KOOM-BAH-YAH M'LORD KOOM-BAH-YAH...

Why dont the train wheels be modified in order to slice through any obstacles,in this case a body, w/o being affected?Maybe use titanium sharpened & armoured wheels.

Whole Public delay juz becoz of some people who wanna die this way.Smelling CO(Carbon Monoxide) might be a better way for em.Painless,Silence and Quick

I wasn't referring to any group but the one person from whom the two contracdictory statements came from.

Btw, why do we always have to mention money? And I wonder how many of those who expressed concern over windfalls actually donated.

It seems some people think Singaporeans are so obsessed with money that they will kill themselves just to get it. Copycat or no copycat.

I don't think it's contradictory. It's like, you can love your mum but hate her nagging.

It's not always the case that we have to mention money. There was a case 0f some student from a good school committing suicide over the size of his penis. There was no mention of money IIRC. It could be money is not an issue at all in these recent MRT deaths, it could be all these deaths are accidents. But the high incidence of MRT deaths after Tan Jee Suan's death does seem unnatural when we first look at it and more care should be exercised during the reporting.

Obviously, normally Singaporeans won't kill themselves for money. Only desperate ones do. When people are desperate, shouldn't we be careful of giving them funny ideas like, jumping onto MRT tracks will make people donate money during their wakes? If they don't know that Tan Jee Suan's family got a lot of donation, there' s less reason for them to do likewise.

Oh puleeeze, as if they have no other means or idea how to kill themselves when they have already decided to, and your funny ideas will prompt more to commit suicide.

You can love your mother, hate her nagging but don't think you can genuinely love her and at the same time truly hate her or say she is an inconvenience to you during unfortunate situations, can you?

Why not?

Great, mommy, I really love you, but only to the extent that you conveniently stay out of my way :)

Some people may have decided to die, but others might not have made the decision yet. The borderline cases, those at the edge. It's entirely plausible that news of the huge donations will hasten the decision for those people who think their deaths can benefit their families, it may tip them over edge. How does the broadcasting news of the donation help to solve the issue? Isn't it enough to know Tan Jee Suan's plight and background ?

Perhaps you can tell us what is "genuine love" and "true hatred" (how does it differ from their normal versions?), and why they can't co-exist in the same instant? If Sam's mother was tricked by a con-man that Sam has warned her about, why is it not possible for Sam to have genuine love for her (eg, grateful that she wasn't harmed) and truly hate her (eg, angry at her for not listening to him) at the same time? It is precisely of love that Sam hates, if it happened to some stranger he wouldn't give a care in the world. Does this sound like a common attitude to you? Perhaps love and hate are not as dichotomous as one thinks.

The forest is too dense to clear. You can beat around the bush and try to answer your own questions.

Ih you don't want to answer my questions....feel free not to....whatever makes you happy....

Ellipses!

There are inherent contradictions in all religions, belief systems and social behaviors. The ability to cope with and dole out contradictions makes us human
-
`And the Lord repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people`

I don't think of it as a problem for 2 reasons
1)The people who care and the people who complain belong to two distinct groups, so no conflict of interest there.
2)Human nature is seemingly contradictory anyway, as in you can believe in legal justice but you won't report your brother to the police for downloading music illegally, but you may do so if he assaults someone. There are different priorities attached to different values after all.

Their concern of the "windfall money" stems from the same feelings you have; they feel that some groups of people are more worthy of help, ie the people are giving to the people do not deserve as much help, and they are giving way too much. It's almost like the NKF saga, do these people know where the money is going? Is it going to the financing of a gold tap or something, or is it going into the children's education?

You are quite right that the problem must be discussed openly. My concern is, do we need to know all the details, especially when some of it may cause more suicides ? Is it enough to know Tan Jee Suan's background and financial situation? Or do we need to how much the public donated to Tan Jee Suan's family in order to help other people like him? How would this additional piece of information help other poor people?

I don't drink. Seems the Indian man was drunk and fell accidentally, so they say.

Do people get drunk at 6.48 am in the morning? I thought it's usually the time they become sober after getting drunk the night before.

I have learned something new.

Trackback from Orangish:

Thanks to this one man, I was late again....

