented makes me believe there is blame to be assigned.

Being a rescuer is a matter of your heart. It involves being the one who WANTS to be called in a time of crisis. It is not running away from what others fear. It is putting yourself on the line for your fellow man - even if that person is not in their right mind and just makes a bad decision.

This is what happens we insist on having the government tell us what to do, how to do it, and when to do it. We end up with a bunch of zombies that have allowed government to dictate our thinking and our humanity. Sad.

Contrast this with two other stories in the news today: man gets killed trying to save ducklings on the interstate, and, locally, a man tried to rescue two youths at the oceanfront. Then HE needed rescuing, too. The lifeguards were able to rescue one of the boys and the man, and you can't help but wonder if the good samaritan had stayed out of the way, whether they could have saved the other boy also. Sometimes helping is dangerous and NOT the best move. Sometimes it endangers the wanna be savior and/or others. There are no easy answers and if we weren't there, I don't think any of us can really say what we would have or should have done. You can't fault those who try, but you also can't fault those whose judgment is based on the actual situation in front of them.

If there is a 'policy' that causes a life NOT to be saved, there is way too much government.

They should have saved the guy's life anyway and 'stuffed' the policy.

No wonder people say it's a loony city.

They did what they were ordered to do.

That's what Klaus Barbie said! I guess that makes it a-ok.

"Policy"? "Budget cuts"?

Those people stood and watched this man til he drowned.

As far as I'm concerned, they are all despicable.

Saving the guy would have been heroic indeed. It would have been a real act of bravery and compassion.

But, I am not going to judge these firefighters negatively for choosing their health, their livelihood, their pension, and their job over a man who was trying to end his own life.

The suicidal are not deserving of compassion.

Take $5, go to Lowe's (or any other nearby hardware store), buy a sturdy anchor rope, go save the guy (even if you have to wait until he passes out). It's as easy as that. Any citizen could have done that, much less first responders. To say that this had anything to do with budget cuts is to take a tragedy and twist it for your own political gain. I could just as easily blame it on the union for negotiating that policy.

I think a lot of you are over simplifying the process. I was a lifeguard a while ago. Water rescues can be difficult even with a willing and non-combative victim in an open natural water environment. Cold water rescues are that much more dangerous and difficult. Cold water rescues with a combative victim are extremely dangerous and difficult for the rescuer. Water is a powerful force when it is moving, and natural water environments do. This wasn't still water, even if there weren't a ton of wave force, there would be currents to contend with. 54 degrees doesn't sound too bad, but that is very cold water, and it does begin to sap your muscle capabilities rather quickly. Humans can survive in it for a bit, but water transfers heat away from the body *far* more efficiently than does air. In addition, one of the first things you learn about trying to rescue people is to keep yourself safe first. A drowning vicitm even if they want to be helped will more often than not become panicked and combative, and if you aren't trained in what is effectively under water judo to get them off you so that you can help them in a controlled manner, a situation can go from dangerous to deadly for you as they latch on to you and drown you both in a matter of minutes, faster in cold water when you are working your muscles heavily to try and help them. And if a victim will not calm down enough to let you help them in that controlled manner, you are supposed to let them go until they pass out so that you can safely help them. A suicidal victim who may be combative, is unpredictable, and extraordinarily dangerous to try and rescue. You would not want to approach them in person, you would need to have something between you that would help keep you safe.

Now, I don't think "policy" should have gotten in the way of saving the man. But don't just dismiss the situation as trivial, neck deep cold water with a potentially hostile victim is a recipe for disaster for a rescuer.

With that said, I'm also extremely familiar with the mental health side of things too. The man needed help. As a Libertarian, I think a person ought to have the ability to commit suicide with dignity if they've come to that conclusion on a rational basis. But depression driving a person to that end is not a rational decision. It's an illness that still carries a lot of stigma, and while it's described as "mental" and so for a lot of people that seems less serious than something "physical" the illness is usually rooted in physical problems, namely problems in neurotransmitters and other nervous system functions. It's little different than a broken bone, even if it "feels" different. So it's a shame this man suffered, and that he was allowed to die without getting the help he needed.

But it's difficult to blame the emergency response teams. That situation was a volatile disaster waiting to happen. What they needed was a light boat that could have gotten out there so that they could have hauled him in, willingly or not... and I do wonder why the Coast Guard were unable to provide that kind of support. But without the tools to keep them safe in the operation, if one of those firefighters had gone in without what they needed, this story could have very easily been about the tragic death of a heroic rescuer who put their life on the line to save a suicidal victim that drug both of them down to drowning - never forget that.

The suicidal are not deserving of compassion.

Neither is a person that would think like that.

The argument that a rescue would have been dangerous is simply nonsense. The guy had been standing out there by himself for a LONG TIME. Clearly, if there were any serious undercurrents or temperature issues he wouldn't have lasted as long as he did.

It doesn't take long to run into the water and pull someone out.

This is basically a case of people mindlessly following orders.

"I didn't help the suicidal man because it wasn't my problem. Then I didn't help the battered wife because it's not my problem. I didn't care about the poor because I'm not poor and it isn't my problem. I didn't care about people that don't have enough to eat because I have plenty to eat and their starvation is not my problem. I didn't help the lonely child that was being bullied because it wasn't my problem. I didn't help the people that lost everything in a tornado because it wasn't my problem....

Then I was left injured and bleeding in the street after being stabbed and robbed and no one helped me because it wasn't their problem."

Is that REALLY the America we want?

Lenny Skutnik. Remember him? January 1982, the man jumped off a bridge in DC into the iced Pototmac river to save a passenger from Air Florida flight 90 that had crashed. No training, no wet suit, just stripped off his coat and boots and did it because it was the right thing to do. Saved her life.

Shame on these trained people. Shame.

The fact that this guy kept looking back as he inched his way into NECK DEEP water, the fact that it was only NECK DEEP water shows beyond the shadow of a doubt he did not want to die. But he did want someone to save him,or he would have kept going out until eh was in waayyy over his head. It sounds like what he wanted was for someone to show him that they cared. If two men had WALKED out to get this guy, they could have gotten him back in a matter of minutes. No one would have drowned, no one would have gotten hypothermia.

Blue Lake, it SHOULD have not been a matter of funding. It SHOULD have been compassion. In Texas the majority of fire fighters (rural and small towns) are volunteer. THEY would have run, not walked to try to save this guy, even though they do not get paid to do it.

If someone has a wreck and kills someone because they are high, or drunk, or distracted, it is manslaughter. There needs to be a new law added, manslaughter by indifference.

Deb, exactly, most "suicides" are simply suicidal gestures and a cry for help.

The moral of the story: if you're contemplating suicide and want to succeed, take a dip in Alameda. By the same token, if you're merely issuing the proverbial "cry for help," a bridge or high ledge is probably a safer bet.

But he did want someone to save him,or he would have kept going out until eh was in waayyy over his head. It sounds like what he wanted was for someone to show him that they cared.

Try Dr Phil. I am sure there were hundreds of people watching this debacle and not one helped.

No common sense. Money over a mans life. What these firefighters did was criminal imo. To sit back ad watch a man die is wrong. They could have easily lowered a ladder, a rope and pulled the man to safety.

It's more about the money. These firefighters are now putting the people's lives at stake due to cutbacks.

If i had been there, I definitely would have jumped in to save the mans life. I can swim, and the fact that it was shallow water, these men could have saved this mans life. They didn't because they are crying about cutbacks. Put them on an hourly salary and give them all the job duties required in saving lives.

This report makes me ill. How can people stand by an watch someone die? He wasn't waving a knife or a gun. He wasn't drenched in gasoline with a lighter in hand. He was standing still in calm water, obviously depressed and mentally ill.

75+ people watched this guy die! Where's the humanity? What the f*** are people in S.F. drinking, because there's some really weird sh!t happening in that place! They won't allow toys in a Happy Meal, but watching someone die is A-OK?

SAN FRANCISCO <circle-jerks>

If there is a 'policy' that causes a life NOT to be saved, there is way too much government.

WTF!! Why blame the government doesn't anyone else common sense? There were plenty of people there and not one took action. Everyone want to blame someone else. No one would have gone to jail for helping. If fact they would have been hailed as a hero. We sit back and expect everyone elese to take action and when we get stuck with s*&t we blame everyone else or the government for doing nothing.

The man walked out there on his own accord, he could of walked back also, but he choose not to. He just wanted his 15 minutes of fame, he got it.

It's easy being the "monday morning quarterbacks" and say "violate the policy" and do the job without the proper training and equipment - they might of gotten lucky and what about the next time, where they violate their training and a couple of them get killed??? The same "monday morning quarterbacks" would be yelling that someone needed to be fired, because they didn't enforce policy.

Again, the man made the choice to go into the water and stand there like an idiot, willing to put other people at risk to save him and getting the media attention he wanted.

those people aren't firemen they are a disgrace, no reason unless they were physically handcuffed should have allowed that to happen.

There's massive amounts of outrage towards the rescue workers who stood idly by, not that much for the civilians...who also stood idly by...and absolutely ZERO outrage towards the man who put everyone in a horrible position to begin with.

Let's remember who created this awful situation to begin with, the man who decided to either A) take his own life in grand fashion and subject close to 100 people to his untimely end or B) throw a hissy fit hoping that someone would march out into the water and rescue him, so that the whole time he could yell and scream "no, let me die, I wanna die!" but really doesnt want to die.

This man made a choice, and it didnt end up well.

I think its awfully unfortunate that most of you claim to be all about personal responsibility, but here...we have no issue blaming everyone but the damn fool who marched out into the water and drowned himself.

Hows that for hypocrisy?

Lots of good comments here but from what I've read those by JMS and EarnestLee stand out.

The first 2 things taught to EMS students are Body Substance Isolation and scene safe. I was not there so I can merely speculate but I cannot see this as a safe scene as JPM has explained so clearly.

It can be a fatal mistake to presume to predict what a person with an unbalanced mind will do. Even persons who are drowning by accident may fight their rescuers. From that perspective this was certainly not a safe scene.

It's all well and good to castigate the fire fighters. And of course we have those who take a 'so what' attitude that a rescue could have lost the jobs or lives of the rescuers. They perch all high and mighty and scorn 'it's all about the money'. No, it is not all about the money but in this economy especially only a fool tosses away a good job. I find it too far a stretch to believe OnlyInAmerica would assume financial responsibility for a fire fighter who lost her/his job, was sued, or had exorbitant medical expenses from this incident.

If you are one of those who think the tea-baggers are the salvation of this country, you have absolutely no right to fault the fire fighters. It's all about less government right? You have to stop socialism now, right? You are outraged that America has become a nanny state, right?

If you live in WI and voted for Walker, you are part of the problem. You voted for a man intent on gutting all essential services. He was put in office specifically to eliminate public services so his cronies e.g. the Kochs can privatize everything. When that happens, you better be waving your insurance policy if you expect privatized fire fighters to save your house.

This didn't happen in San Francisco. It happened in Alameda. Sorry to rain on people's oh-so-clever gay/liberal bashing parade, but facts are facts.

The DNR would have called this "Chronic Human Wasting Disease" (CHWD) and would of spent tons of money to "thin the herd".

The man made the choice to walk into the water, putting other people at risk - Ron White said it best " You can't fix stupid"

@Devil and suicide approvers: I do, fundamentally, agree with you. But here's the only problem with what you are saying. A lot of people attempting suicide are momentarily emotionally troubled. Usually all they need is help. Yes, if someone wants to kill themselves, they should be allowed to. However, truth is, why should someone die if they were emotionally disturbed once in their life and just need someone to turn themselves around? I don't think anybody is really saying anything more than that.

To those who wish the firefighters responded:

Water rescue is HIGHLY DANGEROUS. I know because I have been trained in it. Even when saving someone who wants to be saved, things can go tragically wrong for a rescuer. When someone is unstable, it can be only worse. I think the crime is that the city cut water rescue from the budget. Read again: SAY WHAT? Who exactly is supposed to rescue drowning people? You going to wait for a lifeguard to show up? What if it was a drowning kid? That is as much of a tragedy as anything else.

By the way, like a lot of things regarding saving people, basic water rescue is something that doesn't take a lot of time to learn. If you are around the water a lot, I recommend it. You can absolutely save a life.

This is a sad but true aspect of our society. Too many people just stand there and do nothing. Back in 2000, I was on a greyhound buss trip from Iowa to NY, and a 3 year old child collapsed due to an asthma attack. He started turning blue, and was twitching. Nobody on the bus wanted to do anything. The bus driver wanted to continue driving 30 minutes to the next stop instead of calling for help. His claim was there wasn't a radio on the bus. I had to get him to pull over and flag down a motorists to call for help. I wasn't trained at all in helping a person in this situation, but I did my best. What ticked me off most was there was a nurse on the bus who refused to help cause she wasn't licensed in NY. The whole time I was working with the child, I also had to attended to the baby's panicking mother too. I finally got the child breathing well again and his color came back. We met an ambulance at the nearest rest stop, and the smokers on the bus prevented the paramedics from getting on because they were too busy filling the isles after having a smoke. Finally the mother and the child were taken away, and we continued on with our trip.

It was one of the best moments of my life because I did something truly important. It was also one of the saddest moments because of the 50 people on that bus, nobody was wiling to help. There wasn't even a single person on the bus who was willing to use their cell phone to call 911. That is why I am not shocked by what happened to this guy standing in the water. People are pathetic. Somebody, anybody should have gone out there and done something. Even if all somebody did was swim out there to try and talk the guy down, they could have at least felt good that they did something. Instead, they let a troubled soul die for nothing.

Wasn't the lady who got raided for selling "suicide kits" also in California? Why is it wrong for her to do that and right for the rescue folks to stand around and watch someone slowly trying to drown themselves?

The point being that it has nothing to do with sympathy for the guy or what his situation is. The question is should you really blame other people for not wanting to risk their lives to save someone who purposely puts themselves in danger and is also in a position where they are able to save themselves. I find it funny that you are playing the judgment card when clearly you are judging me and those who watched him die. Of COURSE I'm judging the guy who walked out and drowned himself. Any human being who claims they do not judge others based on their actions is a liar. Some of us just have the balls to say it.

Much of this article makes no sense to me? The very being of lifesavers or public servant is to protect life and property. I understand they discontinued water training, but your a life saver, your still more equipped the average person.

Also the Coast Guard has small boats that could easily deal with the shallow water, not to mention they have Helicopters with rescue swimmers and as a Coast Guard veteran and former Group Watch Officer I can tell you my last unit would have responded, once they called us only our CO could turn us back. So this article doesnt seem correct or at least its missing some info.

It didn't happen in San Francisco. It happened across the Bay in Alameda. The San Francisco media was just the first to report it. This is very sad.

Maybe I'm a coldhearted bitch...

Some of us just have the balls to say it.

So, lynlagro, by your own admission, you are a cold hearted b*tch with balls . . . both your courage and self-awareness are admirable ;)

Obviously, this is a tough call. There are valid opinions on both sides ranging from deep compassion to cynical apathy. Why should people put themselves at risk to save someone who clearly was not struggling to avoid a dangerous situation? Should every act of deliberate stupidity become a reason to take heroic measures to prevent it?

