Mythbuster spinoff - what if it were your house?

[LaxMom]

Other. I would be horrified, as they and the police dept are. I wouldn't be angry, they are normally overly cautious, so this is aberrant. They're fixing the damage. No tv.

[creekland]

Anyone with common sense (and that includes the posters in this thread :D ) knows that a cannonball is not a gun and therefore a firing range is not an appropriate place to shoot a cannon. If it had happened at an artillery range, I'd be more likely to call it a freak accident.

 

 

Are you aware that there are many firearms with a longer range than this cannon had? What if a bullet had ricocheted the same way this cannonball did? It would have still been able to be deadly to anyone in the wrong spot.

[Spy Car]

I would cooperate...on the condition the changed the name of the show to: Falsehood Busters :D

 

Bill

[Renee in NC]

If it were our house, we would all be super excited that we get to meet the Mythbusters crew! We would expect them to pay for all damages and put us up somewhere if needed while work was done. I'd also love to keep the cannonball as a souvenir. :)

 

:iagree: Their being willing to do some "mythbusting" with my sons would go along way here!:D

[In2why]

I hate lawsuits, but I gotta say that just paying for repairs wouldn't be enough. I have experienced the absolute mess and frustration of home repairs. (people don't show up on time or at all, one thing can't be done until another, things cost more than expected or are backordered) And even if they repaired it all, the frustration level for me would be high! I have homeschooled in my bedroom while construction work went on downstairs, it isn't fun, I didn't plan on it, and it didn't cost me a penny since it was picked up by insurance, yet it was still close to a nightmare.

 

I wouldn't want to sue, and I don't want to get rich off of an accident, but they would need to send my family on vacation and I am not coming home until it is all done!

[linders]

Forget the lawsuit, the boys would just insist on being extras in the next stunt!

[ChristineW]

:iagree:

 

I'd definitely file a lawsuit. It was totally preventable.

 

Why. A lawyer would get 1/3 of the cut and you'd be waiting months or years for the house to be fixed while the lawyers hash it out. From the article in the local paper, it seems that they took reasonable precautions--it was shot in a bomb range in an area that used to be a federal artillery range--and consulted experts. Punitive damages are unlikely to be awarded so you're just going to postpone getting what the Discovery Channel is offering now.

 

I'd be really, really mad, and expect a bit of an upgrade when doing the repairs but it wouldn't be worth the hassle of a lawsuit. I'd want it fixed and want to move on as soon as possible.

 

Christine

Edited December 8, 2011 by ChristineW
grammar

[Murmer]

I understand why the owner is mad...someone easily could have been killed...it was beyond possible. Therefore the show and range need to be able to prove that they will be even safer than they have been. That said the hope would be that damage + personal effect + proven safer model for range and mythbuster would occur without having to file a lawsuit.

[shinyhappypeople]

Are you aware that there are many firearms with a longer range than this cannon had? What if a bullet had ricocheted the same way this cannonball did? It would have still been able to be deadly to anyone in the wrong spot.

 

No. I'm not a firearms expert. However, I assume they DID have an expert on hand and that expert *should* have considered several "what-if / worst case" scenarios, including the "what if the cannon ball ricochets into one of the nearby neighborhoods?"

 

Firing a cannon near a populated area. That's just so many shades of stupid I can't even begin to comprehend it.

 

What if a couple of college kids decided to "play Mythbusters" and pulled the same stunt with the same outcome. How forgiving would people be then?

[ktgrok]

It was a bomb range, not a firing range. Not sure what difference that makes. And as someone said, a bullet from a rifle could go as far.

[Kari C in SC]

http://www.unisci.com/stories/20022/0523024.htm

 

150 people are killed each year by falling coconuts. Yep - that is true. We get in our cars each and every day and drive. They are one of the most dangerous weapons and we use them daily. Accidents happen. It is just that simple. I have to tell myself that every. single. day. Life is not a tidy controlled place. It is messy.

 

I would want them to fix my house, put me in a hotel, whatever. I am sure they will make the people comfortable a bit beyond just paying for the repairs. I don't think they endangered people. I think sometimes coconuts fall off trees and hit people. Sometimes bad car accidents happen. And extremely rarely - a cannonball flies through your house. Be thankful and move on.

