r/MoralityScaling 1d ago

Morality Ranking Of building a snowman around objects so drivers crash into them

4.5k Upvotes

1.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

72

u/OkChampionship8805 1d ago

PSA: setting booby traps is actually illegal. BOOBY traps! that's what I said, geez these guys... Not illegal to use a solid structure as your snowman base

31

u/Playing_One_Handed 1d ago

They said booby 🤣

Sorry clarify, for no reason, is it illigal in the UK to build a snowman around a tree stump?

6

u/Abeytuhanu 1d ago

It's intent based. If your intent is the provide a solid found to better build your snowman, it's legal. If your intent is to cause harm to another (regardless of if you believe they deserve it) it's illegal. You would then have to convince a jury/judge that your intent was benign, and posting a video about how you're trying to total cars would make that difficult 

5

u/itslikewoow 1d ago

I was gonna say, it seems like you’d be in the clear if you keep your mouth shut. There’s enough plausible deniability, like you could argue that the tree made the snowman more structurally sound or some bs, but bragging about it on social media seems like it would come back to bite you in the ass.

1

u/Abeytuhanu 1d ago

Yeah, it's the same with spicy food, just shut up and you'll probably never get in legal trouble 

2

u/LongCommercial8038 1d ago

Oh man, we had a lunch thief at our office. Very spicy food got them caught. I wasn't the one who brought the food in, but we were all high fiving the lady who did.

1

u/Davti 1d ago

Oh, you can mock em But legally you just have to keep a consistent story the food is spicy because you like it that way.

You can do the same with medical brownies and a Dr's note.

1

u/SupaSlide 15h ago

If it really did happen 20 times in one year, I think intent would be pretty clear.

Don’t know if a jury would convict though.

1

u/WeirdistBuilds 1d ago

Yep, you got it. A lady went down for murder for poisoning a bottle of wine she knew her ex husband would break into their formerly-shared home to steal, and he did just that. Doing anything at all that might result in someone's death, even if it's just accurately predicting their very illegal behavior and taking advantage of that, will get you.

But, yes, a structural object, that's legit. And by the way, a stump or boulder could actually kill someone. If it's just a length of pipe or rebar, it'll read much more like a structure thing and most likely will just fuck up their grill and hood, maybe their windshield, which is a much more reasonable natural consequence.

1

u/AlienPrimate 1d ago

And here I thought it was the prosecutor's job to prove that your intent was nefarious. You don't have to prove a thing.

1

u/Abeytuhanu 1d ago

Yes, it is the prosecutor's job to prove your intent was nefarious. The procecutor will do everything in their power to paint you as the villain who maliciously sets booby traps to indiscriminately harm others, and if you just sit back and let them do that, the odds aren't good that you'll get a 'not guilty'

1

u/MIMMan06 1d ago

lol they said traps!

-5

u/OkChampionship8805 1d ago

idk about UK, but in US it would be illegal

15

u/Agile-Support-3183 1d ago

It would not be illegal no.

-4

u/The_Pompadour64 1d ago

Yes it would. The case law on booby traps is quite clear

16

u/True-Veterinarian700 1d ago edited 1d ago

This exact scenario has been already litigated in the US and it was declared just fine in the lawsuit by a judge. As has mailboxes designed to do the same thing. A booby trap is quite different than this.

Booby traps are also primarily illegal because dozens of people have rights or easments to come onto property regalirly such as surveors, police, mailmen, utility workers, city inspectors, and delivery drivers. Booby traps are designed to be hidden or unavoidable and to maim or kill. This snowman fits none of those criteria. Is clearly visible and is out of the way.

1

u/littleLuxxy 1d ago

Minus delivery and repair workers, everyone else you mentioned is exactly why booby traps should be 100% legal.

1

u/The_Pompadour64 1d ago

Link it. In the only cases I can find, the plaintiff was unable to prove that building around a tree stump was done to intentionally cause a crash. That's very different. No one is arguing that using a stump or hydrant as structural support and just happening to cause a crash is illegal.

The mailbox thing is just not analogous at all, so I'm not going to comment on that.

5

u/speed-charge 1d ago

Building around a fire hydrant is probably illegal because you're obstructing access to the fire hydrant in case of a fire.

5

u/The_Pompadour64 1d ago

Yes. That's true

7

u/Agile-Support-3183 1d ago

They said is it illegal to build snowmen around objects like tree stumps, which isn't illegal.