Quite likely this man's ill considered attempt to get some attention could have resulted in someone's death, but not his own. Our culture has become so used to death by deliberate stupidity that we don't immediately react any more. Yet, we go to great lengths to prevent humane and compassionate measures such as assisted suicide for terminally ill patients suffering severe pain and distress.

It is true that we have become sanctimonious hypocrites, wringing our hands over self inflicted death by stupidity, but unwilling to allow the choice of death under humane and compassionate conditions. Clearly we are all victims of our own hypocritical ignorance.

It's easy being the "monday morning quarterbacks" and say "violate the policy" and do the job without the proper training and equipment - they might of gotten lucky and what about the next time

That's right. But if no one there helped then they souldn't complain about someone else not helping. And if your trying to drown yourself then don't expect someone to endanger their life and help you. I'd go in a burning house to rescue someone but if you set that fire to kill yourself you're dead.

Sad state of affairs. Shows you what we're in store for. May this tragic story serve as a reminder of how much power and control they already have over us. It may not sound that way, but they are surly taking their baby steps towards controlling everything we do or say. Who will be saved, who will be left to die. And it always seems to start in the (country )of SF CA where they think they are the power of the USA. The lab for the mad political scientists. Laugh if you want or collapse this if you want, but if we don't wake up the last laugh will be on All of Us; including the ones who currently support these egomaniacs in power.

And for whoever said you have no compassion for suicidal people, shame on you. Did you know that suicide is a cry for help???

Nick you have it right. If this was an accident people would have jumped in. The fact that the guy was suicidal changes the scenario. Fire/Ems are trained and repeatedly drilled to not enter an area where a suicidal person is (and other instances) until they have police support. Not to mention they had no water rescue gear. Granted...the water most likely didn't have any undercurrents etc...but they didn't know that....

Just google firefighter drowns......you will find several stories of rescuers drowning WITH the proper equipment. You can say what you want about me....but I'm not going to put my life and ability to take care of my family at risk for a suicidal (unkown homicidal) person without the proper equipment and police to help secure the situation. I would have to see the area and situation before i would be able to be 100% certain of my actions though.

I have a good bit of experience with suicidal people, and I agree with prior comments that a number of suicide attempts are actually gestures seeking help rather than true wishes for death. It does sound possible that this man could have wanted help based on the fact that he kept glancing towards shore and he did not go farther than neck high in the water, though it is impossible to know what he was actually thinking. For those who do not think suicidal people deserve help, I don't know if you are simply ignorant about mental health-that many issues are caused by chemical problems in the brain and can actually be helped and that often suicidal actions are gestures rather than serious attempts, as above, and I honestly don't see how you could not know some of this in this day and age-or if you simply don't care.

I don't know all the logistics of cold water rescue, though I do know something about water rescue in general. While it can be quite dangerous for the rescuer, and I'm sure the cold water and the fact that the person could be unpredictable greatly increases the risk, I can't imagine that no possible way could be found for this to be accomplished considering that there was more than one person there. This was, as the article stated, basically a policy issue. It was policy for them not to do the rescue, so they didn't attempt the rescue. That's the bottom line, whether we like it or not.

Do you people complaining know how dangerous it is to get in 54 degree water without a wetsuit...?

Yes. I've surfed in 45 degree water with a wetsuit and while it was still cold, as a first responder, 54 is hardly deadly for short term exposure. How can you say you're handcuffed by policy and allow someone to die?

To all the folks that dump on SF, bear in mind that somewhere down South last year, firefighters stood and watched a family's house burn to the ground because that family hadn't paid their $78 service fee. They actually came out to water down the neighbor's houses, but watched and lectured the family while their house burned down. I think some animals died in the blaze.

In that tea-bagging community, you pay a fee for fire service. No fee, no service.

Government officials had plenty of self-justification to offer up to the media. It was, after all, the family's fault for not paying up, they knew the policy, bla bla bla.

So, let's not say 'only in San Francisco' or assume these firemen were trying to make a political point. It's everywhere.

Much as I don't like the Liberals in this article blaming the firemen and doing nothing themselves, I also don't like the Conservatives accusing the Liberals of callous, politically motivated hatefulness when they themselves embody and endorse such behavior as a platform.

He didn't want to die... He wanted to see if anyone wanted him to live!

I'm humored how we preach about free will but a man decides by his own free will to end his life and we complain about the people that didn't save him. No knowledge about the man in the water but judgmental of all the people on land.

This isn't a story about a child or adult falling into the water screaming for help. This is a story about a person that made a choice. Save a life whether someone wanting to commit suicide or a woman that wants to abort her pregnancy but don't work on how to pay for and take care of that unwanted life.

Focus your energy on people in Joplin who did not "ask" for the storm or the multitude of people in this country that need help because of horrible circumstances that were beyond their control.

This could have been a terminal illness with no chance for survival and he couldn't take the pain anymore. Should another person risk their life to save a person that does not want to be saved? We aren't above nature, we are part of it and we are as weak a link as any other animal. We won't hesitate to cut down a tree that has been around for a century because it is diseased or dying but we will put a broken down old body on life support even when there is no chance for survival?

Those so quick to criticize the actions or lack of from these people should take back all their comments unless they know beyond a shadow of a doubt that they would have helped this man. 54 degrees is only 12 degrees above freezing and without proper protection even the strongest person would perish.

The biggest mistake here was taking his life in public. If he would have done it silently in the privacy of his own home or wherever he may reside, this isn't even a story.

How soon we forget all the people that were involved in search and rescue after 9/11. People came from all over the country to help. In the face of tragedy we are one of the most compassionate countries in the world but we can make that all go away with one story about a successful suicide.

What a sickeningly judgmental society we have become.

If you must judge let's make our elected officials (crooks) accountable for every tax dollar spent so we can determine what we put ahead of this countries safety.

Maybe bring jobs back to this country so they collect more income taxes which would fund our safety.

Maybe we could get paid back for all the money and favors we have done to prop up every other country but our own.

Maybe I can get off this soapbox before I get out of hand.

So, you could rob a bank or kill a cop, get in a wetsuit - then stand in 5 feet of water and no one can come out to catch you?

Wow.

I guess if you stay in 5 foot water you could wade your way to Mexico.

Or an illegal could go the other way.

While this is kind of heartbreaking, I'm really not surprised. Without the proper equipment, a rescuer can easily be harmed or killed by someone who doesn't want to be saved. But even more importantly, I've been shocked over the number of articles that I've read about people sueing others for rescueing them. It's messed up, but we live in a very litigation prone society. This has socially conditioned us all to not get involved since we could easily be sued into the stone age for trying to do the right thing.

It's kind of a messed up state that our country has gotten itself into. However I don't expect to see things really changing in the near future.

The previous policy was implemented after budget cuts forced the department to discontinue water rescue training and stop maintaining wetsuits and other rescue gear, D'Orazi said Tuesday.

Oh, San Francisco, the Sanctuary City, has budget problems ? Now I wonder why they have budget problems. Yep, education and pensions mainly, amongst other issues. But wait, pay raises for elected officials are in the works:

San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors, mayor and other elected officials stand to receive thousands of dollars in pay increases next year even as The City faces a $306 million deficit and is asking employees to give up more out of their paychecks to fund skyrocketing pension costs.

http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/2011/04/budget-problems-won-t-stop-officials-pay-raises-0

OK, SFran.....how does it feel to cut funding for "public service programs" and put the public at risk while giving pay raises to elected officials ?

I suppose California does not have a "Good Samaritan" law. Now is the time to investigate that legislation while the SFran Police Chief is ignoring Federal Laws concerning "Sanctuary Cities".

That being said, the "watchers of this incident" will be judged by a higher court.

lol, nice Ryan. Agreed.

Just the fact that this guy wanted to kill himself should be reason enough to want to help him, let alone the fact that he was in SHALLOW WATER. Yes, I understand its cold but I wonder if the "rescuers" would still be "handcuffed by policy" if multiple people made an attempt to save this guy and started to drown as well.

Look, no one really knows how they're going to react in a crisis/emergency situation until it happens. Firefighters, police officers, EMTs etc., are trained for these situations, but it seems that in some instances training may actually be a hinderance to action - to say nothing of policy restraints. That is, sometimes regular people acting on instinct can accomplish what trained rescuers wouldn't even attempt. Like Han Solo said, "Never tell me the odds."

My point? Not entirely sure myself, but I'd like to think that I would have tried to rescue this man had I been a witness, regardless of why he was there. Not for attention, or fame or even for the man himself, but because the possibility that I could have helped, but didn't, would personally haunt me.

PS-From the San Mercury Story, the guy was approximately 150 yards from shore when the first responders got there. Like I said you have no idea what the situation is. Only clowns think you would jump into 50 degree water, then swim out more than football field even if it's only neck deep to retrieve a guy who is already attempting suicide, then manage to swim all the way back with him? Now who's dreaming?

Unfortunately this is an awful case of "damned if you do, damned if you don't". You would hope that human emotions would take over but w/o the proper safety equipment, whoever went in to save him could have potentially been at risk too.

Also, in a country that's filled with a bunch people willing to start some frivolous lawsuit over any and everything, the risk for getting this guy to safety then the guy having some money hungry lawyer whispering in his ear about how much money he can get for rescuers violating their rules is very very high. If he had been rescued and a lawsuit followed, I bet a lot of you would be pissed off saying either "what an ungrateful guy they should have let him drown" or "well, the rescuers should have followed the protocol then they wouldn't be getting sued". It's a sad sad world we live in today.

I love all the right-wingers saying that, even though the tax-payers of Alameda decided that they did not want to pay to keep a water-rescue team, they still expect water rescue. This reminds me of the town (I beleive in Texas) that privatized their fire dept and had every house pay individually if they wanted fire protection, or course most houses didn't pay because 'It won't happen to me'. As a result the fire dept was diminished. The story was of a fire at a house that refused to pay the fee for years, then the home-owner was begging the FD to put out the fire, but they said they couldn't because he hadn't paid. The right-wing was up in arms over that, saying the FD didn't do its job and should have put the fire out and they were just trying to make a point. I love how the right-wing sticks to their guns on economic issues and wanting to end govt, but then expects all of these services for free. If Alameda wants water-rescue teams, they should pay for water-rescue teams, end of story.

I've had a little search and rescue training, and one of the basic rules is that you don't recklessly risk yourself when you don't have the equipment and training for the situation. Otherwise, someone else will probbly then have to risk their life to save you when you get into trouble.

I don't like what happened there, but who am I to condemn someone for not risking their life? It seems the majority of the posters here are angry that the firefighters didn't risk their lives. Despite what you may believe, it's not thier job to recklessly take unnecessary risk, not even to save a life.

Whoa, I guess according to alot of you; when my 13 year old swallowed 27 sleeping pills in a suicide attempt I probably shouldn't have intervened and just allowed her to take the course she wanted. Most of you probably think it was her choice to attempt suicide not realizing that it was probably the medication she had just begun...you know may cause suicidal thoughts in teens and young adults. I know this was a grown man but for all we know he could have just changed his medication that caused him to react this way. The brain scan of a mentally ill or depressed brain is quite different from one of a normal. I don't know how you could expect someone with an irrational brain to make rational choices. But I suspect those of you making insensitive comments have little or no experience with someone who has had a mental illness.

Regardless, I believe the right thing always trumps policy. I wasn't there so I don't know but I believe if anyone of those spectators had a three-digit-IQ they might have been able to formulate a plan to at least make an attempt to save this man's life.

dd9359

To all the folks that dump on SF, bear in mind that somewhere down South last year, firefighters stood and watched a family's house burn to the ground because that family hadn't paid their $78 service fee. They actually came out to water down the neighbor's houses, but watched and lectured the family while their house burned down. I think some animals died in the blaze.

In that tea-bagging community, you pay a fee for fire service. No fee, no service.

Uh, dd9359, hate to burst your political "anti tea-bagger" bubble, but, you may want to research Obion County Tennessee, (where the fire took place),and then you will see that they are represented by Democrats and not the tea party. And also the state is also under a Democrat Governor. tisk tisk tisk.

we, humans, suck.

The Alameda Firefighters did what they did to keep their jobs. The man walked out into the Bay because he either wanted to die or he was crying for help. Well the Firefighters kept their jobs and will be able to respond to fires/accidents another day, and the man is dead.

Its beautiful policy to have no training, or equipment for a place where the training is needed. There is something truly wrong with the logic.

Couple of comments really illustrate the prevailing attitudes in this story--

OBXRon asks,

What about the "Good Samaritan Law?"
If they showed up and watched they were voyeurs and not policemen/firemen and they then were subject to that inconvenient law.

Firemen and Policemen, even off duty, are not covered by good Samaritan protections.

Then JSwieny says:

when the departmental policy conflicted with was was RIGHT, I put the departmental policy aside, risking my own life to assist my fellow citizens.

Would you risk the life or career of your wife and children's primary breadwinner? Because there is an insurance industry term for someone who dies doing what you suggest; uninsured. There is an employment term for someone who does what you suggest; unemployed.

Part (sometimes it is just a small part) of what allows firemen and police to do what they do is the knowledge that if something should happen their families will be provided for.

The average joe would not be covered if he died doing something incredibly stupid like tyeing himself to a rope and wading out into 50 degree water to retrieve a hostile adult. A firemen recieves a special rider that protects him in those cases when done as a part of his employment.

Sometimes growned-ups have to make hard choices and perhaps the life of that stranger who wants to die is worth the risk that I might die saving him. Perhaps his life is worth my career, which I will certainly lost for disobeying an order to stand down.

If I am the only one who has to bear the burden of that risk then it is a testiment to my morals and values whether I go forward or not. But in my case such risk is also born by my wife and children, and by the bank that lent me money to purchase my home and car, and by everyone else who benefits from me being alive.

When I make a decision to risk some value that belongs to those people, without full consideration of what is best for those people, then I am being selfish.

@JPJohnson: Um, the water temperatures were around 50 degrees, which wouldn't have incapacitated a rescuer for at least 30 minutes (look up water survival tables). Especially fit young men like these. No special equipment required, just humanity. These were just pussies all around: as amazing as the NYPD/NYFD rescuers were in 9/11, these people are just a waste of air. They didn't do their JOB, never mind exhibit any heroic behavior.

I hope this incident haunts each of them until the day they die. But it probably won't.

People who commit, or attempt to commit suicide are rarely of sound mind. Many who are stopped get help and go on to lead productive lives. SF is one FUBAR'd city. Shame on people to not help this guy. Cross that place off my vacation plans.

So, is the family going to sue?

hypocrisy1776

Alot you know. You don't even know the facts about the house in TENNESSEE not TEXAS. Also, you along with dd9359 try to use this fire to blame the right, well, Tennessee is represented by a Democrat Governor and Obion County Tennessee, where the fire took place is represented by Dems, so get your story straight.

The mayor said if homeowners don't pay, they're out of luck.

Their Mayor is Benny McGuire is a DEMOCRAT! Look it up yourself and stop trying to pass off your opinions as facts. There is a difference. Didn't you know that? Guess not.

There was a time when Men were Men.

The water wasn't very deep.

As mentioned earlier - an hour is plenty of time to round up a rope and things that float.

50 degrees is cold - but you have at least 10 minutes before you have problems - likely way more when you are exerting yourself.

Too bad there were not 2 real men there. They could have easily dragged him out.

Please use some logic in your lives. If he was in there for an hour - just standing - there's no way he could put up a fight. We have people claiming to be experts who are telling you both that the rescuers will get incapacitated by 50 deg water AND that the guy would put up a fight after an hour standing in it?

Which is it?

So if it is the fire/police department to save a person from suicide, why don't we hear about fire/police stepping in between a suicidal person's gun and body? After all, that would possibly prevent the suicide. Standing off to the side trying to talk a shooter into reconsidering the intended actions is no different than talking a drowner into reconsidering - limiting exposure to negative outcomes for the "rescuer".

Hmmm...

With a National Debt of over 14 Trillion dollars and unfunded liabilities of over 50 Trillion dollars and only about 100 million people that actually pay taxes, you're surprised that there are cut backs?

You ain't seen nothing yet!

California has enough money to pay RETIRED teachers more per year than active Teachers in 28 other States... But no money for training emergency and rescue people?

California is controlled first by the strangle hold of the Unions and then by PROGRESSIVE politicians. That's why there is so many huge Companies leaving the State and taking our jobs with them to other States.

Get rid of the Unions and the Progressive politicians and reduce the size of Government... Then we can get back to doing the right thing!!!

Police and firefighters are basicly the cowards on our society, I have never seen a police officer or fireman do anything that would endanger their lives on purpose. I am 67 years old all I have ever seen is the bloody after math of their actions. Latest example the swat team killing a returning marine in his own home, no warrent, wrong man, 70 shots fired by dozen swat members and only 20 hits, they must have had the rookie swat team that day. This incident will be swept under the rug because we all know that police are never held responsible for what they do.

This is an example of bureaucracy and humanity gone a muck!The man was in the water for some time (45 minutes, if I am correct). It would not take take the 2 or more rescuers 45 minutes to get the man out of the water.

Police and firefighters are basicly the cowards on our society...

Respectfully, Gary Hanson, that's an awfully broad and extremely unfair generalization. I'm sure through the lens of your personal experience, it may seem reasonable, but to people who don't know you it looks like proof that wisdom doesn't necessarily come with age.

My bad! Actually the man was in the water for "nearly" or "almost an hour" before he drowned.

@Gary Hanson-737542: I see firefighters and police risk their lives every time they attend a traffic wreck on the interstate on a dark rainy night. Let's not confuse THESE zeroes with absurd generalizations about the good men that actually do their jobs.

@benkyouburito: I'd rather die doing what was right than have to go home tonight and realize my son or daughter will always view me as a coward.

There is a race under the golden gate bridge every year. You don't wear wet suits, hundreds of people do it. No one dies from the cold water.

It took a non fire fighter to go into the water. Typical public unionized workers. Not my job... typical union response. Fire all the California fire fighters and just pay extra for insurance, it is far cheaper to pay the higher insurance rates than pay hundred thousand dollar pensions to people who take less personal risk than a taxi driver.

"So, is the family going to sue?"

Unfortunately I believe that the case history is that police/fire/rescue are not required to actually do their job. There have been several cases where courts have said as much. So the next time you call them remember they might help you, but they might just watch from the safety of their parked vehicle as the nutjob you called them to save you from breaks down your front door and starts shooting your family/friends (actual case from my area).

if a man wanted to kill himself, then let him, why should the police and firefighter intervene, he just going to pull more resources out of the city of a man that will just do it over and over again.

I agree with the officer and firefighter good that they didnt help the man. its not the city problem to help the insane people.

I understand the comments that 54 degree water is dangerous. I understand that some people cannot swim.... but I cannot understand how, this man, who apparently 'looked toward shore SEVERAL times'...I cannot understand how he was let to drown with 75 bystanders and nearly an hour of time. The 75 bystanders could have made a "human chain".... those that can't swim, don't get more than waist deep... I can't help but think that if the man would have seen someONE at least TRY... or even talk to him, he may have come back on his own. The police and fire didn't have a blow horn either? A negotiator? .... This is disgusting and I don't care what you say about me but as far as I am concerned there is blood on ALL the onlooker's hands.... Hope they liked the view...why didn't they leave if they were just going to be useless?

I'm calling bullcrap on this whole "it was too dangerous" excuse. There are polar bear clubs of hundreds of people (I'm sure some in that area) who jump into freezing water and splash around just FOR FUN every year. This reinforces my view of California as the "it's all about me" state. Those old "cowboys" and "hicks" from the middle of the country that you look down your noses at would have run into the water, grabbed the guy, pulled him out then driven home in a gas guzzling pickup to have a steak and a beer. But ya'll are more civilized and cultured out there on the coast ain't ya..

give these brave "first responders" a break...the water was below room temperature, after all

...someone could have caught a cold

54 degrees is a LOT warmer than the "polar bear" water stunts and these people didn't have to swim or be fully in the water. Sorry, I've never heard of frostbite or death from a person who was in 1 foot of water....hence the human chain as a snatch and grab. If the man fought - then he'd be on his own.

Yes, the bystanders should all be ashamed of themselves.

The union guys however, receiving $100k+ salaries from US to do their JOB watching a guy freeze to death in 5' of water is beyond cowardly.

As to the inhuman response that people attempting suicide deserve no help, well that's exactly 100% wrong. These people DO need our help. Especially if they are in public - they obviously need someone to care, as they have lost hope.

Oh well, I guess those union guys working for the fire and PD at least got their salaries and benefits in tact. Just don't expect them to help you if you are in 54 degree water. I wonder when they'll watch houses and people burn, when the fire is too hot? Or they forgot their coats?

The bay area offers us a glimpse at the worst of America.

To get back to OP's Question, no, the person qouted was at the City Hall Meeting, not the beach. So he was commenting on the people and fire rescue at the beach site.

Wow....essential things get cut from budgets, but I am fairly sure all the politicians gave themselves raises!

It is really sad to see what kind of heartless people some are becoming!

Have to agree with you, Futureshock! Every winter we go swimming in our (unheated) backyard pool.

We live in the San Gabriel foothills in CA where it can get to the low 30's at night during the winter.

Of course, we heat-up first in the spa, but still, we don't think twice about going in the pool at those temps.

Actually, it feels great!

This is just the beginning of the results of "cut's". I wonder if someone had lost control of their car and ended up in the water, would they just have to save themselves?

We now have to become more self reliant. Put out our own fires, stay away from the water, don't get into accidents. Stay away from any and everything that might cause us to need help.

I tried to commit suicide one time. After years of abuse at the hands of a family member, I decided to end it all. So, I swallowed a cabinet full of pills and took myself down to a deserted outside stairway, which people no longer used because it was considered to be too dangerous.

I crawled into the bushes along side the stairs and passed out. Along comes a stranger. Now, this stranger seeing a young woman passed out in the bushes in a deserted area, could have done a lot of things -- but he chose to do the right thing. I woke up in the ICU of a hospital. The family member was arrested (and released), and I was put into therapy.

That was many years ago, and I often wonder where I would be if that man had chosen not to get involved. Good thing it was THIS man, and not some of these people posting on this board!

By the way, even though we searched, we never found out the identity of the man who saved my life. Wherever you are --- whoever you are --- Thank you, thank you, thank you.

The guy was approximately 150 yards from shore when the first responders got there. You're not there to assess what the situation is and the responders were there for far less than the hour this all happened. You clowns only think you would jump into 50 degree water, then swim out more than football field to retrieve a guy who is already attempting suicide, then manage to swim all the way back with him? Now who's dreaming? You've also got to include that he's still walking away from you and at some point might fight you.

It's not the depth of the water that kills you. It's the temperature. As an experiment, try carrying 150 pound object 150 feet on land. Ok, now add neck deep icy water and a current. At some point of your trip, you will also suffer from hypothermia. And if you pass out, you're most likely dead. Getting out there isn't the hard part.

Kat, your story is nice. But it would be a little different if the man had to greatly risk his life. You don't give the people in this story enough credit. Of course they wanted to save him, it was just too hazardous to attempt.

I stated: "So, I gather a human life is not worth saving anymore be they suicidal or not? So much for humanity then."

Shuklack stated: Hmmmm. Not if they are suicidal. Save those who want to be saved. I The truly humane thing to do is to let the person die if they want, and not insist that other people who actually want to live should risk their own lives to save him."

Because their mind is not in order, that is a reason to let them die? Ever heard of getting them in for treatment? There are people out here who have been in the same boat as that man, but with treatment have turned their lives around. What is it with people like you? The man is in need of mental help, his mind is tortured with it and he isn't thinking straight, so let's just turn around and let him end it. Wow, you not only lack humanity, but very little thought when it comes to knowing that people can be treated for conditions like this. Other peoples lives mean very little if anything to people such as yourself.

"It's not your place, it's not your decision"

Oh really? And who are you to tell me what I can and can not do? No, sorry, you don`t run my life.

Gabbo - can't help it that you are scared of the water.

But many of us are not. 54 isn't that cold. 5 feet isn't that deep.

But if protecting your job is more important than protecting people, then you are in the wrong line of work.

HOLD ON, here, are you going to try to sell me the Coasties didn't have a Zodiac or survival skiff on their Boat? NO WAY!!!!!! The Coasties can and have proformed rescues, off shore, in as little as 45 feet of Water.

And foe the Police and Fire to just stand by because the water was too cold? Get out of town, they, the first responders, used this as a political ploy at the expense of the mans life. Potential Suicides can be helped with the Right type of care and counsel, but these folks turned it into Politics as usual.

Where I dwell, the First responders and Public don't bat an eye at the water temp or current, they hop in and try, exceptinr in a deep rapids situation.

Get a Grip, each Officer and Responder and Citizen that killed this man sshould be held liable......

Well, Gabbo1, I was not commenting on the people who stood by and watched. I have no idea what they were thinking. My comment was directed at some of these posters who are making comments like, "he made a choice," or "suicidal people don't deserve compassion."

My point, was that most suicidal people are not in their right minds, and no one knows who or what drives a person to the point of suicide. I read something once, let me see, oh yes, it went something like, "There by the grace of God" or "Judge not" -- something like that.

Sometimes, you just don't think straight, and THAT is my point.

No matter how you spin it -- this is a tradegy in more ways than one.

Thank you kat1015719.

One more thing. If this were to happen to me today, I probably wouldn't get any of the help I needed to get over this ---- BUDGET CUTS!

Black Kettle & Sand Creek...lest we forget

I understand the comments that 54 degree water is dangerous. I understand that some people cannot swim.... but I cannot understand how, this man, who apparently 'looked toward shore SEVERAL times'...I cannot understand how he was let to drown with 75 bystanders and nearly an hour of time. The 75 bystanders could have made a "human chain".... those that can't swim, don't get more than waist deep... I can't help but think that if the man would have seen someONE at least TRY... or even talk to him, he may have come back on his own. The police and fire didn't have a blow horn either? A negotiator? .... This is disgusting and I don't care what you say about me but as far as I am concerned there is blood on ALL the onlooker's hands.... Hope they liked the view...why didn't they leave if they were just going to be useless?

Yes, you don't understand. If you throw a rope or make a human chain, it won't do any good. You failed to realize that this guy was sucidal. He continued to inch away from the shore while the firefighters tried to talk him out of it. So what will a human chain will do besides subject the rescuers and bystanders in 54 degree water. 54 degree water is DANGEROUS. High risk for hypothermia. So risk rescuer's and bystander's lives to save a SUICIDAL individual?

And there is a big difference between a 10 yr old child who accidently fell in and the sucidal guy thats been in the water for a 1 hr. 10 yr child wants to be saved.

Have you dealt with a suicidal individual? I do on a daily basis in the emergency room. This is a guy where you can't throw a rope and expected him to grab and pull to safety. He was neck high in water and can walk back but choose not to. Coast Guard was needed because this individual will have to be forced to safety and won't do it willingly. 54 degree water. Fighting and wrestling in 54 degree water without protective gear...... I bet alot won't last long. I bet alot of people will sing a different toon if firefighter lives got lost for trying to save this selfish coward.

I have one question for this simple-minded firefighters and cops...did the NYPD/NYFD have "building falling down" protection when 9/11 happened?! Nope...they did their damn job and actually risked theirs lives for once for their pay.

I can't believe these people. No one will cut their wages or pensions in bad times, then they act like we all should bow down to them because they 'are putting their lives on the line', but when it matters most they fail. Nut up and jump in that water and save that guy or stop acting like you deserve anything more from society than you pay.

Did everyone forget that firemen and paramedics (doctors also) CAN NOT render aid or treatment unless the victim asks or consents to it. You can not force aid/care onto any concious person without their consent. If you are injured and ask for help they will render it, if not no matter how bad your hurt they can not force aid on you unless your unconcious.

"IF" they waded out there and had to restrain or smack this idiot to bring him ashore, thats criminal assault. All they could do even with training and equipment is wait him out and respond as soon as he looses consiousness.

The police can intervene and remove a person against their will if they consitute a threat to others in the vicinity ( like a man in traffic, or on a train track etc.) but other than that they must wait until help is asked for.

Personal responsibility......

Kat, God doesn't let budget cuts stand in His way. And, like you stated, you never met the man one who saved your life. Thank God you are ok now. I wish you the best.

Ryan in Texas: "Gabbo - can't help it that you are scared of the water.

But many of us are not. 54 isn't that cold. 5 feet isn't that deep."

Then you are extremely foolishly not appreciating the full extent of the danger this situation presented to the rescuers.

A) How much do you swim?
B) How much experience do you have swimming in a natural environment (currents, waves, etc) without aid?
C) How much experience do you have swimming in cold water?
D) How much experience do you have swimming in cold water in a natural environment?
E) How much experience do you have swimming while trying to hold up another human's weight?
F) How much experience do you have swimming while trying to hold up another human's weight that's actively fighting you?
G) How much experience do you have swimming while trying to hold up another human's weight that's actively trying to drown you?
H) How much experience do you have swimming while trying to hold up another human's weight that's actively trying to drown you in cold water in a natural environment?

This was not a simple situation. This was extraordinarily hazardous. This could have turned deadly to any rescuer attempting the feat in a matter of minutes. And if you don't appreciate that, then you are ignorant.

This wasn't a polar bear plunge. This wasn't paddling around on a surf board. This was a volatile situation that was ripe for getting a rescuer killed.

Now, I also don't completely fault the government for cutting the cold water training. But I do fault the people who keep voting in politicians that waste government funds on non-essential services that bring the government to the point they can no longer afford to provide essential services.

