Tombstoning campaign launched to stop serious injuries

Tombstoning campaign launched to stop serious injuries

Tombstoning campaign launched to stop serious injuries

First published in News Daily Echo: Photograph of the Author by , Health Reporter

IT’S a fresh warning over a dangerous craze that can leave people horribly injured or worse.

South Central Ambulance Service has warned people to avoid the potentially-deadly ‘tombstoning’ fad this summer.

It involves jumping into water from a great height and is popular in Southampton where youngsters frequently jump off bridges and cliffs into the Itchen and the Test.

Redbridge Causeway is one of the biggest hotspots where youngsters leap from 25 feet above the water.

A spokesman for the service said: “We would definitely warn against anyone doing that due to the unknown dangers and hazardous that lurk beneath the water line.”

One victim of the craze is 31-year-old Nick Biddlecombe, from Blackfield, who shattered his neck after hitting a submerged rock in a jump at Lepe Beach when he was 17.

He was left wheelchair bound and requires 24-hour care.

And as reported by the Daily Echo, his mum branded Olympic champion runner Mo Farah “irresponsible” earlier this year after the double gold medallist was pictured tombstoning off a cliff in the Caribbean.

The warning comes as part of a wider campaign to encourage child safety around all bodies of water, from ponds and swimming pools to rivers and the sea.

Tony Heselton, paramedic & SCAS safeguarding lead said: “Over the last couple of months we have seen an increase in the amount of calls we are attend that involve children and young people in or around water.

“We would like to encourage members of the public to stay safe around water whether that be paddling pools, swimming pools, garden ponds or even open water. It is vitally important that people heed this advice and only attempt to swim in safe areas where there are the appropriate safety precautions should you get into difficulty.”

Dangers include hidden currents, deep water, steep and slimy banks and polluted water.

SCAS recommends erecting meshing and netting around any home water hazards as well as supervising children around baths and sinks.

For Twitter updates on the SCAS #summersafe campaign follow @scas999.

Comments (22)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:42am Mon 21 Jul 14

Frank28 says...

There's another surprise waiting for those who jump off Redbridge Causeway - the Police who reward the acrobatic displays with a fixed-penalty ticket.
There's another surprise waiting for those who jump off Redbridge Causeway - the Police who reward the acrobatic displays with a fixed-penalty ticket. Frank28
  • Score: 10

12:04pm Mon 21 Jul 14

southy says...

Can we have a few facts on here about Redbridge Causeway
1 At low water Springs the water is 6 meters ( 20 feet ) deep (in the spot where they land in the water (its a very deep hole)
2 There is 4.8 meters (15 1/2 feet ) more depth at high water spring tides.
3 At 10 meters ( 33 feet ) above the water the body will not go deeper than 4 meters ( 14 feet ) into the water
5 Ever since they deadge the Shipping Channel down to 11 meters (36 feet ) that hole as got deeper it is pulling down the Bridge supping Bank where the hole as got to deep to support the bank.
6 the only problems that theres been in the Test is because of people go swimming in the river who have never river have swim in rivers before and do not know how to swim in rivers and people who been drinking go swimming and endding up with the cramps.
Can we have a few facts on here about Redbridge Causeway 1 At low water Springs the water is 6 meters ( 20 feet ) deep (in the spot where they land in the water (its a very deep hole) 2 There is 4.8 meters (15 1/2 feet ) more depth at high water spring tides. 3 At 10 meters ( 33 feet ) above the water the body will not go deeper than 4 meters ( 14 feet ) into the water 5 Ever since they deadge the Shipping Channel down to 11 meters (36 feet ) that hole as got deeper it is pulling down the Bridge supping Bank where the hole as got to deep to support the bank. 6 the only problems that theres been in the Test is because of people go swimming in the river who have never river have swim in rivers before and do not know how to swim in rivers and people who been drinking go swimming and endding up with the cramps. southy
  • Score: -19

1:00pm Mon 21 Jul 14

Eric_Cartman says...

southy wrote:
Can we have a few facts on here about Redbridge Causeway
1 At low water Springs the water is 6 meters ( 20 feet ) deep (in the spot where they land in the water (its a very deep hole)
2 There is 4.8 meters (15 1/2 feet ) more depth at high water spring tides.
3 At 10 meters ( 33 feet ) above the water the body will not go deeper than 4 meters ( 14 feet ) into the water
5 Ever since they deadge the Shipping Channel down to 11 meters (36 feet ) that hole as got deeper it is pulling down the Bridge supping Bank where the hole as got to deep to support the bank.
6 the only problems that theres been in the Test is because of people go swimming in the river who have never river have swim in rivers before and do not know how to swim in rivers and people who been drinking go swimming and endding up with the cramps.
Ill informed moron
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Can we have a few facts on here about Redbridge Causeway 1 At low water Springs the water is 6 meters ( 20 feet ) deep (in the spot where they land in the water (its a very deep hole) 2 There is 4.8 meters (15 1/2 feet ) more depth at high water spring tides. 3 At 10 meters ( 33 feet ) above the water the body will not go deeper than 4 meters ( 14 feet ) into the water 5 Ever since they deadge the Shipping Channel down to 11 meters (36 feet ) that hole as got deeper it is pulling down the Bridge supping Bank where the hole as got to deep to support the bank. 6 the only problems that theres been in the Test is because of people go swimming in the river who have never river have swim in rivers before and do not know how to swim in rivers and people who been drinking go swimming and endding up with the cramps.[/p][/quote]Ill informed moron Eric_Cartman
  • Score: 17

2:17pm Mon 21 Jul 14

jenwren1949 says...