[PinkInTheBlue]

If it were our house, we would all be super excited that we get to meet the Mythbusters crew! We would expect them to pay for all damages and put us up somewhere if needed while work was done. I'd also love to keep the cannonball as a souvenir. :)

 

Agree! Agree! As long as they were fixing it, I'd just love the opportunity to meet them. Adam and my husband could talk long and detailed about Indy Gear. I'd just enjoy meeting them. No harm done. Accidents happen and they are cleaning up and apologizing. Some people.... :)

[6packofun]

I would be thanking the Lord that no one was hurt, making sure the damages were paid for and that in the future more precautions were taken (or, depending on how close we were to the demolition site, asking them to move it) and then requesting the cannonball to be mounted and signed by the cast for us to keep. :D

[LarlaB]

I'm not sure that 'anger' would describe what I would feel- more appropriately, it would be fear of what COULD have happened....

 

I don't understand the lawsuit mentality. I'm trying too, but I simply don't. Certainly it was an unnecessary activity, and yes it was preventable (as are most things in life when hindsight is involved...)

 

As a pp said, if they show had a history of recklessness I'd feel differently.

 

As the homeowner, I would ask for damages only (plus direct incidental- no punitive).

[pqr]

Too many lawyers.....

 

 

Nobody was hurt, thank God and that does make a difference.

 

I would want everything paid for but that is it, asking for silly things like "emotional damage" is pretty close to theft.

 

It is a sad indictment of society that the first thing that jumps into the minds of many is to sue and get money that was not earned.

[shinyhappypeople]

I understand why the owner is mad...someone easily could have been killed...it was beyond possible. Therefore the show and range need to be able to prove that they will be even safer than they have been. That said the hope would be that damage + personal effect + proven safer model for range and mythbuster would occur without having to file a lawsuit.

 

I agree with you. I said "definitely file a lawsuit," but really if they could prove to me that they weren't going to pull this cr*p again, I'd be less likely to feel the NEED to take it to the courts. I guess I'm just cynical. I think when dealing with businesses, usually the only way to force change is to force them to literally pay.

 

Here's the deal. According to the Time article, the cannonball traveled about 650 yards. That's about 3-1/2 blocks (in CA, 1 block = 1/10 of a mile). They were absolutely negligent and didn't have the right to endanger the lives of those people.

 

Why do I care so much? Mythbusters has done experiments in my town. I don't want them to come back here if they don't have enough common sense to realize that firing a cannon within a few blocks of a residential area is a very bad idea.

[BigMamaBird]

I'd be angry. But if the show is doing the right thing and fixing the damage, then I wouldn't bother with a lawsuit. These folks seem like they really try hard to comply with safety rules, it's not like a bunch of stupid dofuses, drunkenly blowing stuff up. No one was hurt, things happen. I'd suck it up and move on.

 

Maybe hold out for a cast led Co-op science class or something though!

[JumpedIntoTheDeepEndFirst]

I probably wouldn't start a lawsuit if they were replacing and repairing my home to my satisfaction. I don't need that sort of publicity that comes with being on the show but I wouldn't mind meeting the guys.

[peachskittles]

I wouldn't sue them. As long as my house was repaired and appropriate compensation for whatever extras are needed, I would be alright.

 

Ya know, actually my only thought when I seen the map...There is a BOMB range, what, 4-5 blocks from a residential area???? And people willingly LIVE near there???? :001_huh: Maybe it's nice to be surrounded by cornfields. And, in case I am in the dark about a possible bomb range around me, don't tell me. I would like to continue to think that there are none around me. :tongue_smilie:

[Pippen]

I would see it as an opportunity to get that new flooring I've been wanting.:lol:

[Hannah C.]

First I would be terrified with the "what-ifs." Then I would probably calm down a bit...

 

It seems to me like it was unexpected, and I think that Mythbusters will pay for everything to be fixed, including alternative accommodations, and won't be doing anything like that again in the future. So I wouldn't sue. I'd still be terrified though - something like that is bound to shatter your sense of security.

[jujsky]

I would be absolutely furious that they endangered my family.

 

:iagree: This is exactly how I would feel.