The situation didn't have to end like this. But there is a long line of failures that lead to it. And wasteful government spending and policies that lead to this point and the people who voted in the politicians that put that in place are as much to blame as anyone. You can gripe about the Tea Party or heartless conservatives, but when it comes down to it, if you raise taxes to the point you drive away businesses and cause taxpayers and employers to flee the State, over pay for services where the price of labor is jacked up way over the value you are getting because of pandering to unions, then who really is to blame when there isn't enough money left over to pay for something like water rescue training and equipment to keep the lives of the people who put theirs on the line for the sake of others safe?

Sloppyjoes

if a man wanted to kill himself, then let him, why should the police and firefighter intervene, he just going to pull more resources out of the city

Your remark is colder than the water this man died in. May you receive the compassion you show. And may you encounter others of your own attitude in your time of need.

If you are not willing to risk your life to save others...

...you have no business in Police, Fire or EMT.

(Military, too).

It's just that simple.

To the people blaming the fire and police department: Grow up and Lurk Moar. It said in the article that they lacked the tools and training to do cold water rescues.

Basically what you all are saying is that if there was a major fire next door to your house it would be possible to put out said fire with a water gun if that is all a rescuer had. If you think that it was possible for the fire and police to have saved that man, I encourage you to try my fire analogy and let me know how it works out for you.

Let me put it this way: They wanted to help him but they couldn't. If they did, they would have perhaps died too. Worse: The water was dangerously cold and had a current. Add to this an unpredictable victim and I can't find fault with their decision. No sense they put their lives in mortal danger with limited training and equipment in such a scenario for somebody who wanted to die.

There is no winners in this. This was a tragedy and was compounded due to lack of training and tools. So to those who want to be overly critical of the people there I say this: Unless you were there at that moment in time, you cannot appreciate the gravity of the situation. All these comments are speculative and amount to arm-chair quarterbacking.

Gabbo1-

Kat, your story is nice.

And your comment is condesending. I find it hard to believe in real life if someone just shared a very personal story about themselves that you would be so cold. It must be nice to have a pair from the comfort of your computer screen.

AT 54 degrees, a person has 1 to 2 hours before exhaustion or unconsciousness sets in from hypothermia.

The officer's and firemen's actions are exactly correct. No one on here is in any position to judge them for their actions in that circumstance.

It's not just San Francisco. I am a trained fireman and was told that when there is a clear danger to myself not to risk my life to save someone else or there will be two casualties instead of one.

Dave's statement is exactly correct.

It's a shame that many of you aren't going to read his statement or mine and write in judgement of the officers when there was nothing they could do for the man without putting themselves at risk, probably passing out as soon as they got to the man and drowning. All other resources to rescue the man were not available due to availability.

http://seagrant.umn.edu/coastal_communities/hypothermia

Did everyone forget that firemen and paramedics (doctors also) CAN NOT render aid or treatment unless the victim asks or consents to it. You can not force aid/care onto any concious person without their consent.

Azrancher - I am by no means a legal expert, but I have to question the accuracy of this statement as it pertains to attempted suicide. That is, I believe attempted suicide is actually classified as a felony offense. Thus, in that context, it would seem that this man wasn't a "victim" from whom explicit consent-to-aid would be required.

There are no excuses. I have seen rescues in worse conditions. The people who respond to these emergencies, should be trained and provided the proper equipment.

Claiming that they should allow the man to commit suicide is wrong, but not unusual. If someone locks themselves in a house claiming they are going to commit suicide, the cops will come and shoot him instead. In some instance, you are allowed to kill yourself. In others the cops will do you the favor.

It's not "just that simple". First responders put their life on the line by virtue of what they do, they risk their life every time. But you do it in an intelligent manner, you minimize the risk. If the situation crosses a certain threshold, you do not respond. That is basic training, and there is a damn good reason for it. Unless you value the life of the victims or potential victims *more* than you value the life of the first responder themself.

Military is different, and a completely different set of situational modifiers. Comparing the two is apples to oranges.

@JPM:

I hope you're never around when someone needs help, because the last thing they need is you yelling to the crowd, "Don't help that guy. You could get hurt!"

JPM,

First responders do not risk their lives every time.

Whatever. I don't serve in that capacity any more, but I've actually pulled people out of the water because they got themselves in trouble and saved them. I was a lifeguard years ago. But you do not unnecessarily risk your life to do so, you just do not do it. You can get bent out of shape and emotional about this particular situation if you want and whine about the fire fighters not "doing their job" or not having the decency to go save the guy, but I very much doubt most of you doing that have any clue about what that situation was really like. It's typical monday morning quarterback syndrome. And I was not there, but I do not doubt the fire fighters responded in an appropriate manner given the circumstances. No one wants to wait around and watch someone die that doesn't have to. It probably killed those fire fighters to be stuck there and watching him. It's not just about "following policy" though. It's about making sure you value the life of the rescuer and don't throw it away because you were careless.

First of all, we all need to re asses the respect we give to these responders.

Their jobs are not very dangerous statistically- yet we have gone along with the propaganda that they are.

Construction is far more dangerous.

As are many industries.

We need to remember, they are public servants.

Servants.

Somehow they forgot that along the way.

And partially, it's all our faults for elevating them to heros, when in reality, they are just doing a job.

And even their own words here show they are not willing to risk their necks for yours.

So this incident is an excellent example of why when a cop, firefighter or EMT dies in the line of work, they deserve the same level of respect as the guy who delivers your pizza (statistically a more dangerous job) does when he is killed on the job.

But not near the respect we give to a fallen construction worker, who risks their lives to provide you with shelter or a place to work.

Like the responders say: "We make the big benefits and bloated salaries to not risk our lives."

And we say thank you for nothing.

Ridiculous. I worked for a year as a laborer in construction. I can vouch its dangerous and an accident prone profession. I was nearly cut in half by a blast of steam from an over pressured pipe.

But you disrespect the danger these people face, particularly from the elements they are put into, and you disrespect them, for no good reason.

I'm a fiscal conservative. And I don't do dangerous work any more, I'm a software engineer / database developer now. And I believe in paying a fair market wage for work. Including first responders. I also would argue that Unions representing them have contributed to this mess by forcing the wage paid above the market value of the work thereby depleting the resources left to be able to do things like give them water rescue training and the equipment necessary to get the job done. And I had a problem with the Unions even when I was in more dangerous lines of work.

But don't just dismiss the danger these people face as statistically insignificant, that just shows utter contempt for what they do out of nothing but ignorance.

(Pizza delivery more dangerous than cop or firefighter? Ok I'll bite, show me the evidence and reputable studies. I'd be happy to look. I'm skeptical, but I'm willing to be proven wrong.)

In FL in a "Baker Act" situation, or involuntary commitment, such as with a drug overdose, a first responder will definitely bring a person in against their will and subject them to medical treatment. If the person does not cooperate, they are literally restrained.

JPM - Fire and EMT don't even break the top ten industries for dangerous jobs.

Police rank just barely in the top ten.

And delivery drivers are above them.

You just got a taste of the truth and it conflicts with the propaganda you have swallowed for so long.

I don't expect it to go down easy.

A real man could easily shown the first responders how it's done.

The guy was out there for an hour. How much fight do you have after an hour at 54 degrees?

If it was too shallow for a boat - then you wouldn't even have to swim!

Time to fire the lot of them and get some real heros who are not afraid to get their feet wet.

"We didn't want to put out the fire, it was hot."

"We didn't want to chase the theif, it was dark."

"We didn't want to give him CPR, what if he has cooties?"

PATHETIC.

The state of California is nearly bankrupt paying for this???

America used to be CAN DO, now it's CYA.

Kat, thanks for your willingness to share your story. I can hardly believe those who are so set on their agendas that they are unable to see what you are saying. It makes me wonder what is happening to the heart of our country and our world. If we cannot care for each other as human beings, then what will become of us?

seen too much - no doubt. I have had friends who committed suicide. If I recall the figure it's over 40,000 Americans a year.

Can you imagine if it was your friend in the water?

There is no way I wouldn't give a rescue a shot.

Suicide is a major problem that takes many great people that can turn things around, and chemical imbalances do exist and can be treated.

The problem if far larger than murders - that we see on TV all the time. If the Police could stop half the suicides, they would save more people than if they prevented ALL murders.

I just don't like hearing people, especially those we pay to respond, with the attitude that saving this life is different than if a crook had a gun to a bankers head. It's risky either way, but I'll take the water vs. a gun barrel anyday. But will always be a risk in any job, especially responders.

I thought they knew that when they signed up.

75 people have nothing to do but stand around and watch an idiot drown himself. Unemployment is hell isn't it? Purpose of article, this is news worth wasting print? Yes there are problems in the country and some great examples right here. When someone knows no more than to kill himself don't waste a dime of my money stopping them. And to try to make a point of this as to budget cuts, philosophies, you're all wasting a lot of time.

Robert Karp, in post 1.1138 you say that firefighters assess whether it is dangerous for them to go in to save someone and if its too dangerous they dont. What do you do you get paid for if not to save the lives of others in situations where they would need saving?! "oh it's too dangerous...we can't risk our lives to save one person." I understand the base rational there, but don't go asking, expecting, or assuming that you need a heroes welcome or a city paid for heroes funeral through town when you do you job or die doing it. Because essentially what you are saying is that if a firefighter or cop dies in a dangerous situation it was because he misassessed the level of danger, i.e. He didnt realize it was dangerous, and went in anyway and died. Therefore, one can only conclude that he died from ignorance and not heroism. As Ryan in Texas points out there are far more dangerous occupations.

Wayne...you may feel different if your family member or a loved one was trying to commit suicide...if not you are truly cold hearted!

How about if we organize a boycott of travel to San Francisco until they come up with a set of policies that actually are concerned about human life rather than supporting a bunch of do nothing, ass covering firemen and policemen with hearts of stone, no commonsense and no moral character nor human compassion.

I for one will take my travel dollars elsewhere; I did not loose my heart in San Francisco.

Stoops2conquer this was not San Francisco, it was Alameda. That's a totally different city all the way across the bay from SF. That's like saying boycott New York City because of something that happened in Newark.

The wind shifts across the bay, so either way their progressive/liberal politics still pollute the area. I wonder how these power freak egomaniacs would react if another major earthquake takes place?

Ancient Roman's behaved the same. Clarence would not have set down there, and apparently he will not again. here.

Wow Lucy1 that was so pathetically childish.

Blunt yes, childish, no way.

Lucy1 - How to figure that it wasn't childish to generalize all Bay Area people as progressive/liberals of a power freak nature?!?! That's childish, not just blunt.

I see my post #1.32 was collapsed. Why? Because someone did not agree with it? Ok, so why not collapse every comment made, so they don't show? I wouldn't mind it, if what I stated was against the Newsvine terms, but it wasn't. So, whoever collapsed it, learn to deal with it, and learn to live with what people tell you.

So moderators, would you please reinstate my comment?

Sorry, I haven't been on this thread in a few days. Lucy1 - thanks for clarifying earlier - 'Alot you know. You don't even know the facts about the house in TENNESSEE not TEXAS. Also, you along with dd9359 try to use this fire to blame the right, well, Tennessee is represented by a Democrat Governor and Obion County Tennessee, where the fire took place is represented by Dems, so get your story straight.

The mayor said if homeowners don't pay, they're out of luck.' - As I mentioned in my post, I wasn't sure where this was, I thought it was Texas. But as to my comments about Conservatives, I was speaking about the other Newsvine commentors on that particular story, not the govt of that town.

I mentioned those posting to the original firefighter story who said the FD should have put out the fire even though the house wasn't paying for the service and trying to point out the fallacy of logic where 1) you can't get a free lunch, and 2) everything should be privatized and paid for individually, but 3) in case of emergency this should not apply and the FD, PD or EMS should help those who need it even if we do not pay them anything. Even Republicans should be able to understand the fallacy of that logic, many Republicans tend to agree that there are certain functions that should be paid for by all like - PD, FD, EMS, Military, etc....even though they will continue with their efforts to privatize as much as possible without seeing the studies that show the fact that IE - if we had single payer, where I paid my premiums to the govt rather than Blue-Cross, and that money was used to provide more coverage to the poor, rather than pad the pockets of the Blue-Cross CEO, that the effect would be to lower the demand and costs for EMS and Medicaid. Basically I am a Democrat because I look for the lowest cost and look out for my own self-interest...also I am a Christian and a Patriot, for those reasons I could never vote Republican (these are my personal beliefs)

With the home burning, they could have put out the fire and billed him for the cost., I agree with every other point you made.

Final word, it's all about realistic expectations. The first responders assessed the situations, deemed it too hazardous and called the coast guard. They did their job. You don't have all the details of this issue. How would you suggest someone with no training and no equipment swim out 150 yards into an ocean to save a 280 pound suicidal man? Yeah, he was that big. And the water is cold enough that hypothermia will probably set in sometime during your rescue. You have no idea of his mental condition.

The passerby who actually retrieved the body was the only person on scene actually trained in open water rescue. She was the person most qualified. It helped that the guy was already dead and a floater and his body had come back to the beach.

they could have at least tried. Seems like they were more interested in measuring the water's temperature so that could have a reason for doing NOTHING. Sick

Yet their morbid fascination prevented them from NOT standing around to watch!

Please refrain from attacking fellow posters. It is against Newsvine code.

Agree to disagree.

Bluelake, A few years ago people were jumping in the Potomac river in the middle of winter during a snow storm to rescue people when their plane crashed. These jerks in San Fran that were standing around have no excuse except that they are bunch of self serving scum.

I have a wet suit in my closet. Wasn't there someone nearby who had one in their closet? The guy was there for an HOUR!

Bluelake

Without proper equipment i.e. a wet suit,the rescuer has just as much a chance of dying as the person TRYING to kill themselves. Besides get used to this situation as government funding dries up to an even greater extent. No taxes, no funding.

It took the man ONE HOUR to die, if they could not get out to him and back with in an hour, then they need to learn how to swim.

What happened to the "policy" of "to serve and protect"?

Sounds more like a policy of “I don’t want to get involved”

So right to life only applies to high visibility cases like Terry Schiavo and abortion clinics-----It is acceptable to let an obviously mentally ill person commit suicide because his life is less sacred than a person in a permanent coma / chronic veg state or a lump of cells that may become a child.

Talk about hypocrites.

It seems they have a long list of excuses that don't hold up:

54 degree water is not very dangerous for a rescuer. It takes almost an hour for hypothermia to set in at that temperature for a healthy adult without any protective gear.

It's rather difficult to get "pulled under" by someone when you're standing up in neck deep water. Throw on a life vest before you go in and it's impossible.

Five feet of water is not too shallow for a Coast Guard boat. A number of their typical craft are designed to operate in water that is even more shallow than that.

Worst case scenario, if they were worried about him posing a danger to poorly trained rescuers, they could have waited until he lost consciousness and then immediately pulled him out (without worrying about their own necks) and resuscitated him. The effects of hypothermia provided them with a large window to do this successfully, yet the article gives no indication that they even attempted it.

