2 Visitors Fall From Taft Point

[mrphil]

Here's this editorial piece:

https://www.pressdemocrat.com/opinion/8 ... reventable


Again I'll speculate, having searched for and seen many of the couple's photos, while quite a few were nothing that anyone would consider overtly risky poses in front of spectacularly magnificent views, there are also quite a few more that featured them trying to add their own form of dramatic poses to the already dramatic backdrop. Yes, risky...hamming it up for the viewers. With both of them going off, given what I saw in some of the photos, I don't think it would be outside the realm of possibilities that they might have very well been literally "dancing on the edge".

[rlown]

don't count on Press Demo leaving free access to their stories for long. Best to find a free site for news posting.
You might get the subscribe window pop up on Wednesday.

[Wandering Daisy]

More news coming out on this, and now I do agree they were taking undue risk for their blog. They obviously did not think that their activity had enough risk of death to stop their actions. Roll the dice enough times and you eventually come up with a bad outcome. I do not think the average person is very good at judging risk. Nobody thinks it is going to be them. We now live in a society that is addicted to fame at any cost. Does not help either that there are so many regulatory warning signs that most people simply ignore them. The warning signs in Yosemite are simply there so the park does not get sued. They do not do a bit of good at really warning people. Sad, but I think a cultural shift is needed, not more signs, warnings and restrictions. Something in our culture is certainly negatively affecting mental health. It is a complex problem.

[mrphil]

don't count on Press Demo leaving free access to their stories for long. Best to find a free site for news posting.
You might get the subscribe window pop up on Wednesday.

Yeah, not a fan of the PD, but looked for another link to the editorial, didn't find one, opted for easy. You can read articles for free on an unlimited basis until the election, then back to limits. I go incognito, but what's funny is that you can read the articles for free, but not the comments. Doesn't speak too highly of their journalistic value when the comments are behind a paywall and usually more interesting than the news itself anyhow.

[rightstar76]

.

[rightstar76]

.

[robow8]

Just saw a report that they both had alcohol in their system.
https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/01/18/ ... toxicated/

[Jimr]

Sensational headlines always annoy me. Mercury News headlines that they were intoxicated. Daily Mail UK that they were drunk. Several paragraphs into the article(s), the truth comes out that they have no way of knowing how much alcohol had been consumed. So, what is the lower level of detection for byproducts of alcoholic beverages? I think that's very important. If their consumption level was a glass of wine, then the headlines would be blatantly false and their family left with a false impression to hang over the memory of their loved ones. As if death by selfie wasn't bad enough.