[Running the race]

My kids would be SO excited if it were our house. They LOVE Mythbusters. I'm sure my house would end up looking better after than before. :)

[Heather in Neverland]

If it were our house, we would all be super excited that we get to meet the Mythbusters crew! We would expect them to pay for all damages and put us up somewhere if needed while work was done. I'd also love to keep the cannonball as a souvenir. :)

 

:iagree: I would not sue over something that "could" have happened but didn't. It was an accident. They are making amends. I am called to forgive. The end.

[MyLittleWonders]

:iagree: I would not sue over something that "could" have happened but didn't. It was an accident. They are making amends. I am called to forgive. The end.

 

:iagree:

[creekland]

Ya know, actually my only thought when I seen the map...There is a BOMB range, what, 4-5 blocks from a residential area???? And people willingly LIVE near there???? :001_huh: Maybe it's nice to be surrounded by cornfields. And, in case I am in the dark about a possible bomb range around me, don't tell me. I would like to continue to think that there are none around me. :tongue_smilie:

 

I was thinking about this last night. My mind was wondering if the ones to sue would be the developers of the residential area and the ones without common sense would be those who bought houses there...

 

But I guess it's really similar to some who live right next to airport runways in the flight path. One hopes accidents don't happen (and they usually don't), then sue if they do?

[ravinlunachick]

I agree with Mrs. Mungo and shinyhappypeople.

 

I'm so far from an expert it isn't funny, but I don't think a bullet from a firearm can be compared to a cannonball. Yes, bullets can travel very far, but they aren't going to rip through houses, bounce off of streets, and keep going with enough velocity to destroy more and potentially kill very many more people.

 

Common sense tells me that cannonballs are dangerous. I'm pretty sure my 7 year old knows that. Why in the world would anyone think it's okay to fire one off within a VERY long distance from homes? That's just crazy. Put me in the potential lawsuit group.

 

ETA: Am I the only one who has always thought that bomb disposal range (or whatever they call it) *was* out in the middle of nowhere? It sure does look that way on the show. I had no clue it was so close to a residential area!

[Julie Smith]

I would cooperate...on the condition the changed the name of the show to: Falsehood Busters :D

 

Bill

 

How come I'm not surprised.

[Puma Mom]

If it were our house, we would all be super excited that we get to meet the Mythbusters crew! We would expect them to pay for all damages and put us up somewhere if needed while work was done. I'd also love to keep the cannonball as a souvenir. :)

Definitely. I think my oldest would pay to have Mythbusters damage our house so he could meet and hang out with them.

[Mrs Mungo]

Although some firearms have long ranges, it is *much* less likely that they would ricochet off of a hill of dirt like that. The dirt will absorb a round of ammunition better than a cannonball. Again, you don't need to be an expert to figure that out.

[Leav97]

I would be pissed at first. After I calmed down I would be happy to meet the crew. I noticed they aren't going to include any footage in the episode. I would want the footage include with an explanation of what went wrong and a warning to kids about why you don't do this at home.

[JustGin]

If it were our house, we would all be super excited that we get to meet the Mythbusters crew! We would expect them to pay for all damages and put us up somewhere if needed while work was done. I'd also love to keep the cannonball as a souvenir. :)

 

:iagree: IMHP - Accidents happen, and for goodness sake, they chose to locate 1000 yards from a BOMB range. I would definitely want the cannon ball :)

[creekland]

Although some firearms have long ranges, it is *much* less likely that they would ricochet off of a hill of dirt like that. The dirt will absorb a round of ammunition better than a cannonball. Again, you don't need to be an expert to figure that out.

 

They weren't firing into dirt. They were firing into a cinderblock wall. Bullets can, and do, ricochet often with harmful or deadly results. Bullets can also go through houses and cars.

 

The more I think about this situation (bullets or cannonballs), I think the "fault" lies with the developer putting houses so close to an "open" firing range of any sort. The common sense fault would be buying a house near one.

 

BUT 99.99999999+% of the time, there won't be a problem.

 

AND, they probably shouldn't fire anything against a hard surface here in the future. Stick to the papers and dirt (which will stop any flying object better).

Edited December 9, 2011 by creekland

[KungFuPanda]

Anyone with common sense (and that includes the posters in this thread :D ) knows that a cannonball is not a gun and therefore a firing range is not an appropriate place to shoot a cannon. If it had happened at an artillery range, I'd be more likely to call it a freak accident.

