this post was submitted on 29 Aug 2026
208 points (94.1% liked)
Revenge
98 readers
3 users here now
Because karma need some push
founded 4 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
FYI you can be charged for this in the US in some jurisdictions which have laws about leaving traps on your property. It's stupid but yeah.
Building a snowman on a fire hydrant is dangerous and stupid anyway. As far as building around a stump or similar on my property, someone who drove their vehicle onto my property with the intent to hit my snowman would have to prove that the snowman was a trap. That's a tough sell.
Plus, I needed the tree stump for support. I wasn't trying to make some kind of trap. What kind of psycho would think I planned for them to hit it?
I would take it to trial and countersue for damages to my lawn and property plus court costs.
You drove off of the street onto my lawn with the express purpose of destroying lawn decorations that I had built using this tree stump for support so I could make the snowman taller and more interesting. And now you want me to pay you for the damages that you caused to yourself?
Like the emotional whiplash has turned into real whiplash, and I need $50,000 to fix it
I no longer feel safe in my own home, since apparently I live near lunatics who drive up on the side walk. Money me now please.
If you're intentionally making an "attractive nuisance" (that's a term of art, look it up on Wikipedia or better yet I bet the Cornell law library probably has a good page on it if you want a better explanation than I can give) then it's a much easier sell
Eh, that looks to be specifically about protecting children trespassers. Like making sure a pool it child proof to avoid drowning. If a child drives into my stumpy snowman, there are probably gonna be some other questions.
If I put say, a knife in the snowman's hand, and a kid runs up and cuts themselves, then I think that attractive nuisance doctrine would be at play.
How is building a snowman a trap?
It's about intent.
Building a snowman around a rock is not a trap.
Building a snowman around a rock with the goal of disguising it to create consequences for anyone who runs into it may be considered one.
Of course, intent is legally hard to prove one way or the other.
It's rather less hard to prove when someone puts a video online spelling it out.
Intent will be much easier to prove in court if you make public videos explaining your intent.
That's what I meant by 'less hard to prove'
Less hard to the extent it's easy.
There is another possibility:
The video is a joke and the guy doesn't actually do this.
"Some dumbass kept destroying my snowman so I simply built a stronger snowman."
thanks the equality of justice which punish with the same rage the poor as well as the rich for stealing food or sleeping in the street
You could really say that about so many actions people take daily, something as small as helping someone out of a burning vehicle exposes you to massive liability in some jurisdictions for example. Oh and in this case it would probably only result in any sort of civil loss or criminal conviction if you have shown intent to seek this as a result, but otherwise you're just using a support structure for art on your property. Gonna be an uphill battle if they wanna sue. (Mandatory I am not your lawyer)
Lots of states have "good samaritan" laws protecting people from harm caused by good faith efforts to save a life.
Which is why I said some jurisdictions. Not everywhere is fucking crazy, but some places are.
That's not even remotely stupid. Hiding a potentially lethal trap in a snowman isn't close to a reasonable response to a fucking destroyed snowman.
It's a nonissue if you keep your car on the road and not, you know, in someone else's front yard
Who has a fire hydrant in their front yard? And besides, even if someone is trespassing and causing some property damage (I wouldn't even call destroying a snowman that) that's no justification for causing bodily harm. There's no justification for that outside of immediate self-defence.
You're right. We should hide a pile of claymores. Gotta get rid of that word "potentially"