Bluelake....

Now there is a TYPICAL liberal comment. Goes right along with the liberal program and 2 major Liberal Bi-laws...

The end ALWAYS justifies the means...

NEVER let a good crisis go to waste...

That sort of thinking is repugnant to me.

I've done fire, ocean rescue and ems and you should see how difficult it can be with training to drag a "cooperative" victim out of the water. I've had violent suicidal/psych patients kick, punch, bite and wrap their hands around my neck and choke me. I challenge anybody on this board to go into neck deep 54 degree water without proper equipment and try and keep your head above water when you get to somebody like that. Good luck.

Wasn't there someone nearby who had one in their closet?

Uhh, poking around someone's closet in The S.F. area might get you more than you bargained for.

John - You and I have some common history. I was a firefighter / EMT and have taken part in rescues as well. If this guy was within reach of shore (which I am only guessing as he "waded out neck deep") my department would have donned PFD's, tied a lifeline to a swimmer, and made an attempt to go get this guy. When wearing a PFD, you have the buoyancy to keep 2 men above water.

The swimmer can expect to get kicked, punched, scratched, ect... It is part of the job, unfortunately. But after a half hour or so, the mans faculities probably would have been dimished to the point of not putting up a "good" defense against a fresh person in the water. If a fight is put up where the swimmer is in danger, he can be pulled to safety by the lifeline.

NO rescuer I have ever met would have stood by and done NOTHING. Our motto was to "ADAPT AND OVERCOME" - NOT WAIT FOR DEATH AND DRAG THEM OUT!

DaveB... Forget about waiting... standard practice while trying to save a drowning victim is to knock them out if they resist or fight... in the end its better for both the victim and the rescuer

Bluelake, you are full of it.

Take $5, go to Lowe's (or any other nearby hardware store), buy a sturdy anchor rope, go save the guy (even if you have to wait until he passes out). It's as easy as that. Any citizen could have done that, much less first responders. To say that this had anything to do with budget cuts is to take a tragedy and twist it for your own political gain. I could just as easily blame it on the union for negotiating that policy.

Cut education, fire, police but don't cut the arts, entertainment, racecar sponsorships, fancy night clubs, raises for politicians, funding for franken-seeds and franken-fish for Monsanto to poison us, etc....yep, prioritizing at its best! Our Government is so jacked up and corrupt!

ScoMata1964- Thank you. I would only suggest that you read post #2.13 by John1802062 who, unlike you, seems to know what he is talking about. Rescuing a small child or a victim in ice cold water is vastly different from the rescue of somebody who is resisting or unwilling to help in their own rescue.

As for the tax comment, your a republican. Need I say more?

It's you're, but you are obviously democrat and not expected to know proper grammar or spelling right? Need I say more?

Read my post above, been there, done that. I know what I am talking about, and have seen this scenario play out in person. This same thing happened right in front of my house, and I was out on the river to help them if needed, fortunately, he gave up and let them pull him in after a long fight, but I was there in the cold in case there was a problem with the first boat.

BTW, since you seem so presumptuous and assuming and wrong, the Ohio is a RIVER, not an OCEAN, and remains in the 40s and 50s most of the winter. It rarely freezes.

And what tax comment? Obvioulsy you are a bigot, and an ignorant one too, need I say more?

When the guy died after an HOUR of being in the water, did they just leave his body in the bay because it was too cold, or too deep, or we can't get a boat, or we don't get paid for doing this? NO. THEN they recover the body; he is now an eye sore. THAT is all those people care about.

Somebody needs to review their politics, because the liberals certainly do not espouse a pragmatic ends-justify-means position. Conservatives often, not always, but often, do.

A civilian recovered his body. A passerby. They probably were disgusted by the officials standing around watching him float.

Any citizen could have done that, much less first responders.

Then why didn't "any citizen" do it? Why did all these other people, standing on the beach watching, not help? It seems that everyone is willing to blame police and firefighters, but forget that there were others there as well that watched too! The responders were stopped by policy, not by a want to not help!

LS - Ploice and fire would have set up a perimeter around the area to try to keep citizens out of the water. They wouldn't want the possibility of a second victim - adding to the problems instead of solving them.

The end ALWAYS justifies the means...

NEVER let a good crisis go to waste...

DerekV:

You are a poor student of history to think this only applies to liberals. Wasn't it George W Bush that used both of these for 9-11 and Iraq? How'd that work out?

Maybe its not that youre a poor student, youre just a partisan hack?

Kicking, hitting flailing, spare me the "it's too dangerous" I have watched my husband, acertified diver and EMT work a lifeguard job and have to go out and get a grown man that was bobbing and flailing. When he realized the man was bigger and it was going to be a problem he cold cocked the guy out in the water and brought him to shore. Spare me the "Oh it's too dangerous". He taught my boys that if you ever have to rescue someone drowning and they are flailing don't risk letting their panic drown you both haul off and deliver a punch right between the eyes. They will settle down. He would have NEVER stood and watched as somone drowned. You think punching someone in the face was policy? No , but is prevented a drowning. And the man was actually grateful. He did what he had to do. Imagine that.

Common Man

Bluelake, A few years ago people were jumping in the Potomac river in the middle of winter during a snow storm to rescue people when their plane crashed. These jerks in San Fran that were standing around have no excuse except that they are bunch of self serving scum.

There's a big diffrence, as the man made the choice to walk out into the water - he could of walked back. The people in the DC plane crash wanted to live, the man in Alameda didn't.

The only "self serving scum" are "the monday morning quarterbacks" that have never been put into these situations - let alone taking the time to even get the basic CPR training.

typical liberals......... letting this guy die/kill himself and blaming lack of funds from tax payers as the cause......

saying lack of funds left the public with fire a holes and police dopes that are too stupid to do a water rescue..........

so its the lack of funding that caused this guys death..........liberals are so pathetic they make me sick.........basically liberals think every thing they do is right ....unless....... they didnt SPEND enough money ---its really the only mistake liberals will ever admit to....we should have spent MORE..........

Agreed it is dangerous but it is not that difficult to figure it out......as concernedone said above 2.15.........

bluelake is a typical liberal and just wants more taxes and looking for SCARE tactics to get liberals and their failure govt programs more cash to waste........

god help us when these policy makers get our healthcare under their control

thanks to the stupid folks that think the govt and liberals help people..........this is a good example of how the govt helps people........along with the post office budget........keep voting for big govt .....these same policy makers will be in charge of health care soon...........if you are that stupid you deserve it......

"Today in NJ there was a train accident but the governor said 'I'll send in more trains'"

Honestly, we are going to rail on Firefighters who did not have the training or the ability to go in after a highly combative man in freezing water? And to the PFD thing, what guarantees that instead of trying to drown the rescuer he doesn't just choke them to death instead? Rescuing a man in the surf in 6 feet of water not freezing who wants to be rescued is hard enough...

Also lets look at it this way, they couldn't do it, so instead of risking their lives and their families livelihood they call the experts (the USCG, kind of like everyone who called the fire department) and they watch as the USCG screw up and bring the wrong boat.

The poster above was also correct, they break policy once, ok they MIGHT save someone, MIGHT. Policy becomes less sacred (and this isn't just policy like this costs us money this is their entire training as policy, everything they do is policy decided upon for a reason), so it gets violated again and again. Next thing we know we have half a dozen dead Fire Fighters because you think policy is cut and dry and has no purpose. They decide the policy of not going into a dangerous area is BS, and they die. They decide that piece of PPE is too heavy. They aren't dumb but they rely on their training in a tough situation and they learn EARLY on that if they disregard their training people DIE and it could be their best friend on the same squad or their family who doesn't get a father coming home.

They did the right thing, they didn't have training, they didn't have equipment, they called who did and those people dropped the ball. I doubt they were sitting on the shore not apprehensive about the USCG doing their part and showing up. I think we should be pissed at the USCG for being dumb, and the city council for cutting the funding for this matter (because who does that in a state bordered by water on one whole side?).

I might have been able to saved him.......at least i would have tried

kyack.....canoe.....jon boat.........rope.....life jackets........surf board......hobie board.....sun fish......or just walked out....neck deep ...cant drown unless you cant walk......of course i'm sure the cops and fire lackeys would not have allowed an ordinary citizen to help out.....they after all are not going to allow some civilian to show them up ....because its for your own safety........yeah right .......its because they are on a continuous power trip...like all govt agencies are.....backed by govt legal policies ....to do what they interpret the policy to mean regardless of if it makes sense or not.......

There seems to be an awful lot of concern for this guy, and basically none for the safety of the other people there. This guy was suicidal. There seems to be two options for his state of mind: first, that he was actually suicidal and wanted to die, or second, that he was troubled/distraught and wanted attention. In the first case, the guy wants to die. Let him die. Don't put other people in harm's way just to save someone who doesn't want the help. In the second, his selfish cry for attention could potentially have caused someone else to be injured or killed. I think I read that he stood there for an hour. That's plenty of time to decide he didn't want to die and turn around and walk back out, if he truly didn't want to do it. So I'm going to assume that he actually meant to kill himself. If some dude tries to kill himself in front of me by standing around in cold-ass water, then I'm going to let him do his thing. If somebody goes in by accident or falls in or whatever, then I would try to save them. Hell I'd try to save a dog if that was necessary. But I wouldn't go in after someone who did this to themselves, and I wouldn't expect anyone else to either.

As someone who has actually worked for a fire department the number 1 rule is safety. A firefighter or a police officer CANNOT exceed their training or equipment, regardless of what they would like to do. As just a support volunteer carrying advanced First Aid and CPR and trainer certifications, we did undergo swift-water and still-water rescue training. The primary rule? 1 dead body is unfortunate. 1 dead civilian and 4 dead firefighters is a goddamn tragedy of stupidity. 54 degree water will cause hypothermia in rather short order. Unfortunately people die in this world, and while we would like to save them all, we can't, and it certainly doesn't make sense to kill off firefighters and police officers for one dude that decided he wanted to meet his maker. Unfortunately, the policy in this case is right, without the gear or training, they should not be attempting a rescue. What is wrong here is this continuing and incessant need to cut everything, which is putting lives and our economy in danger. We cut public safety to save a few bucks, and people die. We cut education to save a few bucks, and people don't get educated, which creates an entire generation of people destined for a career as "Taco Artist". We cut taxes on businesses on top of these cuts to vital services. All because we have this misguided idea that the best way out of a problem is to destroy.

Our country is royally effed. If we want to know who to blame, we can only look in the mirror.

They could have rowed out there hit him with a tranquilizer and dragged him into the boat.

How about getting someone from suicide prevention to talk to him with a bull horn?

There were a lot of better options than standing around watching the guy die. I used to live in CA and this surpasses the normal level of stupidity out there.

@Fake;

And when you die because you're a stupid wannabe hero, they'd get blamed, and most likely sued for it. They might have had that on their mind as well.

Your turn will come one day Mr Rebuttal, you'll save your dollar on planned rescue operations and likely die yourself or possibly your children. There were all kinds of observers present and no one would risk their lives to rescue this guy. Don't place the blame on the Firemen alone. Without proper gear they were not only putting their lives in jeopardy, but their job even if the were successful in a rescue.

No sir you will only get what you pay for in this world anything more is a bonus. Firemen were pulled back to fire service only, and why because big Insurance Company's will increase dramatically every fire policy if a properly trained Fire Dept is not present in a community.

You're a joke, you say you would have tried to save this guy. I say with your attitude you wouldn't have. You take the cowardly way out, blame others for your own shortcomings. I don't see where you claim to be a VOLUNTEER FireMan, perhaps if you were that would lend you some credence. Don't answer now and say you forgot to mention it, we know that would be a lie. And that again would be the cowards way out.

All this applies to the other watchers as well. Cowards one and all. To make a life and job decision to save this guy is too much to ask of these firemen.

HEY BLUELAKE!!!! TAXES do not have one thing to do with this article but the 48 Morons at last count who want to blame it on anything but the right thing to do which with so many bystanders and not one person went in. And its all about taxes? Give me an "F" ing break!!!!

Blue Lake - I'm reposting this just for you.

There was a time when Men were Men.

The water wasn't very deep.

As mentioned earlier - an hour is plenty of time to round up a rope and things that float.

50 degrees is cold - but you have at least 10 minutes before you have problems - likely way more when you are exerting yourself.

Too bad there were not 2 real men there. They could have easily dragged him out.

Please use some logic in your lives. If he was in there for an hour - just standing - there's no way he could put up a fight. We have people claiming to be experts who are telling you both that the rescuers will get incapacitated by 50 deg water AND that the guy would put up a fight after an hour standing in it?

Which is it?

Seriously, nobody had a small aluminum boat with an outboard?

Why didn't they bring in some of those $100k - $200k a year lifeguards?

Suicidal isn't analogous to "obviously mentally ill (#2.10)"

Isn't it about time for taxes (as- well- as wages to match the inflation) to go up, esp. for the wealthy?

In the end the only person at fault here is the jerk who killed himself. It is not governments role to protect you from yourselves. Nor is it a rescue workers responsibility legally or ethiclly to die for you. If they had gone out to get him without equipment and against orders not only would they have most likely died but their families would have recieved no benefits because they were acting outside of their scope.

The Heros are dead folks you and your lawyers killed them. If you want to know why this story and stories like it are becoming common occurances look in a mirror. If you want them to stop than start railing against politicians who think public safety is the place to save money. God knows all you Nancies need your parks, your trash pickup, and your road repairs. What are a few human lives in comparison to that.

This mans death is his own fault and if you need someone to blame it is YOUR fault but the police and fire acted in accordance with their orders and protocols. If you want to see change than change it at the source, vote more funding to Emergency Services.

EMTMatt - you obviously don't remember what you were taught concerning hypothermia and it's effects including how much time it takes to do how much damage at what temperature.

Basic EMT training.

Clearly, there should be more cuts in Emergency Services if they can't even understand the basics of lifesaving techniques.

After all, why pay them to stand around and do nothing. We can get that for free from the citizens of S.F.

54 degrees is not that cold. You have at least 10 minutes before bad things start to happen, more if you are moving.

Since the guy wasn't moving, he would be sluggish after 15 minutes. If you can't pull a guy out of 5 feet of water when he can barely move - please quit now and let a real man take the job.

so its the lack of funding that caused this guys death..........liberals are so pathetic they make me sick.........basically liberals think every thing they do is right ....unless....... they didnt SPEND enough money ---its really the only mistake liberals will ever admit to....we should have spent MORE..........

Okay, so it's all political. You took a poll and found out they were all Liberals. The fact that due to budget cuts, they were unprepared for frigid water and a man died. All you can do is blame Liberals. Maybe if the man was wanted for murder, you would say, see we got rid of the scum because Conservatives decided to cut spending.

Everything has to come down to politics.

Lenny Skutnik. Remember him? January 1982, the man jumped off a bridge in DC into the iced Pototmac river to save a passenger from Air Florida flight 90 that had crashed. No training, no wet suit, just stripped off his coat and boots and did it because it was the right thing to do. Saved her life.

I was 2 @ the time and had never heard of the story until you mentioned it. So I looked it up. Water was 29 degrees that day and it was snowing. He swam 30 feet to get her and pushed stroked back 30 feet to shore.

And he wasnt the only one to respond.

54 degrees sounds like a heat wave in comparrison!

John, in PJ school we called that morning PT.

Besides get used to this situation as government funding dries up to an even greater extent. No taxes, no funding.

But we can always seem to find money for huge, twisted hunks of metal installed on the courthouse lawn and call it ........ "ART".

In Seattle last year, the city appropriated $46,000.00 to purchase brightly colored umbrellas to keep at downtown intersections - in hopes that people would use them (rain or shine) in crosswalks to increase visibility, and avoid run-ins with drivers. Seems to me that it would be just a lot simpler to look both ways before you cross the street.

We can find money for local law enforcement's prostitution 'stings' - Imagine that.. money that was taken from YOUR paycheck by force.. to help prevent Adults from engaging in Consentual Behavior.

And the list goes on and on - there is simply No End to the government's thirst for your money and the wasting of it on things they have NO business being involved in.

We can always seem to come up with the money .. just so long as we work double hard to avoid coming up with using it for any meaningful results.

The firefighters and police in California make damn good money and over the top pensions. I don't begrudge them their monies, however, if they can't find it withing themselves to be a caring member of the human race, there are thousands of others that would do their job. They would do their job for 50 percent of what they are making now.

Would they like to give up there job and have 2 people (just as competent) to replace them? The firefighters and police in California better wake up. They should not act like prima donna's.

the one and only-1533412

They could have rowed out there hit him with a tranquilizer and dragged him into the boat.

How about getting someone from suicide prevention to talk to him with a bull horn?

There were a lot of better options than standing around watching the guy die. I used to live in CA and this surpasses the normal level of stupidity out there.

Have you read the article? They couldn't get a boat in close enough because it was shallow. Shoot him with a tranquillizer? Wow, that will make the situation alot worse. What do you think the firefighters was doing for an hr?

Welcome to reality. It's not like the movies. They can't snap their fingers and have all the resources in the world to appear within minutes. And if you haven't heard, city budgets been cutting budgets for years, sooner or later someone will get killed.

had enough - A real man could easily shown the first responders how it's done.

The guy was out there for an hour. How much fight do you have after an hour at 54 degrees?

If it was too shallow for a boat - then you wouldn't even have to swim!

Time to fire the lot of them and get some real heros who are not afraid to get their feet wet.

"We didn't want to put out the fire, it was hot."

"We didn't want to chase the theif, it was dark."

"We didn't want to give him CPR, what if he has cooties?"

PATHETIC.

The state is nearly bankrupt paying for this???

Thank you to whomever restored my comment. There seems to be a lot of people trying to shut down other people's opinions that they just don't like and not because a comment is not well written or nasty.

My comment above strongly (near the top of the thread) expresses a sincere, genuine moral outrage that both the so called "fire fighters/rescue personnel" as well as do nothing spectators stood by and allowed this man to die without lifting a finger. There is absolutely no excuse - the water was not that cold, nor dangerous, nor deep - yet these, I can't even think of a word despicable enough to label them, these callous individuals sat by while a possibly deranged and irrational person died.

This is not acceptable. The District Attorney should be thinking about preferring charges against them of reckless disregard of human life. Head should roll because of this.

Why should we expect the police and firemen to put themselves at risk to 'save' this guy when a perfectly capable man was already there in the water exactly at the location where this man died for almost an hour doing nothing to keep this man alive?

FlyOverMe

A civilian recovered his body. A passerby.

According to a columnist for the Oakland Tribune, a young woman swam out to bring him to shore. The emergency personnel would not lend a helping hand even when she had come within 15 feet of the shore - they waited until she had actually finally reached the shore. Perhaps they feared the water splashing around the by-now inert body might have gotten their clothes wet? The following is from this article.

Firefighters and police still stood their ground as she dragged the nearly 300 pound man. After she had gotten to shore, emergency personnel gave the woman a hand.

In every picture I've seen of this event, the emergency personnel are just idly standing around. But is this really much different than us seeing so many other union employees getting paid for standing around doing nothing (even when there is work that could be done)? Well, not entirely doing nothing - some firefighters raised ladders on the trucks so they could get a better view of the man as his life slowly drifted away.

No, there's probably a policy about not shredding policy.

We need laws because some people are amoral and can't be counted on to do the right thing. We need policies because some people are too stupid to do the right thing. But we also need brains enough to do the right thing no matter what the policy or law says.

Elaine you are asking people to think. Thinking is very hard to do. It is so much easier to just obey the rules that someone else has made. Don't the people who make the rules know what's best for us? (Sarcasm.)

My question would be: Would the police, fire crews and other people present have behaved in the same way if instead of an adult intent on suicide, it had been a 10 year old child who fell into the water?

Would you lose your job over this?

Jherek -

My question would be: Would the police, fire crews and other people present have behaved in the same way if instead of an adult intent on suicide, it had been a 10 year old child who fell into the water?

You can't compare a 10yr old falling into water with a 50ish yr old man walking into water to commit suicide, people will react differently sure, but it is an apples to oranges comparision and flawed analogy.

An adult man who wants to kill himself is not my concern, I would help a drowning child or adult, but if an adult want to off himself - have at it. Drowning victims often cause the death of a untrained rescuer. Something sounds off about the situation, but I wasn't there.

Kurt Vonnegut was right. This culture is doomed, thanks to TV and other media forms glorifying death, killing, and violence. Slowly, generation by generation, we have been losing our humanity. That not one person walked, WALKED, into the water and saved this person, is a tragedy.

They couldn't walk in to save him, but once he was dead someone pulled his dead body ashore so they could get a closer look at the dead guy. If they did it when he was dead, they could have done it while he was alive... but they chose not to.

It isn't about policy or losing your job. If these guys show up at a structure fire with no turnout gear, scba etc. they don't go in. Without proper gear you can easily die. A suicidal man in neck deep water is no different.

While I can see you point... we live in a sue crazy society. What if they someone chose to go in after him, and the guy was hurt or killed while trying to save his life? The Firerfighter or the cop would be responsible legally and open themselves, their dept and the city to lawsuits. Sounds crazy, right?

Well it isn't... there was a case just like the one I described in NYC...
in fact, there have been several of them... in once instance, a cop broke up a rape and while he was pulling the rapist off the women, he broke the rapist's arm... the cop was sued and LOST 40,000.

America is doomed... and this story is just one of the many signs indicating such

Elaine...read post #2. Yes, EMS Responders have a job but they also have responsibilities to their families. If one of those men or women had entered the water against regulations and died their families would have gotten nothing. If one of them had entered the water and gotten injured they would not have had insurance to pay for their care. Sad as it sounds sometimes nothing can be done.

The problem seems to be with the City not those standing on shore. The City shorted these people equipment that could have made a rescue possible...Instead of blaming these first responders maybe someone should ask the city where they are allocating funds for the welfare of the community.

Next time it might not be a suicide rather a family run off the road.

he was in the water for an hour. He didnt hold himself under to drown. He went hypothermic before going face down which means he would have been ragdoll for at least the last 30 mins. Even on drugs, he wouldnt have been violent. 54 deg water is NOT instant death. Its takes; I dont know, an hour to die!!! Maybe their rescue training should take a trip down to coronado so the SEALs can teach them how long you can work in cold water. geez.

You can enforce policies and procedures, to some extent, ethics, but morals are a personal thing. No moral person would have just stood there.

America will be destroyed by eroded morals, not political parties, businesses, governments, or those receiving government assistance. Because everyone, and I mean everyone, plays the system instead of being honest, the end is certain.

Handcuffed by policy is just another way to say we are making a political statement to get more money for the department. They didn't care about this man all they want is for the policy to be removed and the MONEY reinstated. What ever happen to the "Save a life at all cost" attitude of these service people and departments. On January 12th, 1982 I was caught in traffic on the 14th street bridge when the Air Florida plane crashed. I watched as Lenny Skutnik dove into the Icy Potomac river and help a Stewardess get saved. Without his efforts she would have died. He was just a person t the scene. the alleged professionals stood and watched. he wasn't even being paid to save her life. Those that were responsible and being paid ignored their duty.

At what point, we became dehumanized humans! This is absolutely absurd for saying the less!!

Elaine: Your comment should also be shredded. You are certainly narrowminded just like all of your little tin soldier followers who voted for your comment, and like a witness named Gary Barlow who could stand there and say, "We expected to see at some point that there would be a concern for him."

Well, Gary Barlow, who are you that you could not be concerned but could only stand there as an idiot gawker and bystander?

Elaine, would you have been any different than Gary Barlow or any of the other spectators (like in an ancient Roman theater) standing there, for an hour, with their finger in their nose??

I really think a lot of it is how a person is raised, Kids don't have any respect for parents or others, think of self only.I have stopped at many accidents when driving from Ill to Missouri, each week to help care for my Mother who was ill. One time I will never forget. There was a pickup on the side of the road and saw a body laying beside it. So stopped. This person had a shot gun on the seat, where he had shot himself in chest and had a sucking wound. Shot went clear through the chest. I had a emergency kit in my truck. slapped my hands over the back and front of the chest and stopped the sucking of air. then prayed for a truck or police to stop and get help. there was a car that kept going by but never stopped. finally a trucker came by and stopped. I asked him for some plastic bags so put them over there front and back, tapped them in place, took his blood pressure , while the trucker called for an ambulance. After the ambulance and police showed up the car that had been passing stopped. It turned out he was a policeman, I asked him why he didn't stop, he just said I didn't want to fill out all the paper work. I was so angry but didn't say anything as would have said too much. The man who shot himself awakened and said why did you do this. I just said you need help, and when over this gun shot wound you need a Droctor to help you with your problems, so you can go forwards. Nothing is worth your life. Then I went home . I hope his life got strightened out. But sure don't think much of that police man that didn't want to fill out papers. Oh by the way I am a RN. I can't pass up some one that needs help, and do not understand all of those people just standing there. Two men could have went out and got him, if he started to fight one of them could have just hit him on the chin and brought him in. They wouldn't have been in the water very long and a life could have been saved.People try to take their life's when either going down into depression or coming out of it. Need mental help. People just getting where they don't care and that is sad.

@Rick, dude shut up you have know idea what kind of laws and regulations we are held to. I am a paramedic, and I can tell it's not abot getting more money it's about our lives to. It never was SAVE A LIFE AT ALL COST. It's about making sure EVERYONE can get out with the least amount of harm. If we don't have the right training for something, then what's point in us even trying. Now we have two people dead. Also like they said above this nation is sue crazy. They could have pulled him in and he could say they hurt him and BAM, huge lawsuit. Not to mention this going said "I AM GOING TO KILL MYSELF" Why should I risk my life to save someone that doesn't want to live. You think it's about money and it's not. WE have familys to, we have our own lives to look after. Also that guy that saved that women in the plane crash awesome, I hope he got a medal. However if the paid people didn't do anything they most likly had a good reason to. So either experience the job yourself, or shut up and stop acting like we don't care about people. There's a reason we paid all that money and spent all that time in school to learn about saving people.

America - the land of the free and the not-so-brave. Maybe this is how the world ends: with all of us standing around watching each other die and not giving a d*mn, while fretting about 'policy' and wet socks.

Three guys with guts, life vests and a rope, and we would have had a very different story.

Bs Detector- So your saying the guys without training or knowledge should have known how long they could survive or that it wasn't completely suicide? Or that the reinforcements they called wouldn't do the job?

I highly doubt people with enough dedication to spend years in training paying their own money, and doing this in their free time when they could instead take up another job that pays FAR more just care about money. I mean the arrogance people. Whats next? How about we cut funding for ventilators and tell them "you can hold your breath for at least 2 minutes"?

Clearly no one read the part about 54 degree water, lack of wetsuits or rescue swimming training, and dangerous undercurrents.

This story also misses an important point. From the San Mercury Story, the guy was approximately 150 yards from shore when the first responders got there. None of us were there, we have no idea what the situation is. You clowns only think you would jump into 50 degree water, then swim out more than football field even if it only neck deep to retrieve a guy who is already attempting suicide, then manage to swim all the way back with him? Now who's dreaming?

Un holy fvck.

Really? They all watched for an hour..

People sometimes just need help. There was a way for someone to help.

@Cpt, These people think firefighters and police officers lives are expendable. Being a soldier, i hate the fact that people think just because you take the oath to serve and protect that your life is now expendable.

@ScottyW1:

That was not an analogy Scotty. That was a question and a legitimate one. The excuse for not rescuing the man was not "it was his call, he was an adult trying to commit suicide"; rather the excuse was "the rules would not allow us to save him".

Once again, my question would be: Would the police, fire crews and other people present have behaved in the same way if instead of an adult intent on suicide, it had been a 10 year old child who fell into the water?

Listen to what Ammzy says @ 3.17.

John @3.8: You think you had a really nice answer; short and sweet and no nasty words. You are far too short to be my backup.

Let me explain further what I said earlier. In my line of work I have to carry a couple of certifications that I must maintain every two years. I also have the state (I live in -not CA) test me every few months. But I am a civilian. (I saw where some of you were commenting about civilian responders.) I am not a professional like Ammzy above, who I have high respect for. But my job requires me to work day by day with special needs and troubled clients. I was selected to apply for this job because I have something in my heart that those who recommended me for this job saw and liked.

Just a few examples: Once I drove down a big boulevard in a well known city. It is a twisty boulevard. I came around a blind curve in the boulevard which has yellow signs up all over the place telling you to slow to 25 mph (who beside me ever see's those and obeys them?). As I came around the corner I see a young lady, who is pregnant sitting in her car. She has just been sideswiped by a speeder around the corner. Her car is wrecked and she is sitting there crying loudly. I have a car behind me trying to run me over and a passenger in the car with me telling me to keep going, do not stop. I asked my passenger if he wanted my key and car. I told him that I was going to stop right there. Well guess what, he got out with me and helped me.

Three years ago I was in a house with a bunch of men. It was a two story house and one man was upstairs in a room by himself. His door was closed but not locked. Suddenly he went into a rage and began banging on the walls and door and beating on an upstairs window that I was afraid he might jump out of. One young guy, who was almost twice the size of this man who lost control, ran out the door in his underware. Everybody else is panicking and shouting about how the guy upstairs "has a demon". I headed up the stairs and they are all shouting at me to not go up there. I opened the door and saw the man jumping up and down on his bed like it was a trampoline. (Now he is an older rather overweight man, so you see how unusual this is.) But at the moment I realized that something had happened to the man and he was unable to figure out how to get out of the room and lost his control. When he saw me he jumped off of the bed and ran at me and clawed me across the left side of my face, and I am fast. I placed him in an arrest hold and held him and talked to him until he came back to his senses. No, he did not have a demon! And three years later you can see my reward, a scar across my face. But the man is alive.