 

Common sense was not applied and lives were put in danger. Totally not acceptable. An apology doesn't cut it.

 

 

A cannon IS a gun.

:leaving:

[Mrs Mungo]

They weren't firing into dirt. They were firing into a cinderblock wall. Bullets can, and do, ricochet often with harmful or deadly results. Bullets can also go through houses and cars.

 

There was a hill of dirt behind the wall, yes? I thought that is what the article said? Sure, rounds can go through houses and cars. COMPLETELY through a house, partially through another house and through a car? Extremely unlikely. Most types of ammunition fired from most types of firearms won't even go through two sides of a vehicle (excluding a 50 cal with armor piercing rounds or something).

 

The more I think about this situation (bullets or cannonballs), I think the "fault" lies with the developer putting houses so close to an "open" firing range of any sort. The common sense fault would be buying a house near one.

 

Again, I can drive past firing ranges all day long, but not artillery ranges, those are placed further from populated areas. Why is that? Because one is inherently more risky.

 

AND, they probably shouldn't fire anything against a hard surface here in the future. Stick to the papers and dirt (which will stop any flying object better).

 

Agreed.

[KatieH]

The reason that punitive lawsuits exist is so that people/companies are more careful and take better precautions. It is great that nobody was hurt, but they were *extremely lucky* that nobody was hurt. I would be absolutely furious that they endangered my family.

 

I tend to agree with this. I love the show. But I felt absolutely sick when I heard about this. I understand it was an accident. I'm glad that no one was hurt. But it's pure luck that no one was injured or killed. They were obviously nowhere near far enough away from residential areas to be doing the experiment. I'm not a litigious person, and I can't say for sure that I'd sue, but I would seriously consider it.

[foxbridgeacademy]

They are always careful, accidents happen. Plus the kids would never speak to me again if I sued their heroes!

[Murphy101]

I don't understand why it being an accident matters.

I don't think anyone thinks MB are malicious idiots.

But accidents still require a wrong be made as right as possible.

And I wonder if whether punitive damages would be sought varies with income level.

If we had to leave work to meet with contractors all the time, take a kid to therapy they didn't previously need, live out of a hotel, eat out more frequently,... All these things take away from income in more ways than just their cost. And for people living on a lower income - even if the house is replaced, they could still come out a financial mess.

 

Comparing an act of nature like a coconut falling to a cannonball experiment is ridiculous.

 

I hope MB and the injured parties come to a fair agreement. I think MB is truly upset for the damage they have done and I don't think they will argue anything that is at least in the ballpark of reasonable.

 

But I do think reasonable should include more than replacing the walls and car.

[Mrs Mungo]

Comparing an act of nature like a coconut falling to a cannonball experiment is ridiculous.

 

In Hawaii road crews go along and cut all of the baby coconuts off of the trees along the roadways. The hotels keep their palm trees relatively free of coconuts too. So, even nature is controlled for the public's safety.

[Murphy101]

I would think so. It's no different than cutting trees back from power, house, and property lines before winter arrives.

[creekland]

There was a hill of dirt behind the wall, yes? I thought that is what the article said?

 

Well, yes, and that's what everyone thought would happen. IF it went through the wall, the dirt would stop it. What surprised everyone was the ricochet and the extent of the ricochet. ;)

 

Sure, rounds can go through houses and cars. COMPLETELY through a house, partially through another house and through a car? Extremely unlikely. Most types of ammunition fired from most types of firearms won't even go through two sides of a vehicle (excluding a 50 cal with armor piercing rounds or something).

 

Now I'm wondering if this place has a limit on the strength of the firearm that can be used there... pure curiosity. If not, they should soon get a limit. ;);)

 

Learning from mistakes/accidents is incredibly important.

[creekland]

I don't understand why it being an accident matters.

 

Because I think the vast majority of us would be in the lawsuit camp if the "incident" were done on purpose as a publicity stunt. ;)

 

I don't believe it was.

 

If they weren't planning on making things right, I also think more of us would be in the lawsuit camp - just to get things fixed (including ALL costs).

 

But they've said they will do this willingly and are very apologetic over the accident happening.

 

That's why it surprises me that even 10 or 11% of people would consider a lawsuit under the actual circumstances. But I've learned (through the hive and life experiences) that not much should surprise me anymore. :tongue_smilie: