• ceenote@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    483
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    22 days ago

    If you plow through a snowman with your car, you’re an asshole. If you do it with your brand new sports car, you’re a stupid asshole.

  • toofpic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    145
    ·
    edit-2
    22 days ago

    Even in case of a “usual” snowman, you can easily crack plastic bodyparts or dent metal ones. This is not GTA, where you just have to remember which items are breakable and which are not

    • Sludgehammer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      53
      ·
      edit-2
      22 days ago

      I’m honestly wondering if he made up the cinder block to try and make this someone else’s fault.

      • eatCasserole@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        edit-2
        22 days ago

        Good point. Hitting cinder blocks would probably leave scratches on the bumper, no? I don’t see any scratches in the photo.

        Looking at that bumper, it really looks like the work of something soft but heavy.

        Also notably absent: a picture of the cinder blocks.

        • jaybone@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          22 days ago

          Come to think of it, has anyone seen that guy and a cinder block in the same room together?

      • meco03211@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        22 days ago

        I can confirm that hitting large objects can sound like hitting straight concrete or cement. I hit a black bear one night when I was going about 70mph on the freeway. Would have sworn some truck lost a load of cinder blocks or something. There was at least one fur tuft on my car.

          • meco03211@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            22 days ago

            Fun fact if you hit a living animal in the road it would only be covered under comprehensive insurance. If you hit something like a bear, just to use a completely random animal, because that bear had already been hit by another car (possibly as little as mere minutes before), then it’s covered under collision insurance. Ask me how I know.

            • Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              21 days ago

              When you say “it,” do you mean repairs to the car or to the animal? Like, if I hit a dog, I’m certainly going to get it to a vet if I can, (although the owner would probably rather take it themselves than trust my driving) is my insurance going to pick up the vet bill?

              Oh wait, we’d want more help to the dog than “slap a coat of paint on it.” I better just get out my credit card.

              • meco03211@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                21 days ago

                Not sure how a dog would be handled. Pretty sure it would fall under property, but might have some extra legalese around it. The it I was referring to in this case was the car. The bear was very unlikely to survive, but it did in fact scamper off. If you recall I said it sounded like I hit a bunch of cinder blocks. Well I got out and went back to try to see if the other driver was alright. Never saw anything in the road. The state troopers didn’t see anything either. The first driver that hit it said it must have been about a 500lb black bear.

      • Tollana1234567@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        21 days ago

        or he had buyers remorse and tried to get it totaled, by saying it was blaming someone else. because he was stupid enough to buy an expensive car.

    • Birds are not real@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      21 days ago

      It still appeared serious enough to be upvoted by 700 people. I guess this speaks more on how the sanity of linkedin users is perceived than it speaks on the validity of the situation. And yeh, linkedin users are a bit fucked in the head.

      • I Cast Fist@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        21 days ago

        I mean, it’s the internet, it’s like a 70/30 chance of it being someone who’s really that entitled and stupid or just being troll bullshit

        • Birds are not real@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          20 days ago

          We do not know, and therefore should abstain from deducing fallacies out of air. I only commented on what was actually observable and relatable.

  • you_are_dust@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    96
    ·
    22 days ago

    What would make you think driving through a snowman is a good idea to begin with? You’d have to be driving through a yard or at least jumping a curb. Take the guy’s license away for reckless driving.

  • BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    93
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    22 days ago

    So Mark Majeski purposefully crashed his car into a static object and blames someone else for the consequences of his own actions?

  • curiousaur@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    89
    ·
    22 days ago

    My cousins used to live on a street with massive trees that dropped tons of leaves every autumn. The city would have special service days where everyone rakes the leaves into big piles in the street and street sweepers would come vacuum them up.

    Hooligans liked the drive through the big piles in the middle of the night. I honestly kinda see the appeal, who could resist. Anyway, they started to doing the same thing. Piles of cinder blocks under some of them. I was staying with them one night and we heard some horrible carnage, came out to find some sedan high centered on a pile of cinder blocks with the bumper hanging off.

    • Whats_your_reasoning@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      22 days ago

      There was a news story some years back about a little girl who was killed when her father did this. She was playing in a pile of leaves and her dad was unaware of that. He drove through the pile of leaves and … yeah, that was that. :(

      Trying to find the original news story, I’m finding multiple instances of this sort of thing happening. Which is even more heartbreaking.

    • jaybone@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      22 days ago

      This is good revenge. But what happens when the street sweepers come to pick them up?

    • lastlybutfirstly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      22 days ago

      If someone died, that would be murder charges. Putting cinder blocks in the street under leaves is a boobytrap and those are usually illegal. What if it was an ambulance coming to pick up someone up next door? Or someone swerving to miss a cat?

        • lastlybutfirstly@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          22 days ago

          I probably wouldn’t. But the paramedic crawling from the burning wreckage of an ambulance screaming “MY LEGS! I CAN"T FEEL MY LEGS!” probably would.

      • curiousaur@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        22 days ago

        Get off your high horse Karen

        It would be manslaughter for the stupid driver driving into something obscured that they can’t know is safe, at speed.

        • lastlybutfirstly@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          22 days ago

          I’m not judging. I’m just telling you guys what would happen. So you probably don’t want to try this at home.

          • curiousaur@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            22 days ago

            But you’re wrong Karen. What if a kid was playing in the leaves and they drove over them? The driver is at fault.

              • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                21 days ago

                Tbf they’ll do neither, they just want to be angry and feel self righteous for a minute. They’ve probably forgotten about this convo already (or will soon). Sad really, I always assume things aren’t right at home for them, like playground bullies.

  • kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    51
    ·
    22 days ago

    I’d be surprised if there were any legal consequences for something like this. It’s not a “booby trap” in the traditional sense where it poses a danger to legitimate visitors or emergency responders entering a property. It is a solid structure inside another (seemingly less solid) structure. You should already not be trying to ram into it. It poses zero risk to anyone that doesn’t already intent to maliciously destroy the apparently less solid structure.

    • PrettyFlyForAFatGuy@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      22 days ago

      we have issues in the UK with something like this. if you pay road tax you can park anywhere that isn’t parking controlled, including outside peoples houses (so long as you’re not restricting their access to the highway). some homeowners started putting traffic cones out to “reserve” the spot outside their homes (you cant legally do this btw).

      People would just push them out of the way with their cars so homeowners started filling them with concrete.

      Putting one of those in the road absolutely can and does get you in trouble

    • rumba@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      21 days ago

      The post itself is just clickbait, but legal consequences are not all that clear. It’s honestly mostly about intent.

      Here’s a case where a guy’s mailbox kept getting run over so he rebuilt it with a railroad tie and an 8" pipe burried 3 ft in the ground packed with concrete, and the guy who smashed it destroyed his car and paralyzed himself. https://www.courtnewsohio.gov/cases/2021/SCO/1124/201057.asp#.YaUu6xZOnDs

      It went all the way to the Ohio Supreme Court where they found with a lack of intent to harm, the owners were not at fault, but that’s a near miss. He said he filled the 8" post with dry concrete mix so if it rained it might ‘firm up’ which is sus and then buried it 36" in the ground testifying he was confident it would ‘lay over’ if struck. I’m not saying he wasn’t morally in the right, but there’s no way those to statements were factual accounts of how that went down. of course, the driver seeing an 8" post under a mailbox would have been equally insane trying to run through it. I’m thinking with a different set of lawyers, intent wouldn’t have been all that hard to prove.

      Also, could you imagine needing to employ a lawyer through several court cases, an appeal, and ultimately state supreme court hearings to keep from being responsible.

      • brbposting@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        20 days ago

        could you imagine needing to employ a lawyer through several court cases, an appeal, and ultimately state supreme court hearings to keep from being responsible.

        The “I would sue”/“you should sue!” crowd isn’t listening!

      • JcbAzPx@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        21 days ago

        It couldn’t have been considered a booby trap, legally speaking, because it was a mailbox and was harmless for normal operation and traffic. It could only harm someone vandalizing the mailbox, so that’s why intent came in.

        If it was truly a trap, intent wouldn’t have mattered. You are always liable for damages from a booby trap. That’s why you set them up so they can’t cause damage.

        • rumba@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          21 days ago

          It couldn’t have been considered a booby trap, legally speaking, because it was a mailbox and was harmless for normal operation and traffic. I

          But it kinda was a booby trap. Guy was tired of his mailbox getting smashed, concrete, 8" steel pipe, railroad tie head, I don’t think he was going to killing the guy or even hurting, but it had happened many times and he knew it was a matter of time before it happened again.

          They driver was clearly in the wrong. the box owner imo clearly had intent.

          don’t get me wrong, i’m not mad it went down that way, fucking driver was a dickhead and playing stupid games, I would rather the mailbox just destroy the truck and taught him a lesson.

          • JcbAzPx@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            21 days ago

            The definition of booby trap requires it to be harmful to anyone who interacts with it, even innocently. Since it was only harmful to someone intending to knock it over by driving into it or who loses control of their vehicle, you need to determine intent to harm.

  • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    22 days ago

    Assuming you can drive through any kind of obstacle already qualifies you as a moron. Even if it’s just a cardboard box, you never know what’s inside. Doing this and then acting all entitled qualifies you as a special kind of moron.

    • magnetosphere@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      22 days ago

      When I was a kid, I laughed at people swerving to avoid a paper bag. It seemed silly to me. My dad explained why they were doing it, and then chuckled as my eyes got huge and I said “OHHHH!”

  • ThePantser@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    22 days ago

    There is a house near me that builds a snowman around their mailbox that is on a cemented in post. I would love to see someone freak out after smashing their car when they tried to destroy the snowman.

    If you see a snowman just sitting somewhere and it’s not in the road then it’s on you for being a dick and going off-road to smash it.

  • Zink@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    21 days ago

    Engagement bait.

    I went and checked Facebook for notifications the other day and saw this exact post.

    This is all over the place: Posts by people who are confidently wrong in some obvious way, just begging for some smart internet person to come set them straight and get their wimpy dopamine hit.

    It is really enlightening, in a depressing way, to scroll mainstream social media like that and see the level of enshittification that people are conditioned to accept and keep scrolling through. It is so much worse than even ad-driven legacy media like live TV.

      • Zink@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        21 days ago

        Yep. It works.

        It caught my attention before I decided to ignore it, and even some of the early replies in these comments correctly pointing out the stupidity of the driver’s ways have hundreds of upvotes, which is a lot for Lemmy!

  • SpiceDealer@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    22 days ago

    I’m mad because a child’s creation caused damage to my newly bought, overpriced 2026 Redneck Sports Car™ and I’m going to resort to litigation! /s

    • III@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      21 days ago

      The defendant has been found guilty. The plaintiff is awarded $4.37 to be paid directly from the defendants allowance over the course of the next year.

  • BillyClark@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    22 days ago

    Fuck Cars the Snowman
    was an angry vengeful soul

    With a corncob pipe and some cinder blocks
    to make drivers barrel roll