They were jumping off there yesterday afternoon, when we drove past, I know the water is inviting this weather but they obviously dont care about the risks.
They were jumping off there yesterday afternoon, when we drove past, I know the water is inviting this weather but they obviously dont care about the risks. jenwren1949
  • Score: 3

2:51pm Mon 21 Jul 14

Donald2000 says...

Eric_Cartman wrote:
southy wrote:
Can we have a few facts on here about Redbridge Causeway
1 At low water Springs the water is 6 meters ( 20 feet ) deep (in the spot where they land in the water (its a very deep hole)
2 There is 4.8 meters (15 1/2 feet ) more depth at high water spring tides.
3 At 10 meters ( 33 feet ) above the water the body will not go deeper than 4 meters ( 14 feet ) into the water
5 Ever since they deadge the Shipping Channel down to 11 meters (36 feet ) that hole as got deeper it is pulling down the Bridge supping Bank where the hole as got to deep to support the bank.
6 the only problems that theres been in the Test is because of people go swimming in the river who have never river have swim in rivers before and do not know how to swim in rivers and people who been drinking go swimming and endding up with the cramps.
Ill informed moron
Yet there is no attempt from you Eric, to put up an alternative argument.

I suppose they taught you in school that to ridicule someone's answer was a fair argument, when in effect it makes you just as much a moron as the one you are ridiculing. Now run along and play in your sandpit.
[quote][p][bold]Eric_Cartman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Can we have a few facts on here about Redbridge Causeway 1 At low water Springs the water is 6 meters ( 20 feet ) deep (in the spot where they land in the water (its a very deep hole) 2 There is 4.8 meters (15 1/2 feet ) more depth at high water spring tides. 3 At 10 meters ( 33 feet ) above the water the body will not go deeper than 4 meters ( 14 feet ) into the water 5 Ever since they deadge the Shipping Channel down to 11 meters (36 feet ) that hole as got deeper it is pulling down the Bridge supping Bank where the hole as got to deep to support the bank. 6 the only problems that theres been in the Test is because of people go swimming in the river who have never river have swim in rivers before and do not know how to swim in rivers and people who been drinking go swimming and endding up with the cramps.[/p][/quote]Ill informed moron[/p][/quote]Yet there is no attempt from you Eric, to put up an alternative argument. I suppose they taught you in school that to ridicule someone's answer was a fair argument, when in effect it makes you just as much a moron as the one you are ridiculing. Now run along and play in your sandpit. Donald2000
  • Score: -6

4:30pm Mon 21 Jul 14

southy says...

Donald2000 wrote:
Eric_Cartman wrote:
southy wrote:
Can we have a few facts on here about Redbridge Causeway
1 At low water Springs the water is 6 meters ( 20 feet ) deep (in the spot where they land in the water (its a very deep hole)
2 There is 4.8 meters (15 1/2 feet ) more depth at high water spring tides.
3 At 10 meters ( 33 feet ) above the water the body will not go deeper than 4 meters ( 14 feet ) into the water
5 Ever since they deadge the Shipping Channel down to 11 meters (36 feet ) that hole as got deeper it is pulling down the Bridge supping Bank where the hole as got to deep to support the bank.
6 the only problems that theres been in the Test is because of people go swimming in the river who have never river have swim in rivers before and do not know how to swim in rivers and people who been drinking go swimming and endding up with the cramps.
Ill informed moron
Yet there is no attempt from you Eric, to put up an alternative argument.

I suppose they taught you in school that to ridicule someone's answer was a fair argument, when in effect it makes you just as much a moron as the one you are ridiculing. Now run along and play in your sandpit.
He as no answers or arguement against what I say, We use to have swimming with a 10 meter platform, the depth in which they landed was 16 foot 6 inches deep, you could watch down stairs where they had the glass plated windows and you could see how deep a person could go to inthe water it was no where near the bottom, the windows was 3 feet of the bottom of the pool and they was not getting down that deep, to get to the bottom you had to swim down there was no other way getting down there.
I know this area of the River Test very well its where I learned to swim when I was 3 to 4 years old, I know how deep that hole was back in 2006 I measured it at low water, What I have stated are all facts and to find out how much more water there is ontop of low water levels you only need to look in a tide book to find that out.
[quote][p][bold]Donald2000[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eric_Cartman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Can we have a few facts on here about Redbridge Causeway 1 At low water Springs the water is 6 meters ( 20 feet ) deep (in the spot where they land in the water (its a very deep hole) 2 There is 4.8 meters (15 1/2 feet ) more depth at high water spring tides. 3 At 10 meters ( 33 feet ) above the water the body will not go deeper than 4 meters ( 14 feet ) into the water 5 Ever since they deadge the Shipping Channel down to 11 meters (36 feet ) that hole as got deeper it is pulling down the Bridge supping Bank where the hole as got to deep to support the bank. 6 the only problems that theres been in the Test is because of people go swimming in the river who have never river have swim in rivers before and do not know how to swim in rivers and people who been drinking go swimming and endding up with the cramps.[/p][/quote]Ill informed moron[/p][/quote]Yet there is no attempt from you Eric, to put up an alternative argument. I suppose they taught you in school that to ridicule someone's answer was a fair argument, when in effect it makes you just as much a moron as the one you are ridiculing. Now run along and play in your sandpit.[/p][/quote]He as no answers or arguement against what I say, We use to have swimming with a 10 meter platform, the depth in which they landed was 16 foot 6 inches deep, you could watch down stairs where they had the glass plated windows and you could see how deep a person could go to inthe water it was no where near the bottom, the windows was 3 feet of the bottom of the pool and they was not getting down that deep, to get to the bottom you had to swim down there was no other way getting down there. I know this area of the River Test very well its where I learned to swim when I was 3 to 4 years old, I know how deep that hole was back in 2006 I measured it at low water, What I have stated are all facts and to find out how much more water there is ontop of low water levels you only need to look in a tide book to find that out. southy
  • Score: -9

4:41pm Mon 21 Jul 14

sotonbusdriver says...

The Council have brought this TOMBSTONE diving up on themselves...

They closed the LIDO, re-built the old Centre 2000 bathes, putting The Quays in its place..... But because of Health and Safety Rules at The Quays, you cannot use the diving pool, unless paying a ridiculous price for lessons.

We use to have the lido with multiple boards in its own Pool towards the back, and the Centre 2000 had the 16ft deep end with 5 boards in all... Open to the public with lifeguards of duty...

Now that has all been taken away from the kids of today, so the only way they can dive is to jump off bridges into streams and rivers.... A lot of those kids come from families that are living off benefits... If they want to stop TOMBSTONE diving, then open the diving pools to the public during normal sessions, make the prices for use of the pools cheap enough for everyone regardless of income to enjoy....

The amount of money that ONE single injury costs the taxpayers, with Police, Ambulance, Coastguard, and then Hospital usage, along with the many times Police go to the scene after a report, and the kids scarper without getting caught, must be a huge burden...

It must be logical to open the pools at a lower price during the holidays, make the diving boards available to all, than run the risk of them doing themselves an injury off of bridges....

If there was proper facilities at affordable prices, then the kids would use them... TOO much in this city has been taken away, or had so much Health & Safety put on it, that it isn't worth using it....

COME ON COUNCILLORS use your brains do the maths and make the pools reduce their entrance fees and open the diving boards to all......
The Council have brought this TOMBSTONE diving up on themselves... They closed the LIDO, re-built the old Centre 2000 bathes, putting The Quays in its place..... But because of Health and Safety Rules at The Quays, you cannot use the diving pool, unless paying a ridiculous price for lessons. We use to have the lido with multiple boards in its own Pool towards the back, and the Centre 2000 had the 16ft deep end with 5 boards in all... Open to the public with lifeguards of duty... Now that has all been taken away from the kids of today, so the only way they can dive is to jump off bridges into streams and rivers.... A lot of those kids come from families that are living off benefits... If they want to stop TOMBSTONE diving, then open the diving pools to the public during normal sessions, make the prices for use of the pools cheap enough for everyone regardless of income to enjoy.... The amount of money that ONE single injury costs the taxpayers, with Police, Ambulance, Coastguard, and then Hospital usage, along with the many times Police go to the scene after a report, and the kids scarper without getting caught, must be a huge burden... It must be logical to open the pools at a lower price during the holidays, make the diving boards available to all, than run the risk of them doing themselves an injury off of bridges.... If there was proper facilities at affordable prices, then the kids would use them... TOO much in this city has been taken away, or had so much Health & Safety put on it, that it isn't worth using it.... COME ON COUNCILLORS use your brains do the maths and make the pools reduce their entrance fees and open the diving boards to all...... sotonbusdriver
  • Score: 9

5:18pm Mon 21 Jul 14

O_crusti says...

"It involves jumping into water from a great height and is popular in Southampton where youngsters frequently jump off bridges and cliffs into the Itchen and the Test."



I'd like to know where the cliffs are that people jump from into the Itchen and Test.
"It involves jumping into water from a great height and is popular in Southampton where youngsters frequently jump off bridges and cliffs into the Itchen and the Test." I'd like to know where the cliffs are that people jump from into the Itchen and Test. O_crusti
  • Score: 7

10:17pm Mon 21 Jul 14

Dragnet says...

The only mention of an actual injury in this article is from 14 years ago at Lepe. Has anyone actually been injured at Redbridge? Should we ban kids from all activities that could hurt them?
The only mention of an actual injury in this article is from 14 years ago at Lepe. Has anyone actually been injured at Redbridge? Should we ban kids from all activities that could hurt them? Dragnet
  • Score: 1

10:45pm Mon 21 Jul 14

Donald2000 says...

Dragnet wrote:
The only mention of an actual injury in this article is from 14 years ago at Lepe. Has anyone actually been injured at Redbridge? Should we ban kids from all activities that could hurt them?
No, we should just let them kill themselves and turn a blind eye into the process.

You are talking about activities involving kids throwing themselves off bridges into water containing obstacles which could end their lives.

I just bet you are the pride of your workplace for intellect, are you not?
[quote][p][bold]Dragnet[/bold] wrote: The only mention of an actual injury in this article is from 14 years ago at Lepe. Has anyone actually been injured at Redbridge? Should we ban kids from all activities that could hurt them?[/p][/quote]No, we should just let them kill themselves and turn a blind eye into the process. You are talking about activities involving kids throwing themselves off bridges into water containing obstacles which could end their lives. I just bet you are the pride of your workplace for intellect, are you not? Donald2000
  • Score: -5

10:58pm Mon 21 Jul 14

Dragnet says...

Donald2000 wrote:
Dragnet wrote:
The only mention of an actual injury in this article is from 14 years ago at Lepe. Has anyone actually been injured at Redbridge? Should we ban kids from all activities that could hurt them?
No, we should just let them kill themselves and turn a blind eye into the process.

You are talking about activities involving kids throwing themselves off bridges into water containing obstacles which could end their lives.

I just bet you are the pride of your workplace for intellect, are you not?
I suppose they taught you in school that to ridicule someone's answer was a fair argument. Where have I read that before?
[quote][p][bold]Donald2000[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dragnet[/bold] wrote: The only mention of an actual injury in this article is from 14 years ago at Lepe. Has anyone actually been injured at Redbridge? Should we ban kids from all activities that could hurt them?[/p][/quote]No, we should just let them kill themselves and turn a blind eye into the process. You are talking about activities involving kids throwing themselves off bridges into water containing obstacles which could end their lives. I just bet you are the pride of your workplace for intellect, are you not?[/p][/quote]I suppose they taught you in school that to ridicule someone's answer was a fair argument. Where have I read that before? Dragnet
  • Score: 2

1:21am Tue 22 Jul 14

southy says...

Dragnet wrote:
The only mention of an actual injury in this article is from 14 years ago at Lepe. Has anyone actually been injured at Redbridge? Should we ban kids from all activities that could hurt them?
Ever since the Bridge was built in redbridge and finished in 1953 there have been people jumping off it, there as been no injurys.
There have been drownings a number of them over the years, but it had no connections of jumping of the bridge, the drownings have been because of 2 reasons people who only ever swim in pools and have never learned how to swim in a river, the other is because people been drinking in the pub and then jump in water and end up with the cramps
[quote][p][bold]Dragnet[/bold] wrote: The only mention of an actual injury in this article is from 14 years ago at Lepe. Has anyone actually been injured at Redbridge? Should we ban kids from all activities that could hurt them?[/p][/quote]Ever since the Bridge was built in redbridge and finished in 1953 there have been people jumping off it, there as been no injurys. There have been drownings a number of them over the years, but it had no connections of jumping of the bridge, the drownings have been because of 2 reasons people who only ever swim in pools and have never learned how to swim in a river, the other is because people been drinking in the pub and then jump in water and end up with the cramps southy
  • Score: -3

9:45am Tue 22 Jul 14

Donald2000 says...

Dragnet wrote:
Donald2000 wrote:
Dragnet wrote:
The only mention of an actual injury in this article is from 14 years ago at Lepe. Has anyone actually been injured at Redbridge? Should we ban kids from all activities that could hurt them?
No, we should just let them kill themselves and turn a blind eye into the process.

You are talking about activities involving kids throwing themselves off bridges into water containing obstacles which could end their lives.

I just bet you are the pride of your workplace for intellect, are you not?
I suppose they taught you in school that to ridicule someone's answer was a fair argument. Where have I read that before?
It doesn't ridicule your argument. It demolishes it. It must be obvious to all concerned that to encourage activities whereby children could kill themselves is no argument whatsoever. At least if you are going to come on here, let's have an argument that makes some sort of sense.
[quote][p][bold]Dragnet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Donald2000[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dragnet[/bold] wrote: The only mention of an actual injury in this article is from 14 years ago at Lepe. Has anyone actually been injured at Redbridge? Should we ban kids from all activities that could hurt them?[/p][/quote]No, we should just let them kill themselves and turn a blind eye into the process. You are talking about activities involving kids throwing themselves off bridges into water containing obstacles which could end their lives. I just bet you are the pride of your workplace for intellect, are you not?[/p][/quote]I suppose they taught you in school that to ridicule someone's answer was a fair argument. Where have I read that before?[/p][/quote]It doesn't ridicule your argument. It demolishes it. It must be obvious to all concerned that to encourage activities whereby children could kill themselves is no argument whatsoever. At least if you are going to come on here, let's have an argument that makes some sort of sense. Donald2000
  • Score: -2

10:28am Tue 22 Jul 14

fruitloop76 says...

Iv always been a good strong swimmer but would think more than twice swimming there ( although I did when younger hence I know how bad they get ) kids wouldn't stand a chance with the currents if caught up in them and not a strong swimmer but flip the coin its hot the want fun excitement and something to do everything cost so much these days for their age group so u cant blame them from making their own fun be it dangerous or not! ... they need to be vigilant and do something rear these days have a real reason to watch the back of their mate!
Iv always been a good strong swimmer but would think more than twice swimming there ( although I did when younger hence I know how bad they get ) kids wouldn't stand a chance with the currents if caught up in them and not a strong swimmer but flip the coin its hot the want fun excitement and something to do everything cost so much these days for their age group so u cant blame them from making their own fun be it dangerous or not! ... they need to be vigilant and do something rear these days have a real reason to watch the back of their mate! fruitloop76
  • Score: 0

11:49am Tue 22 Jul 14

sparkster says...

I did read some time ago of a boy who went tombstoning, the wter wasn't as deep as he thought and ended up breaking his back. Im all for kids having fun but tombstoning can be dangerous, you dont always know in some places if there are rocks under the water
I did read some time ago of a boy who went tombstoning, the wter wasn't as deep as he thought and ended up breaking his back. Im all for kids having fun but tombstoning can be dangerous, you dont always know in some places if there are rocks under the water sparkster
  • Score: 0

12:21pm Tue 22 Jul 14

Dragnet says...

Donald2000 wrote:
Dragnet wrote:
Donald2000 wrote:
Dragnet wrote:
The only mention of an actual injury in this article is from 14 years ago at Lepe. Has anyone actually been injured at Redbridge? Should we ban kids from all activities that could hurt them?
No, we should just let them kill themselves and turn a blind eye into the process.

You are talking about activities involving kids throwing themselves off bridges into water containing obstacles which could end their lives.

I just bet you are the pride of your workplace for intellect, are you not?
I suppose they taught you in school that to ridicule someone's answer was a fair argument. Where have I read that before?
It doesn't ridicule your argument. It demolishes it. It must be obvious to all concerned that to encourage activities whereby children could kill themselves is no argument whatsoever. At least if you are going to come on here, let's have an argument that makes some sort of sense.
Ok. My first post was actually 2 questions; Has anyone been hurt at Redbridge? and do you ban everything that could possibly cause injury?

I don't know the first answer, but if there have been any, they are rare. The second answer must be 'NO'. Otherwise we would ban cycling, ice-skating, climbing frames and roundabouts at parks, garden trampolines (over 20,000 A&E visits per year), horse riding, diving into pools, etc....etc....etc...
.

I think this might only be an issue because it's being called 'Tombstoning', very dramatic. When I was a kid, we called it 'jumping into water'.
[quote][p][bold]Donald2000[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dragnet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Donald2000[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dragnet[/bold] wrote: The only mention of an actual injury in this article is from 14 years ago at Lepe. Has anyone actually been injured at Redbridge? Should we ban kids from all activities that could hurt them?[/p][/quote]No, we should just let them kill themselves and turn a blind eye into the process. You are talking about activities involving kids throwing themselves off bridges into water containing obstacles which could end their lives. I just bet you are the pride of your workplace for intellect, are you not?[/p][/quote]I suppose they taught you in school that to ridicule someone's answer was a fair argument. Where have I read that before?[/p][/quote]It doesn't ridicule your argument. It demolishes it. It must be obvious to all concerned that to encourage activities whereby children could kill themselves is no argument whatsoever. At least if you are going to come on here, let's have an argument that makes some sort of sense.[/p][/quote]Ok. My first post was actually 2 questions; Has anyone been hurt at Redbridge? and do you ban everything that could possibly cause injury? I don't know the first answer, but if there have been any, they are rare. The second answer must be 'NO'. Otherwise we would ban cycling, ice-skating, climbing frames and roundabouts at parks, garden trampolines (over 20,000 A&E visits per year), horse riding, diving into pools, etc....etc....etc... . I think this might only be an issue because it's being called 'Tombstoning', very dramatic. When I was a kid, we called it 'jumping into water'. Dragnet
  • Score: 0

4:25pm Tue 22 Jul 14

Jon The Legend says...

Dragnet wrote:
Donald2000 wrote:
Dragnet wrote:
Donald2000 wrote:
Dragnet wrote:
The only mention of an actual injury in this article is from 14 years ago at Lepe. Has anyone actually been injured at Redbridge? Should we ban kids from all activities that could hurt them?
No, we should just let them kill themselves and turn a blind eye into the process.

You are talking about activities involving kids throwing themselves off bridges into water containing obstacles which could end their lives.

I just bet you are the pride of your workplace for intellect, are you not?
I suppose they taught you in school that to ridicule someone's answer was a fair argument. Where have I read that before?
It doesn't ridicule your argument. It demolishes it. It must be obvious to all concerned that to encourage activities whereby children could kill themselves is no argument whatsoever. At least if you are going to come on here, let's have an argument that makes some sort of sense.
Ok. My first post was actually 2 questions; Has anyone been hurt at Redbridge? and do you ban everything that could possibly cause injury?

I don't know the first answer, but if there have been any, they are rare. The second answer must be 'NO'. Otherwise we would ban cycling, ice-skating, climbing frames and roundabouts at parks, garden trampolines (over 20,000 A&E visits per year), horse riding, diving into pools, etc....etc....etc...

.

I think this might only be an issue because it's being called 'Tombstoning', very dramatic. When I was a kid, we called it 'jumping into water'.
This is an issue because people are seriously injuring themselves. I know Nick very well (I'm his brother) and if you knew just half of what he has gone through in the last 14 years i guarantee you would change your opinion. No one is saying that it needs to be banned, just controlled.
[quote][p][bold]Dragnet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Donald2000[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dragnet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Donald2000[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dragnet[/bold] wrote: The only mention of an actual injury in this article is from 14 years ago at Lepe. Has anyone actually been injured at Redbridge? Should we ban kids from all activities that could hurt them?[/p][/quote]No, we should just let them kill themselves and turn a blind eye into the process. You are talking about activities involving kids throwing themselves off bridges into water containing obstacles which could end their lives. I just bet you are the pride of your workplace for intellect, are you not?[/p][/quote]I suppose they taught you in school that to ridicule someone's answer was a fair argument. Where have I read that before?[/p][/quote]It doesn't ridicule your argument. It demolishes it. It must be obvious to all concerned that to encourage activities whereby children could kill themselves is no argument whatsoever. At least if you are going to come on here, let's have an argument that makes some sort of sense.[/p][/quote]Ok. My first post was actually 2 questions; Has anyone been hurt at Redbridge? and do you ban everything that could possibly cause injury? I don't know the first answer, but if there have been any, they are rare. The second answer must be 'NO'. Otherwise we would ban cycling, ice-skating, climbing frames and roundabouts at parks, garden trampolines (over 20,000 A&E visits per year), horse riding, diving into pools, etc....etc....etc... . I think this might only be an issue because it's being called 'Tombstoning', very dramatic. When I was a kid, we called it 'jumping into water'.[/p][/quote]This is an issue because people are seriously injuring themselves. I know Nick very well (I'm his brother) and if you knew just half of what he has gone through in the last 14 years i guarantee you would change your opinion. No one is saying that it needs to be banned, just controlled. Jon The Legend
  • Score: 0

5:58pm Tue 22 Jul 14

southamptonadi says...

Jon The Legend wrote:
Dragnet wrote:
Donald2000 wrote:
Dragnet wrote:
Donald2000 wrote:
Dragnet wrote:
The only mention of an actual injury in this article is from 14 years ago at Lepe. Has anyone actually been injured at Redbridge? Should we ban kids from all activities that could hurt them?
No, we should just let them kill themselves and turn a blind eye into the process.

You are talking about activities involving kids throwing themselves off bridges into water containing obstacles which could end their lives.

I just bet you are the pride of your workplace for intellect, are you not?
I suppose they taught you in school that to ridicule someone's answer was a fair argument. Where have I read that before?
It doesn't ridicule your argument. It demolishes it. It must be obvious to all concerned that to encourage activities whereby children could kill themselves is no argument whatsoever. At least if you are going to come on here, let's have an argument that makes some sort of sense.
Ok. My first post was actually 2 questions; Has anyone been hurt at Redbridge? and do you ban everything that could possibly cause injury?

I don't know the first answer, but if there have been any, they are rare. The second answer must be 'NO'. Otherwise we would ban cycling, ice-skating, climbing frames and roundabouts at parks, garden trampolines (over 20,000 A&E visits per year), horse riding, diving into pools, etc....etc....etc...


.

I think this might only be an issue because it's being called 'Tombstoning', very dramatic. When I was a kid, we called it 'jumping into water'.
This is an issue because people are seriously injuring themselves. I know Nick very well (I'm his brother) and if you knew just half of what he has gone through in the last 14 years i guarantee you would change your opinion. No one is saying that it needs to be banned, just controlled.
I like the way you feel it should be controlled not banned especially with your families experience, very rational thinking.

People jumping of bridges has happened probably since bridges were invented, yes people get hurt or killed, but probably more so from cycling.

I think the the bridge in this article is probably the wrong place for the echo to highlight as it does appear to be quite safe. People are always jumping here, every year since I can remember.


Seems as the area to the south is a recreational area, I wonder if there is someone out there who would put a barge out there with a tower on in an area that has been dredged with life guards etc and a small boat to get you there. Obviously further down river as it does get shallow.

Or just dredge around the bridge as people will continue to jump there lets just make it as safe as possible. Maybe build some kind of ledge there with a ladder.

I realise it's on the border of two councils but I think they should realise this will continue and a few things could help.
[quote][p][bold]Jon The Legend[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dragnet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Donald2000[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dragnet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Donald2000[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dragnet[/bold] wrote: The only mention of an actual injury in this article is from 14 years ago at Lepe. Has anyone actually been injured at Redbridge? Should we ban kids from all activities that could hurt them?[/p][/quote]No, we should just let them kill themselves and turn a blind eye into the process. You are talking about activities involving kids throwing themselves off bridges into water containing obstacles which could end their lives. I just bet you are the pride of your workplace for intellect, are you not?[/p][/quote]I suppose they taught you in school that to ridicule someone's answer was a fair argument. Where have I read that before?[/p][/quote]It doesn't ridicule your argument. It demolishes it. It must be obvious to all concerned that to encourage activities whereby children could kill themselves is no argument whatsoever. At least if you are going to come on here, let's have an argument that makes some sort of sense.[/p][/quote]Ok. My first post was actually 2 questions; Has anyone been hurt at Redbridge? and do you ban everything that could possibly cause injury? I don't know the first answer, but if there have been any, they are rare. The second answer must be 'NO'. Otherwise we would ban cycling, ice-skating, climbing frames and roundabouts at parks, garden trampolines (over 20,000 A&E visits per year), horse riding, diving into pools, etc....etc....etc... . I think this might only be an issue because it's being called 'Tombstoning', very dramatic. When I was a kid, we called it 'jumping into water'.[/p][/quote]This is an issue because people are seriously injuring themselves. I know Nick very well (I'm his brother) and if you knew just half of what he has gone through in the last 14 years i guarantee you would change your opinion. No one is saying that it needs to be banned, just controlled.[/p][/quote]I like the way you feel it should be controlled not banned especially with your families experience, very rational thinking. People jumping of bridges has happened probably since bridges were invented, yes people get hurt or killed, but probably more so from cycling. I think the the bridge in this article is probably the wrong place for the echo to highlight as it does appear to be quite safe. People are always jumping here, every year since I can remember. Seems as the area to the south is a recreational area, I wonder if there is someone out there who would put a barge out there with a tower on in an area that has been dredged with life guards etc and a small boat to get you there. Obviously further down river as it does get shallow. Or just dredge around the bridge as people will continue to jump there lets just make it as safe as possible. Maybe build some kind of ledge there with a ladder. I realise it's on the border of two councils but I think they should realise this will continue and a few things could help. southamptonadi
  • Score: -1