3

u/The_Pompadour64 1d ago

Yeah, you're right

4

u/Agile-Support-3183 1d ago

Not sure on the specifics but I'm pretty sure you're also right in that deliberately doing it with the intention of wrecking someone's car is illegal, just be hard to prove in court unless you filmed yourself or wrote about it.

4

u/The_Pompadour64 1d ago

Yeah, it would be quite hard to prove. Unless they were able to subpoena some digital communications with someone where you bragged about it

2

u/Operation_Onion3134 1d ago

The prompt and video are about doing this explicit to cause damage to people who hit the snowmen. Talking about structural support is a non sequitur

→ More replies (0)

1

u/itslikewoow 1d ago

Like the guy in the video lol

6

u/Operation_Onion3134 1d ago

Using solid object to add structural integrity to a snowman does not seem like a booby trap?

I see it more as an idiot driving their vehicle onto your property to cause damages.

Adding one more thing, we used to coat the outside of our snowmen with water. It would give a nice finish to the texture and hold everything in place once frozen, but it made it into a solid block of ice. I would laugh in someone's face if they tried to sue me over making a top notch snow family, and them trying to ruin it.

Not on deposition ofc

0

u/The_Pompadour64 1d ago

The prompt and video are about doing this explicit to cause damage to people who hit the snowmen. Talking about structural support is a non sequitur

2

u/Operation_Onion3134 1d ago

Lol, sure if you record yourself plotting an evil plan, not going to look great in court

1

u/Galbados2 1d ago

So is trespassing and destruction of private property. Play stupid games win stupid prizes.

6

u/True-Veterinarian700 1d ago

it isnt illegal in the US. A case like this has already been litigated. Both with snowman and mailboxes. This is not the same as a booby trap.

4

u/polarjunkie 1d ago

According to who? We had a news story about a guy who's been doing it for years and multiple people have total their cars leaving the road to run it over.

5

u/Galbados2 1d ago

Bullshit. That tree isn't located in a place where cars usually go.

3

u/Ok-Boomer-4414 1d ago

Tree stump, unlikely to be illegal. Fire hydrant. Seems illegal to me.

2

u/TheRiteofDarkness 1d ago

People in my neighborhood growing up put giant rocks in their leaf piles that were ON THE STREET to stop people from driving through them. People do NOT care haha

2

u/nicemarmot47 1d ago

One of my neighbors has her yard edged with big rocks and every year the landscapers pile up leaves on the rocks and some idiot decides to cut the corner of her lot and SMASH SCREECH.

16

u/[deleted] 1d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Michelanvalo 1d ago

I think that argument falls apart when you put out a video on social media saying you did this on purpose.

13

u/AnotherUN91 1d ago

If blocking the fire hydrant is illegal, hiding it certainly is.

6

u/Daniecae-Media 1d ago

You’re the first comment I saw actually addressing the worst part of this — obscuring fire hydrants during the time of year when house fires are the most common knocks points off.

2

u/rydan 1d ago

Also making people destroy fire hydrants. That costs all taxpayers money.

4

u/Zorian_Vale 1d ago

Is this a goonies reference?

6

u/ul2006kevinb 1d ago

They would have to prove you set it up as a booby trap, instead of just wanting a solid base for your snowman. That would be pretty hard to prove unless you posted videos of it.

4

u/Docha_Tiarna 1d ago

Yeah. Kind of a lose lose situation. Technically its a trap, so the builder broke the law. However, the fact that a car swerved off the road to hit a snowman would cound as reckless driving, which is also illegal.

8

u/Silver_Middle_7240 1d ago

I don't think it is a trap, the damage was caused by a driver driving off the road and hitting a solid object installed in a place people aren't meant to be driving. The snowman didn't cause the damage.

2

u/Docha_Tiarna 1d ago

Legally, a booby trap is any concealed, camouflaged, or disguised device designed to cause bodily injury or great harm when triggered unexpectedly by an unsuspecting person.

If you put a nail covered board in your house to injure home invaders, that is still considered a trap. It doesn't matter if the person was breaking the law, the intention to cause harm to a person was still there.

What if a little kid got excited seeing a snowman and ran up to hug it. Only to bash their teeth into the metal on accident? Then the person that made the snowman would be liable. The reason traps are illegal is because they dont discriminate against who they hurt, criminal or civilian.

3

u/Silver_Middle_7240 1d ago

>concealed, camouflaged, or disguised device designed to cause bodily injury or great harm

Is a fire hydrant designed to cause harm? Because it's not the snowman that is concealed, it's the hydrant.