Hopefully, nobody will say that when it is your turn. You will never know.

when i told my friend about the yishun incident she just blankly said that it's fashionable and rational now either because it's the fastest way out of poverty for cash-strapped families, or the best way to gain publicity for the attention deprived suicidal soul. it's amazing and interesting to see how the discourse of our jumping-off-mrt-suicide act has mutated.

But I don't think its perfectly normal to have more and more of these kind of incidents... Accidents or not...

i'm sure its perfectly normal for national train services to experience these things. dont make a mountain out of a molehill.

What makes you so sure? It's not normal for somebody to dismiss the loss of a life as only a molehill. Life is that cheap to you, huh?

Trackback from the-double-0-project.net:

Sometimes it’s a tough call to make, how much information to reveal or cover up for the greater good....

The main focus shouldn't be whether there are copycat suicides or whether money is involved. Copycat or not, there will be suicides. Not everyone does it to get money although it may be due to lack of money. Besides, the donations are not guaranteed.

It will be more fruitful to find out why people decide to commit suicide and then take action to solve the problem at the root. Not talking about them will not prevent things from getting worse. Sweeping dust under the carpet doesn't make a room any cleaner.

Why should it bother us whether their families "benefit" financially from their suicides? Because they get a windfall and we didn't? Why doesn't anybody complain about those who choose to die at home? Because they are out of the way? And will anyone really care if there are copycats of home suicides, especially if they don't get a single cent from the public?

So, it is more likely that people find it a nuisance that their busy lives are disrupted, so they want to put a stop to it. Somehow, appearing concerned about copycat deaths is more politically correct than saying outright that it isn't fair for the relatives to get a windfall or that such frequent occurrences on the tracks are a nuisance.

Copycat or not, there will be suicides. But if you know, or suspect that release of certain information may lead to an increase in suicides, should you not be more careful before releasing such information? Besides, suppressing the release of sensitive info is not mutually exclusive from trying to finding the root of the problem and attempting to solve it. Can you not do both at the same time?

You're quite right to say that not all suicides involve money, but it's just that I suspect that the recent ones are sparked off by Tan Jee Suan's suicide, where money was a critical factor. Of course, I don't have any proof to back up my suspicions, so take it with a pinch of salt.

Do you think no one will care if copycat suicides similar to that of the Japanese students occur here, no one will care, because it doesn't involve money or inconvenience the public? I doubt so, in fact I think a similar uproar will occur in Singapore if this indeed happens. Reason being, as a society, we don't see death as a way to solve our problems. In fact, a suicide occurred recently near my workplace, and the person involved was from where I worked. A lot of people were shocked.

With regards to the "windfall", some people complain because they see the irrationality behind it. Lots of people die everyday in variety of ways, and the deaths of Huang Na and Tan Jee Suan are not much different, so they think, "why do people donate so much money to them?"

I agree that there are people who only take the MRT suicides as a kind of nuisance. And I think these people have a valid reason to complain, since they are paying a price for the suicide of someone unrelated to them.

Isn't it contradictory to say that people do genuinely care and yet say that they have a valid reason to complain about suicidal nuisance? So, you actually mean people do care but only to the extent that they are not affected.

And I still don't see any reason why people should be 'concerned' about how others spend their windfall money. There are other more worthy things to sweat over, such as orphans, undernourished kids, homeless old people. It is easy to be concerned by telling others what to do, but more difficult if we actually have to reach into our pockets or be inconvenienced help others.

As for your claims about increased frequency of suicides due to publicity, it is debatable. And how can we all discuss and solve problems unless we have them in the open for all to know and contribute ideas and opinions?

Hopefully this time the video surveillance cameras are recording and able to have a fuller investigation what really happened if the person fell or jump on his own.

They should preferably be preventive, rather than for post mortem purposes. There is little use 'crying over spilled milk'.

Didn't they (SMRT) raise the fare a few years back because they wanted to install video surveillance equipment to monitor and prevent accidents and incidents such as these?

well, if the costs are to be eventually incurred by communters via increased fares, will you be happy as well? another theme of complains will consequently emerge about SMRT hidden profits and so forth, and there'll be no end to our dissatisfaction and discontents about, apparently, everything.

the problem is not whether open air mrt platforms have barricades or preventive infrastructure. even if these are erected on the platforms, the suicidal individual will just proceed to die in another way, simply because s/he is already contemplating death. these barricade structures do not prevent people from killing themselves, but only prevent suicidal people from delaying train services and people's precious time to keep the nation's economy consistently booming and vibrant. so it is highly contradictory that you are seem extremely sympathetic and concerned about increasing 'deaths' and yet are crying out for preventive structures that only sustain the existing status quo.

whatever it is, increasing suicide rates (by taking one's own lives through any means) are symptomatic of some sickness(s) already contracted by the society. attention should not be given to commuters' time and additional infrastructure that can potentially increase fares and are not in any potential way a deterrent to the mindsets of suicidal people. rather, it's time to rethink the social policies, perpetual widening income gaps, a hidden status quo of injustice, and the suppression of individuals and groups in this pseudo peaceful and functional society.

I suspect increasing MRT suicides may be partly diversionary - ie people would've killed themselves in some other way, but because of publicity/popularity they kill themselves in this way.

Then you might wish to ask why. Why do they want to publicise their suicides?

Perhaps, they wanted to know they matter enough for people to pause
-
`Actually, he jumped and killed himself. He meant to take my brother with him but could not do so`

They have probably wasted their lives then. Because to some, they are only molehills.

Theres a good reason why we have one of the highest net migration rates in the world
-
`Even if I were to acquire Singapore nationality, at heart I will always remain a Filipino`

Isn't the migration *in*?

That is so passe. Transcending to the other world is the latest in thing donch u know?

You are right. The state of Singapore has one of the highest net migration rates (ranked against other nations)
-
刘项原来不读书

Well, if my memory serves me correctly, the reason SMRT cited for not setting up those barricades on above-ground stations was operating costs -- apparently human lives are worth lesser than those damn barricades that prevent people form jumping to their deaths...

It may be wiser to consider putting up barricades because the families may decide to sue for damages caused by lack of safety installations to prevent people from falling onto the tracks.

I am just waiting for SMRT to use their newly increment fare funds to build a barrier that prevents people from jumping.

You must be dreaming. They've hinted that if you want barriers to keep yourself from suicide, it'll have to come from the public's pocket, not from their operating surpluses. Those are for shareholders.

More to come, i suspect. But for this case, why did this guy die? for the same reason? or..

For those who die for money, maybe not, when they find the donations dwindling from donor fatigue.

So this worrying about publicity causing more people jumping tracks for money is "making a mountain out of a molehill".

We should be worried about why people worry about this donation thingy.

that's what happens when you try to rush in way too early before the train doors open.

It must have taken a lot of despair to throw one's body against an oncoming train. May he rest in peace.

Trackback from MRT jump track statistics:

With fancy graphic to boot!...

CNA's headline chose to highlight the train service disruption rather than a man has died. Strange country we live in.

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/245348/1/.html

Normal service resumes between Sembawang and Yio Chu Kang MRT stations
Posted: 05 December 2006 1139 hrs

Normal service has resumed for southbound trains travelling from Sembawang to Yio Chu Kang MRT stations.

The service was disrupted earlier on Tuesday morning after a man was hit by a train at Yishun station.

He was later pronounced dead. - CNA/ch

I think they are being careful with the coverage here. They don't want people to get anymore ideas about commiting suicide.

Who would choose to kill himself just to be fashionable, huh?

The hush hush is just to cover up the bad to appear good. That's all.

I don't buy that reason they gave.

hey, somebody registered under my "bored" nick!! grrr.....

but anyway....

it's not about being fashionable....

wouldn't you agree that a desperate man, having read about the family which received hundreds of thousands in donations after the breadwinner jumped in front of a train, would likewise consider doing the same thing to help his family? the media needed to stop giving such deaths the high profile coverage, in order to prevent like-minded people from doing the same...

in this case, i would agree with agoogaga..... the loss of life is undoubtedly sad, but at the same time, you can't deny that the increasing incidents are a public nuisance....

For once, I agree with the media's hush-hush attitude.