I told you what kind of work I do. Well I have also had to pick up and body slam an out of control client who was actually attempting to kill a close precious relative of theirs. They did not know what they were doing. And I had to hold the client in a ju-jitsu arrest hold for almost 15 minutes until they quit fighting and biting. Okay!

As sad as it is and as inhumane as it sounds, I understand the firefighters' actions. Why would a fire captain send in someone to save a suicidal man when there was not training or gear available? How different this story would have been if the suicidal man took one or two firefighters with him?

Years ago, in a town near where I live, with a long bridge about forty feet above a dangerous river, a woman determined to kill herself stopped her car, got out and jumped into the river to what she was convinced would be her certain death. The fall did not kill her, she missed the rocks.

A Good Samaritan saw her do this, stopped his car and risked his life to jump in and save her. Incredibly, he did. She was taken to a hospital, then a psych ward. They thought they "solved" her mental problems and released her a few months later. She promptly got it right the next time and killed herself. I don't remember how.

The Good Samaritin was left wondering whether he was a hero for doing what he did, or an idiot to risk his own life for a lost cause. What would you tell him? What would you tell these firefighters if they had risked their lives to save this guy, and a few weeks later, he got it right and killed himself?

Well you can thank frivolous lawsuits for this BS. The policy wouldn't exist if public entities, like the police and fire department, were not getting sued all the time by people just looking to make a buck.

They go in the water to get this guy and he dies or has to be hospitalized they would have probably been sued because these guys were not trained in this rescue technique, therefore blaming their lack of training for what happened to this guy who is "trying to kill himself".

Handful,

Are you under the delusion everyone lives in CA and in the SF area at that? Why would people outside the area hear about some suburb or small town outside SF? If they never heard of SF they would be geographically challanged but not some two bit town outside it.

Rescuers put themselves at risk every time they attempt to save a person, and with out proper gear and training that risk is increased. The Surf and wave action on the Northern California Pacific Coast is not Gentle like it is on the East Coast, the water is definitely cold, and this man would likely resist being rescued. From a Life Guard perspective Going into to rescue someone is always the last choice, and with a person who is unwilling to be rescued it not trivial.

I do not fault the Fire Fighters for not placing themselves at risk in this case. They risk their lives on a regular basis, there has to be some evaluation as to what is acceptable risk and what is not. Why would a Fire Captain send men without gear into harms way? He would need to feel that they had what they needed in order to come back safely.

@SpcTorres: You're in the wrong line of work.

bs detector

he was in the water for an hour. He didnt hold himself under to drown. He went hypothermic before going face down which means he would have been ragdoll for at least the last 30 mins. Even on drugs, he wouldnt have been violent. 54 deg water is NOT instant death. Its takes; I dont know, an hour to die!!! Maybe their rescue training should take a trip down to coronado so the SEALs can teach them how long you can work in cold water. geez.

He lasted an hr just by standing there. How long you you think you will last when you struggle and wrestle this guy to shore? I bet not long.

You think he would have stayed in one spot if the rescuers started to walk toward him? He was neck deep in 54 degree water. He was already inching away from the shore while they tried to talk him out of it. Sooner or later, they would have need the coast guard with a boat. Glad this idiot died instead of several firefighters. Can't save suicidals if they don't want to be saved.

The excuse for not rescuing the man was not "it was his call, he was an adult trying to commit suicide"; rather the excuse was "the rules would not allow us to save him".

My question would be: Would the police, fire crews and other people present have behaved in the same way if instead of an adult intent on suicide, it had been a 10 year old child or a grandmother who fell into the water?

I, for one, believe suicidal people deseve a chance because I have known a number of them who have recovered and are no longer suicidal. I have knocked pills out of the hands of a person who was about to take them, and she didn't try again-at least not in the time I knew her. A friend once told me she always carried a bottle of various pills around in her purse "just in case," obviously inviting me to intervene. She also never took them-and I've heard news of her for years since then. I was once given responsibility for another girl on a college trip who had already taken one overdose WHILE ON THE TRIP (I guess the adult chaperones didn't feel like dealing with it.) She didn't make another attempt the whole time I knew her in college. I didn't do anything except show that I cared about these people (and I hated having the responsibility, especially since the adults around me wouldn't take it!)

There have been many others since I've been an adult, but now at least they have been taken care of by the right people. I've heard kids talk about suicide-including my own-and now I know the right questions to ask to assess their risk. Especially with teens, they can be quite melodramatic, though you should never ignore a suicide threat. My daughter has talked about it in a serious way by telling me she once considered it and also in a manipulative way, as in, "If I don't get my way, I'll kill myself!" (In the second situation, it was really transparent; and I calmly told her just to be sure not to do it on the new carpet. I think at that point she started laughing in spite of trying to act angry.) I have to wonder how some of you on here would react if you discovered that YOUR teen or your child of any age was suicidal! Would you be as cold as you sound now? Would you still say that he/she had made his/her choice and that lives should not be risked to save him/her? This man was someone's son, after all.

Those who question whether some of us would do anything, I don't know if I would jump into 50 degree water. I'm not as strong a swimmer as I used to be since I've had a frozen shoulder and arthritis in my arms. However, I have taken action in other situations, even when bloody wounds were involved and blood spattered on my clothes (I know a bit more than basic first aid, though I would not attempt something I was not qualified or able to do-I live in the sue happy state of FL. If you think I'm terrible because of that, I'm sorry. It really is a good thing, however, that I won't do those things in that I am not attempting anything that could potentially harm the person just because I don't have a clue what I am doing.) I have even unknowingly risked getting injured in certain situations-once I was unexpectedly kicked across the room and into the wall by someone who was out of their head when I intervened to prevent them from being injured. (I didn't leave after that, though I protected myself better; and I had another person go for more help at that point.) I also know CPR and would use it if necessary to try to save a life.

Walking into neck-deep, 54 degree water in the ocean out to a suicidal person is a good way for a lot of people to die also. hypothermia, currents, being attacked by the person..all were quite possible under the situation. Have you ever tried to manuever an unwilling person in the water in such circumstances? Its almost impossible under ideal conditions (on land), let alone those conditions.

Which isn't to say that trained personnel with equipment shouldn't have tried, but I can understand why ordinary citizens might have been unable to do anything but observe.

Vermont guy... i have moved an unwilling person through the water... there are techniques to making them, if not more willing, then more cooperative

Without knowing the conditions it is hard to make any real judgment. Too shallow of water might have also included extremely rough surf making a rescue by boat extremely dangerous. You can put a boat into a foot of water so there had to be other factors involved that prevented rescue not explained in the article.

R. B. Chandler

Without knowing the conditions it is hard to make any real judgment. Too shallow of water might have also included extremely rough surf making a rescue by boat extremely dangerous. You can put a boat into a foot of water so there had to be other factors involved that prevented rescue not explained in the article.

I think the article mentions that the guy was standing in neck deep water for an hour while at times looking over his shoulder. With that description, I would say that there wasn't much of a surf or he would have been gone well before the hour was up. I personally think that the Coast Guard didn't want to scratch the paint on the bottom of their boat or as they would have said: "put the boat in peril." It was a judgement call and judgement wasn't exercised very well. Starting with the City of Alameda.

I disagree, stupidity and bravado should have pushed one of many civilians into the water. But none of them were running to shame the Firefighters. Stop focusing on just the men that had been told outright that they couldn't. NOBODY AT ALL wanted to help, just administer blame and cluck.

Earnest, I have to agree with you. At some point you would think SOMEBODY would go in after him,,,, before he was dead I mean.

The guy wa doing hypothermic for an hour. He would have been a half concious ragdoll for at least the last 30 mins. Violence is the early response to cold, passive dream world is the later response.

Concerned Criminal: Well, you are one Criminal who I would like on my side; I don't care if some gossiper called you a 'criminal'. You seem more human than all the others here making noise.

Not to take sides on any of these matters, BUT: the guy who walked out into the water to end his life had every opportunity to turn around and walk back out. No doubt, there were multitudes on the shore trying to persuade him to return. No doubt, it was a dangerous situation. No doubt, the whole episode will cause a change in the system. This guy, with all of his self-defeating, suicidal actions may, in the long run, saved lives. However, the bottom line is that this suicidal person made a final decision.

Something will change. New rules will be made. More attention will be paid. I don't want anyone to die in this way, but the circumstances were what they were. None of us can take it back. The course to take must be a positive one, and this situation needs to highlight what the "wrongs" are, so that they can be fixed. I refuse to blame anyone. The whole situation was a product of all the circumstances before it. Now is the time to fix these problems. Eventually, a new set of problems will arise, but for the here and now, we must find a better way.

Have you ever had hypothermia? have you ever swam in 50 degree water and tried to drag a human body out of it? Are you a lifeguard?

None of you people have the slightest idea what you're talking about. Yeah, it's really easy to say "you should have walked out there and saved him" from your computer, in your warm house, but you don't know why he did it, and you don't know if he would have put up a fight when you got there, and without the proper equipment to make sure he didn't hold you under, or panic when you got to him, two lives would have been lost. You blame the people that watched, but you have no idea what goes into this process, none.

Try blaming your legislature for disallowing the expenditure for the proper equipment to be on site, and removing the proper training program from the department.

I agree Annie... WTF??? Wet suits needed for the 10 minutes it takes to drag his ass out of the water? Standing by and watching? We're they also screaming "drown baby drown"??? This is hideous and an appalling statement about the status of fire and police rescue teams. Don't they have any freaking morals? So, the guy was intent on committing suicide... so fkn what? Perhaps some psychiatric treatment would help him through that crisis, whatever it was. Should he be entitled to take his own life? Yes! Should crowds standing by gawk, or try to dissuade him and/or pull him out? Yes! Leaving him to drown is indefensible and deplorable.

Zack "gradually inched out farther and farther" from the shore but occasionally glanced back over his shoulder at the beach, Brunetti said.

I bet you a million that it won't take 10 mins. Standing neck deep in 54 degree water....... how long do you think it will take to save a sucidal man? I bet this Zack guy will inch out farther and farther if the firefighters tried to get closer to him. I guarantee you that he won't be standing still so he can be saved.

I don't see the blame where it really belongs on the city. Why the city never paid for any training like this? A perfect analogy is expecting the police to fight fires........ and firefighters to arrest drunks. In this case, the coast guard. You can't expect them to risk lives without proper training. The city dropped the ball by continuing to take budget cuts.

The excuse for not rescuing the man was not "it was his call, he was an adult trying to commit suicide"; rather the excuse was "the rules would not allow us to save him".

My question would be: Would the police, fire crews and other people present have behaved in the same way if instead of an adult intent on suicide, it had been a 10 year old child or a grandmother who fell into the water?

@Jherek

if it was a grandmother or a child that "fell into the water" the situation would have been different, they would have known that the individual wouldn't have fought against them trying to be rescued, the individual wouldn't have continued on a path out into the water, they would have been trying to get back to the shore, there are a multitude of reasons your senario is nothing like the one that took place.

A man who's been in cold water for 30 minutes isn't going to fight back. He kept looking back to see if anyone would come for him. It just confirmed in a depressed man's mind his life was worthless. Can you imagine being so despondent and see 75 people including paramedics, fire and police watch you die for an hour?

Public Speech... wasn't a gossiper that called me a criminal. It was my own country but hey unjust laws are not laws at all for someone who seeks justice.

"Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual"- Thomas jefferson (one of our founding criminals)

training? what about common sense? Try to rescue him. Throw a rope around him and try to pull him to shore. Anything would have been better than nothing. I hope those firefighters sleep well tonight; I know I couldn't live knowing I turned a blind eye.

The Nasty Swamprat

This is tragic, but it's no different if this man had been perched on a high building. 1st Responders have, I repeat, have to follow SOPs.

No one knows the meaning of SOP better than I do, but I also know that there are some “rules” ie “Policies” made to be broken.

When a human life becomes less important than some rule or policy our society has a very serious problem, implementing the SOP here is saying it is Standard Operational Procedure to watch someone die when you could have done something about it.

John H. completely missed the point ... and he just became another victim to deal with. This happens all the time with police or bystanders in fires or potentially toxic air environments who go in with no equipment and no clue.

The problem with that "prpoer" training is it is taught to follow SOP - not to think on the fly! If you cannot adapt and overcome adversity, you might as well be a clerk at 7-11!

They could have made a human chain to reach him, that way even if he turned violent there would have been a couple of guys to subdue him.

hypothermic violence doesnt last that long. The guy would have been drifting off. That's why his survival instinct didnt kick at the end and he stayed face down.

Here's a prime example smaller government in action. Doesn't look so good does it?

What a tragic story

First responders really are not trained to think for themselves. I do not want any of them coming or doing anything to me. Was at a auction once and a lady had an anxiety attack and was hyperventilating, so put a brown paper sack over her mouth and nose and had her take a few breath and she was over it. someone had called the first responders so they came rushing in tied her to a board and put 0/2 on her which she didn't need.took her to the ER where she was discharged as nothing wrong. she had done this before. So this lady had a ambulance bill first responder bill and ER bill to pay. My son had a twisted bowel and was vomiting feces, called for the air ambulance, told them not to call the first responders, Got him to the place where the air ambulance comes had taken his BP. and it was good , his breathing was good checked his pulse ox.Had portable 0/2 if he needed it. well the first responders came anyway, told them didn't want or need them and had said for them not to come.They started to put 0/2 on him, told them no his pulse ox. was 97 which is good. They said we have to and I just told them if you want sued then try it. at that time the air ambulance came and they took him to the hospital and also took his pulse ox and no 0/2 was put on him. I drove up to the hospital to be with him. They don't need to slap 0/2 on everyone if a person is COPD they can cause more harm . They need to learn to take pulse ox and go by that. May be in some areas they have more training I don't know, but the ones I have met don't know enough to give first aid. Sorry feel that way but I really don't want them to care for me and for sure not worth the bill they send for their ambulance and what they do. So with this training what would they do for a man who is in water, no need of them. But don't understand all the people standing around that two men couldn't go in and get him out.

Mary-3547433

First responders really are not trained to think for themselves. I do not want any of them coming or doing anything to me.

They are trained to save lives. Maintain basic ABCs and transport them to the hospital. Welcome to the world of malpractice. Sue happy society. People call 911 for emergencies, EMTs and paramedics that do come expect the worst. They are not there to give medical advice nor dignosis the medical problem. That's why doctors go to school for 10+ yrs.

And coming to the ER? They have protocols to follow. Protocols are in place so they don't miss NOTHING. Main reason is Malpractice.

Mary,

Pulsoximetry is not very reliable - it is one of many vital signs used to assess a patient. Having cold hands, poor perfusion, or nail polish can skew the readings. Even in patients with COPD, oxygen is very unlikely to cause harm. Theoretically, yes, it can affect breathing, but how many doctors do you know who withold oxygen from COPD patients? Probably none.

The excuse for not rescuing the man was not "it was his call, he was an adult trying to commit suicide"; rather the excuse was "the rules would not allow us to save him".

My question would be: Would the police, fire crews and other people present have behaved in the same way if instead of an adult intent on suicide, it had been a 10 year old child or a grandmother who fell into the water?

Do you have a clue why they call ifre fighters Firemen? Well it is because they are paid to put out fires, not save crazy peope. If the City Council will not fund rescue teams, then it no longer falls under their purview to rescue people. If they are under orders to do nothing then it is at a minimum a fireable offense to disobey that order. Pretty simple.

This guy was in the water, not accidently, but by choice. It's a free country and he really can commit suicide if he wishes. No one there was so inclined to talk him out of it, or rescue him because he at some point still could have retreated to shore if he wanted to.

If a child or the like were to fall in the water and were not there due to their own will that would be a different situation, and that requires a different solution. It's all pretty simple.

In many if not most places committing suicide is not legal; so, no, he can't commit suicide if he wishes unless CA law is somehow different. In FL under the Baker Act attemting suicide can result in a person being brought in for medical and/or psychiatric treatment involuntarily and being physically restrained if they do not cooperate.

it is SF,what you expect

So much for claims of being a so-called Christian nation.

Uhhh, who other than rabid intolerant fundamentalists claim this is a "christian nation"??

Last I looked it is a secular nation with diverse religous freedom for all.

Lay down his life!? Seems no one is willing to even lay down their jobs, let alone their life!

So much for claims of being a so-called Christian nation.

It was founded by Christians who are rolling in their graves.

Let's not go there, 3rdparty, because I don't want to have to dig out all the historical documentation to the contrary.

Rick read the historical documentation the real story not the revised history story. This country was founded on Judeo- christian values, not religion. May I say our society as all but lost those values. Relativism, secularism. and self absorption have replaced any form of human kindness. Politics, policy, and the media are the gods of todays society. They tell todays mindless followers how to act, what to wear, what to eat, what to think. They take away your right endowed by the Creator for life, liberty and the of happiness. We have become a society without a heart or a soul or the ability to discern right from wrong.

"So much for claims of being a so-called Christian nation."

We are not and have never been a Christian Nation and will never be one without a major change to the Constitution as a new amendment, which would never get the ratification of enough states to pass.

The framers were very explicit in the separation of church and state. The few phases which mention a creator or God are just vernacular of the time, and never in any context defined the United States as a nation of any particular religion or of any religion at all.

Turn off Talk Radio and start reading.

You dont see the lifeguards running around there in wetsuits. And they're outside the bay where the water is colder.

Well spoken Mike, if people would actually read history rather than regurgitate whats been told to them by other members of the same religion they would know that not all the founding fathers were Christan. That separation of church and state are fundamental to the government which they created in order to preserve freedom of religion or lack thereof.

Okay, aside from the fact that this is a "Christian nation" only in the deluded eyes of Fundamentalists and Evangelicals (for whom non-Christians simply do not exist), there's no sense whatsoever dying to "save" someone who is TRYING to die - and, if "saved," will just try again tomorrow. When did religion completely replace common sense????

The excuse for not rescuing the man was not "it was his call, he was an adult trying to commit suicide"; rather the excuse was "the rules would not allow us to save him".

My question would be: Would the police, fire crews and other people present have behaved in the same way if instead of an adult intent on suicide, it had been a 10 year old child or a grandmother who fell into the water?

"Budget cuts" cannot be used as an excuse for all of those people doing nothing.

The guy wanted to die. If he had been rescued, most likely he would have tried again. The amount of money spent by the rescue crews in this instance is wasted as it is, just by showing up and diverting attention to other more serious matters.

Someone likened this scenario to a child in the same situation, where the bystanders just looked on and did nothing. Totally different case. A child, most likely, would cooperate in his/her own rescue. This man may have put up a fight, putting the would-be rescuers at risk of their own lives. The guy is responsible for his own life. If he chose to take his own life, that's his prerogative.

Mozzie, how does it feel to be a soulless, heartless human who's only concern is money? However, the thought of legalizing suicide gets your panties all in a bunch. When one of your teenage kids decides to take their life you'll be perfectly ok with everyone doing nothing because it's a waste of money right? And guess what sweetie pie, kids in distress are just as, if not more out of control than adults.

So callous. Each side. "It's wrong for people to just watch him do this; and YOU stupid SOB can suck it." OR "Let him die, who cares?" Both your sides show signs of very narrow thinking. Try a little civil debate or even act ADULT without name calling, if at all possible.

As much as I agree with the theory a person should be able to take their own life, I don't think it should be done in public. Seriously suicidal people will just do it in their homes or wherever is private. I don't want to watch it.

Sally: It's not "sweetie pie", it's Mort.

The excuse for not rescuing the man was not "it was his call, he was an adult trying to commit suicide"; rather the excuse was "the rules would not allow us to save him".

My question would be: Would the police, fire crews and other people present have behaved in the same way if instead of an adult intent on suicide, it had been a 10 year old child or a grandmother who fell into the water?

Jherek, copying and pasting the same response over and over doesn't make your point any better.

At least SOMEBODY noticed it. You are the only person so far and you only responded to make a criticism.

I find it amazing that absolutely no-one else has picked up on what the actual policy of the police and fire department is: They don't have the equipment or training to do water rescues. That means if ANYONE needs a water rescue, the cops and fire department will just show up and watch them drown.

Doesn't anyone else find that disturbing?

Jherek,

They were trained up until 2009, and their boat is in dry dock. So basically you have trained firefighters who will not get in the water due to policy.

We're been there for a while. We allowed a woman who was not sick or dying of disease starve to death at the hands of bitter husband who had zero documentation that said she wanted to die.

RIP to this poor man and Terri Shiavo.

Sick or dying? She was a tomato, it was the humane thing to do to pull the plug on her.

In your opnion.

Right because we have the technology to regrow brain cells and she was totally saveable

I do not expect you to understand that she was a christian, not a tomato, who would never of wanted what happened to her.

So since she was a christian, she would have rather have had her life prolonged unnaturally, trapped in her own body, instead of letting her body do what was naturally going to happen and go join the lord in heaven?

do you two need to be separated ? come back to the topic an stay cool

It's funny to see all the "christians" get all up in arms over Teri Schaivo. Funny how in that particular case they wanted to defy God who was letting her body die and use science to keep her technically alive. The ultimate flip flop.

interesting...was the coastgaurd actually called?i must of missed confirmation of that in this article. What if the guy got out there and actually couldn't make it back because as everyone is pointing out the" elements" (dangerous ,cold water ,etc)then it really just became- the need for a rescue-regardless of his reasons for going into the water in the first place.

If Terry Shiavo had been saved, but her insurance cancelled, would the right-wing spend the money to keep her alive? (I believe at the time some churches offered to pay the associated bills). Assuming this is true, are they willing to pay for all medically necessary care for the poor? If this is the case, aren't they in fact supporting universal health care, supplemented for the poor (regardless of whether this is govt run single-payer or provided by the private sector). Given this philosophy, wouldn't it make sense for most of those who wanted Terry Schiavo to live to vote Democrat?

wow. why bother having a FD at all

To put out fires.

btone - exactly!

Next, you can watch your house, with family in it, burn to the ground because policy only allows them to fight house fire under 2 stories. City cut our budget so we threw the ladders away.

I'll be fine. I live in a ranch.

3rd Party: To your post about Terri. Perhaps she could have been helped in the very beginning. In that light you must give thanks to the conservatives blocking all requested funds for stem cell research. But, we will never know if Terri could have been saved or not, but this unfortunate man could have been. And that is the sorrow of it.

This is Alameda not San Francisco. It's a city on San Francisco Bay, but is across the bay near Oakland. These were Alameda firefighters and cops, not SF ones.

I wonder if the spectators would have done anything had they realized the fire department wasn't going to do anything? I admit if I were standing there, I would probably have thought the fire department was waiting for equipment to arrive. It wouldn't have occurred to me they couldn't do anything.

I can understand them being worried about him being violent. I'm not entirely sure what that has to do with it since I assume the fireman could have been tied off to shore and pulled out if trouble occurred. They don't carry armor anyway so it shouldn't have been worry about injury any more than usual. Does this mean they will refuse to rescue anyone they fear may be violent?

What I find the most shocking though is the fact that a spectator had to go in and retrieve the body. I think violence was a non issue at that point in time.

The policy certainly does need to be rewritten. What I think you are also seeing is the problem inherent in these types of policies. They simply can't cover every conceivable circumstance. That means a tragedy happens when a new situation comes up and then it gets added to the policy until the policy is impossible to understand or otherwise useless. In general, I believe that society has no one else to blame but themselves. Society generated the circumstances that require these types of policies to be created in the first place.

Bureaucrats

Yes, and when that firefighter goes out tied to shore but the rope falls off and they both drown from the violent man we will call that poor firefighter a moron. Give me a break.

If they are only concerned about being as safe as possible, they shouldn't go in to an emergency related field. It's a choice to be a firefighter. They could have been accountants.

I'm not only blaming the fire fighters, but all the people who stood by and did nothing. If someone is willing to wade out and get the body, it wasn't so dangerous that SOMETHING couldn't be done.

And anyway.. do you really imagine they would make an example out of someone who chose to break that policy?

And anyway.. do you really imagine they would make an example out of someone who chose to break that policy?

Absolutely. I just can't guarantee it. Doing stuff like that can highlight how poor the policy may be. That means someone high up gets embarrassed. That means whoever broke policy is on someone-high-up's crap list.

Not when they get pressure from a good amount of people. When people say- THAT'S NOT RIGHT- as a group, things can be different.

So you are going to jump into bone chilling water without training to save someone who is suicidal who may very well resist or attack you if you come near him?

Yes, Max. There are actually entities who would do that. They are called "human beings."

The interesting thing is that you meet them every day. It's just that you personally don't recognize them.

Firemen aren't trained for rescues?

Besides, how able would this guy have been to resist or attack under hypothermic conditions after the first five or ten minutes. Inexcusably poor judgement by people paid to 'protect and serve".

zhovti,

Firefighters sometimes aren't trained for water rescues - it is not part of their initial training (at least in my area), but this training is offered after they are certified. Apparently, budget cuts prevented this training from being offered in this area.

Nope, they are called fools. Without proper equipment and psychological training, you would only add to the tragedy. It is however inexcusable that authorities could not respond.

The man stood there for an hour, geniuses.

In an hour you couldn't figure out a way to rescue him without excessive risk? No, you probably couldn't.

And here's a thought for you: simple human concern and kindness often works better than psychological training when someone is hurting.

Capt - take the America off your name - you're a message board wuss.

Policy should never kill anyone - and yes I too woulod have have done
something. People jump in "bone-chilling" water all the time, yeah its a shock to the system but it's not like he was in the middle of the Pacific, he was in neck deep water.

An hour? Time for a trip to a marine store to buy and inflate a zodiac at the
worst - there Capt. you don't even have to get wet or cold.

This story shows just how pathetic people can be - bunch of lemmings. It took a civy to go out and get him - hey Capt. that guy wasn't worried about getting cold and wet and embarassed all those wannabes.

Right. Sounds like there was a whole bunch of non-FD/first responders etc. standing around watching... with no policies or public funding to stop them... and they did nothing. Only in California... damned if you do and damned if you don't. Go figure.... IF you have never been responsible for rescues, and trained to do rescues under the proper procedures and with the right equipment, don't judge those who know right from wrong in such events. Do you know the water conditions? What was the mental state of the "victim" who was doing something intentional, an adult, and old enough to know better and has free choice. That's what all you Californian's want... your right to choose what you want to do. Now, it's done.. he had his choice.

Capt. america you are a disgrace to the human race.

From the description of the guy who waded into the water, he was depressed and despondent. He looked back several times, which seems to be a clear sign he wasn't so sure about going through with it. Maybe he was looking back to see if anyone even cared. What he saw - people standing around watching must've confirmed to him that no one does care and his life is worthless.

I don't buy the argument that there was a fear that he would become violent. I think there would be signs of that as a rescuer approached - the man would yell or threaten before taking action. Other than the cold water, if the man waded out there, anyone who wanted to rescue could do the same thing. Several people could've gone out to him and brought him back together, even if he resisted. This is just sad and sick. And, I seriously doubt anyone on the fire department would've lost their job over attempting to rescue him.

Bone chilling? The guy who supposedly wanted to die stood around for an hour in "bone chilling" waters before he died. That's not bone chilling at all.

Some people have every excuse in the book. And what makes it worse is those who resort of hyperbole and LIES to justify their position.

Good points, Renee. Imagine the spin on the story if the headline had read, "SFFD Rescuer Violates 'Policy' to Save Suicidal Man"? I wouldn't want to be the Department's spokesperson attempting to justify dismissal or censure for an act of valor.

"a witness could have jumped in at any time to save the man from the neck-deep water"

If the emergency crews hadn't been on the scene someone might have (and it sounds like someone eventually did, just too late), but people tend to instantly defer to "authorities" when present, even when the "authorities" are as useless as these ones. I find their "policy" & violence/drug excuses disturbingly transparent, after 10-20 minutes in that kind of water he would have been incapable of resistance. And as far as "equipment", all you would really need would be a boat with an oar, two life preservers, and two ropes of appropriate length to have attempted a rescue with no real danger to the personnel. Every one of those "rescue" workers should either be disciplined or fired.

ANO, I agree... not receiving the proper training and not having the right equipment seems like a copoutfor not being creative enough to figure something out... imagine what people did before life jackets, wet suits and helicopters? maybe they got in a row boat went out and dragged the guy back to shore? but that would be to much common sense and i am sure that the budget cuts are what prevented them from "Row Boat Training". If the guy managed to stay in one place for an hour then the current wasn't an issue. With 3-5 people in a boat violent response shouldn't have been an issue... i have said it above, in lifeguard training you are instructed that if aiding someone who is resisting, subdue them (render them unconscious) and proceed with rescue. This was either a horrible attempt at a political point... (i mean is watching someone die really worth the city buying you wet suits).. or a horrible failure of character with all involved. I can't believe a bystander didn't get involved... what are they going to do arrest you for saving a guys life? I would love to be brought to court for those charges... think of the people you could sue over wrongful imprisonment (or something along those lines) after you were found innocent

Exactly concerned. My husband taught my boys that if you get someone who is flailing and they wont stop, sucker punch them between the eyes at the forehead and proceed.

Renee - Even people who want to be rescued can be dangerous and flail around to the point where they hurt or kill the would-be rescuer.

Be as altruistic as you want on paper, these people weren't trained, couldn't be trained and had very little clue how to perform the rescue (or if it could be performed as they WEREN'T trained) or if their "rescue" would instead complicate the situation and kill everyone involved. They called the USCG and thought the "experts" would do something (kind of like all the people that called them).

I would have done something. I went in to the medical field of work because I wanted to help people. That could expose me to TB, AIDS, shngles, etc, etc... So, I guess I'm an diot.

I also swim in the ocean for short periods of time in the winter even. Once you start to warm up and lose some feeling in your toes, you're going into hypothermia.. but I've lived each time I've done it yet.

Anyway.. with 75 people standing around.. something could have been done, easily.