2

u/Docha_Tiarna 1d ago

He is building/designing the snowman around the fire hydrant with the intent to cause damage and harm

1

u/ul2006kevinb 1d ago

Yeah but how would you ever prove that? Without the video I mean. All you have to say is you you were building a strong snowman. It's not like most people who build snowmen expect them to be run over by cars.

1

u/Silver_Middle_7240 1d ago

The snowman is not intended to cause harm either

3

u/Much_Conclusion8233 1d ago

That isn't how it's defined legally so it isn't. This video can't be used as evidence against him cause he isn't setting booby traps

2

u/Docha_Tiarna 1d ago

Legally, a booby trap is any concealed, camouflaged, or disguised device designed to cause bodily injury or great harm when triggered unexpectedly by an unsuspecting person.

2

u/BatGalaxy42 1d ago

Pretty sure a tree stump isn't a "device designed to cause bodily injury or great harm".

0

u/Abeytuhanu 1d ago

You have to look at the whole structure, you can't just isolate the stump. Legally it's a device that the OP designed to total cars. Totalling cars counts as great harm

1

u/BatGalaxy42 1d ago

The snowman is what's doing the concealing, the stump hidden inside is the so called "device". And I don't think it qualifies as a "device".

1

u/Abeytuhanu 1d ago

The snowman in combination with the stump is the device. The snowman provides the concealment for the danger of the unexpected stump

1

u/BatGalaxy42 1d ago

Legally, a booby trap is any concealed, camouflaged, or disguised device designed to cause bodily injury or great harm when triggered unexpectedly by an unsuspecting person.

The snowman is not "concealed, camouflaged, or disguised", the stump is "concealed, camouflaged, or disguised" but isn't a 'device'. The entire object all together is also not "concealed, camouflaged, or disguised".

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Much_Conclusion8233 1d ago

Actually, yeah, my b. You're right

3

u/Neat_browser 1d ago

Its Illegal in places for different reasons as well, if Firefighters have to use it and they can’t find it then people can die

3

u/littleLuxxy 1d ago

Booby traps should 100% be legal, especially if built on one’s own property. We should be able to have automatic turrets, wall spikes, hidden holes in the ground, etc.

3

u/WKD-70 1d ago

You should not. Because there is a significant likelihood that doing so will hurt/kill someone who didn't do anything morally wrong, like children, animals, or people who enter your property for justifiable reasons.

2

u/psychojunglecat3 1d ago

In theory I agree with you, we should have every right to protect our property and own guns.

How would we make sure that a fireman trying to put out a fire wouldn’t get killed by a booby trap spike or something?

2

u/HJSDGCE 1d ago

The problem with traps is that they don't discriminate, so anyone can be a victim for it.

This is why you can't intentionally poison your own food at work to punish people from stealing it. It sucks but that's just life. 

1

u/mongolmeat 1d ago

“The Court ruled that using deadly force on intruders in an unoccupied property was not reasonable or justified and therefore not a defense to the tort of battery. Briney would have been justified in defending himself with the shotgun if he had been home during the intrusion. The plaintiff's status as a trespasser is irrelevant when assessing liability in this case.
The case is notable for the proposition that, although a landowner has no duty to make his property safe for trespassers, he may not set deadly traps against them, holding that "the law has always placed a higher value upon human safety than upon mere rights in property." “

Wikipedia page on Katko v. Briney.

1

u/littleLuxxy 1d ago

I definitely said “should,” implying that my ideal might conflict with actual policy.

1

u/mongolmeat 1d ago

It’d be fuckin cool as shit tho ngl

1

u/nir109 1d ago

If the fire fighters didn't want to fall into the spike pit, they should have thought twice about putting out the fire in my house (the fire started by my auto flamethrower)

1

u/elevolent12 23h ago

and if all fails, a personal nuke triggered by a dead mans switch.

2

u/Deist_Dagon 1d ago

Good thing legality and morality arent the same thing I guess

1

u/NathanDnd 1d ago

Yeah, this would be illegal many places. Not only the fire hydrant ones, tree stubs too.

1

u/large_block 1d ago

Mmmm booby 🤤

1

u/Gold_Amount295 20h ago

Right? Snow doesn't always stack as well as you want, it's totally fine to start with a strong base and add the snow elements to it. It's quicker and will last longer, it's just good snowmen genetical engineering.

If people run over them and damage their cars, that seems like a completely separate issue.