5:58pm Tue 22 Jul 14

southamptonadi says...

Jon The Legend wrote:
Dragnet wrote:
Donald2000 wrote:
Dragnet wrote:
Donald2000 wrote:
Dragnet wrote:
The only mention of an actual injury in this article is from 14 years ago at Lepe. Has anyone actually been injured at Redbridge? Should we ban kids from all activities that could hurt them?
No, we should just let them kill themselves and turn a blind eye into the process.

You are talking about activities involving kids throwing themselves off bridges into water containing obstacles which could end their lives.

I just bet you are the pride of your workplace for intellect, are you not?
I suppose they taught you in school that to ridicule someone's answer was a fair argument. Where have I read that before?
It doesn't ridicule your argument. It demolishes it. It must be obvious to all concerned that to encourage activities whereby children could kill themselves is no argument whatsoever. At least if you are going to come on here, let's have an argument that makes some sort of sense.
Ok. My first post was actually 2 questions; Has anyone been hurt at Redbridge? and do you ban everything that could possibly cause injury?

I don't know the first answer, but if there have been any, they are rare. The second answer must be 'NO'. Otherwise we would ban cycling, ice-skating, climbing frames and roundabouts at parks, garden trampolines (over 20,000 A&E visits per year), horse riding, diving into pools, etc....etc....etc...


.

I think this might only be an issue because it's being called 'Tombstoning', very dramatic. When I was a kid, we called it 'jumping into water'.
This is an issue because people are seriously injuring themselves. I know Nick very well (I'm his brother) and if you knew just half of what he has gone through in the last 14 years i guarantee you would change your opinion. No one is saying that it needs to be banned, just controlled.
I like the way you feel it should be controlled not banned especially with your families experience, very rational thinking.

People jumping of bridges has happened probably since bridges were invented, yes people get hurt or killed, but probably more so from cycling.

I think the the bridge in this article is probably the wrong place for the echo to highlight as it does appear to be quite safe. People are always jumping here, every year since I can remember.


Seems as the area to the south is a recreational area, I wonder if there is someone out there who would put a barge out there with a tower on in an area that has been dredged with life guards etc and a small boat to get you there. Obviously further down river as it does get shallow.

Or just dredge around the bridge as people will continue to jump there lets just make it as safe as possible. Maybe build some kind of ledge there with a ladder.

I realise it's on the border of two councils but I think they should realise this will continue and a few things could help.
[quote][p][bold]Jon The Legend[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dragnet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Donald2000[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dragnet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Donald2000[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dragnet[/bold] wrote: The only mention of an actual injury in this article is from 14 years ago at Lepe. Has anyone actually been injured at Redbridge? Should we ban kids from all activities that could hurt them?[/p][/quote]No, we should just let them kill themselves and turn a blind eye into the process. You are talking about activities involving kids throwing themselves off bridges into water containing obstacles which could end their lives. I just bet you are the pride of your workplace for intellect, are you not?[/p][/quote]I suppose they taught you in school that to ridicule someone's answer was a fair argument. Where have I read that before?[/p][/quote]It doesn't ridicule your argument. It demolishes it. It must be obvious to all concerned that to encourage activities whereby children could kill themselves is no argument whatsoever. At least if you are going to come on here, let's have an argument that makes some sort of sense.[/p][/quote]Ok. My first post was actually 2 questions; Has anyone been hurt at Redbridge? and do you ban everything that could possibly cause injury? I don't know the first answer, but if there have been any, they are rare. The second answer must be 'NO'. Otherwise we would ban cycling, ice-skating, climbing frames and roundabouts at parks, garden trampolines (over 20,000 A&E visits per year), horse riding, diving into pools, etc....etc....etc... . I think this might only be an issue because it's being called 'Tombstoning', very dramatic. When I was a kid, we called it 'jumping into water'.[/p][/quote]This is an issue because people are seriously injuring themselves. I know Nick very well (I'm his brother) and if you knew just half of what he has gone through in the last 14 years i guarantee you would change your opinion. No one is saying that it needs to be banned, just controlled.[/p][/quote]I like the way you feel it should be controlled not banned especially with your families experience, very rational thinking. People jumping of bridges has happened probably since bridges were invented, yes people get hurt or killed, but probably more so from cycling. I think the the bridge in this article is probably the wrong place for the echo to highlight as it does appear to be quite safe. People are always jumping here, every year since I can remember. Seems as the area to the south is a recreational area, I wonder if there is someone out there who would put a barge out there with a tower on in an area that has been dredged with life guards etc and a small boat to get you there. Obviously further down river as it does get shallow. Or just dredge around the bridge as people will continue to jump there lets just make it as safe as possible. Maybe build some kind of ledge there with a ladder. I realise it's on the border of two councils but I think they should realise this will continue and a few things could help. southamptonadi
  • Score: 0

9:54pm Tue 22 Jul 14

Lisa6666 says...

