[0] https://www.huffpost.com/entry/nyu-bobst-library-suicides-al...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWPEVhrWZS0

Start at 6:50 for reducing access to means and methods.

It's a very important part, and you must have reducing access to means and methods if you want to reduce the numbers of people killing themselves.

>Anderson points to another example where simply making a change in people's access to instruments of suicide dramatically lowered the suicide rate. In England, death by asphyxiation from breathing oven fumes had accounted for roughly half of all suicides up until the 1970s, when Britain began converting ovens from coal gas, which contains lots of carbon monoxide, to natural gas, which has almost none. During that time, suicides plummeted roughly 30 percent — and the numbers haven't changed since.

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/10/health/blocking-the-paths...

With that in mind, I can easily see how things like fences might make the problem worse as you said. People will feel even more trapped and helpless when what they need is the opposite.

I didn't say this (because I thought it was obvious) but installing fences is not meant to make people happier. It's meant to reduce access to means and methods. This is part, but only part, of preventing suicide.

It's a very important part, and it's the bit that we have best evidence for.

In the short term it's the bit that has most impact.

That's not what the post you replied to was saying. The worry is that being "fenced in" would actively make people less happy.

I'm sure you're already aware of this, but condescendingly stating that you're being polite is the opposite of being polite.

> we know fences work.

No, you don't know that.

You may know they solve the visible problem (suicide), but you don't know if they do anything to alleviate the conditions that lead to suicide.

Is there anyone who believes fences make people happier or less depressed?

I've never claimed that the only thing we need to do is install fences.