Yes there are risks as there are in all walks of life, however as mentioned, kids have been jumping off there for years, I don't know the statistics of injuries, but it seems to me they are not that high. Let them have there fun as they have done for many years....
Yes there are risks as there are in all walks of life, however as mentioned, kids have been jumping off there for years, I don't know the statistics of injuries, but it seems to me they are not that high. Let them have there fun as they have done for many years.... Lisa6666
  • Score: 0

1:38am Wed 23 Jul 14

southy says...

sparkster wrote:
I did read some time ago of a boy who went tombstoning, the wter wasn't as deep as he thought and ended up breaking his back. Im all for kids having fun but tombstoning can be dangerous, you dont always know in some places if there are rocks under the water
That was Lepe Beach, and where he dived into the ground in dry at low water, that right away should tell how shallow the water is
[quote][p][bold]sparkster[/bold] wrote: I did read some time ago of a boy who went tombstoning, the wter wasn't as deep as he thought and ended up breaking his back. Im all for kids having fun but tombstoning can be dangerous, you dont always know in some places if there are rocks under the water[/p][/quote]That was Lepe Beach, and where he dived into the ground in dry at low water, that right away should tell how shallow the water is southy
  • Score: 0

1:42am Wed 23 Jul 14

southy says...

Jon The Legend wrote:
Dragnet wrote:
Donald2000 wrote:
Dragnet wrote:
Donald2000 wrote:
Dragnet wrote:
The only mention of an actual injury in this article is from 14 years ago at Lepe. Has anyone actually been injured at Redbridge? Should we ban kids from all activities that could hurt them?
No, we should just let them kill themselves and turn a blind eye into the process.

You are talking about activities involving kids throwing themselves off bridges into water containing obstacles which could end their lives.

I just bet you are the pride of your workplace for intellect, are you not?
I suppose they taught you in school that to ridicule someone's answer was a fair argument. Where have I read that before?
It doesn't ridicule your argument. It demolishes it. It must be obvious to all concerned that to encourage activities whereby children could kill themselves is no argument whatsoever. At least if you are going to come on here, let's have an argument that makes some sort of sense.
Ok. My first post was actually 2 questions; Has anyone been hurt at Redbridge? and do you ban everything that could possibly cause injury?

I don't know the first answer, but if there have been any, they are rare. The second answer must be 'NO'. Otherwise we would ban cycling, ice-skating, climbing frames and roundabouts at parks, garden trampolines (over 20,000 A&E visits per year), horse riding, diving into pools, etc....etc....etc...


.

I think this might only be an issue because it's being called 'Tombstoning', very dramatic. When I was a kid, we called it 'jumping into water'.
This is an issue because people are seriously injuring themselves. I know Nick very well (I'm his brother) and if you knew just half of what he has gone through in the last 14 years i guarantee you would change your opinion. No one is saying that it needs to be banned, just controlled.
If you are Nicks Brother then you realise the very big difference between jumping in to water that dry out at low tides like at Lepe beach and jumping to water that is 20 feet deep at low water.
[quote][p][bold]Jon The Legend[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dragnet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Donald2000[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dragnet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Donald2000[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dragnet[/bold] wrote: The only mention of an actual injury in this article is from 14 years ago at Lepe. Has anyone actually been injured at Redbridge? Should we ban kids from all activities that could hurt them?[/p][/quote]No, we should just let them kill themselves and turn a blind eye into the process. You are talking about activities involving kids throwing themselves off bridges into water containing obstacles which could end their lives. I just bet you are the pride of your workplace for intellect, are you not?[/p][/quote]I suppose they taught you in school that to ridicule someone's answer was a fair argument. Where have I read that before?[/p][/quote]It doesn't ridicule your argument. It demolishes it. It must be obvious to all concerned that to encourage activities whereby children could kill themselves is no argument whatsoever. At least if you are going to come on here, let's have an argument that makes some sort of sense.[/p][/quote]Ok. My first post was actually 2 questions; Has anyone been hurt at Redbridge? and do you ban everything that could possibly cause injury? I don't know the first answer, but if there have been any, they are rare. The second answer must be 'NO'. Otherwise we would ban cycling, ice-skating, climbing frames and roundabouts at parks, garden trampolines (over 20,000 A&E visits per year), horse riding, diving into pools, etc....etc....etc... . I think this might only be an issue because it's being called 'Tombstoning', very dramatic. When I was a kid, we called it 'jumping into water'.[/p][/quote]This is an issue because people are seriously injuring themselves. I know Nick very well (I'm his brother) and if you knew just half of what he has gone through in the last 14 years i guarantee you would change your opinion. No one is saying that it needs to be banned, just controlled.[/p][/quote]If you are Nicks Brother then you realise the very big difference between jumping in to water that dry out at low tides like at Lepe beach and jumping to water that is 20 feet deep at low water. southy
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree