Don't you think we're about due for a volcano?

Read this earlier today. Lol'ed heartily. Showed it to my mum. She lol'ed too.

Why did I write lol'ed?

Can a cannon ball ruin a house? Myth comformed!

I'm surprised this took so long to happen, actually.

Who tought it would be a good idea to fire a cannon towards populated areas? It is a weapon, common sense should say don't do that.

Oh well, a close call is unfortunately the best way to learn.

Hope they don't cancel the show though, it's my favorite on TV, and it starts in 10 minutes :hehe:

I didn't know a cannonball had that much force, damn. hmy:

they were at a bomb range, that the suburbs built around

I got myself zombie insurance from the guy. No longer can afford my dental plan, but when the zombie apocalypse comes, I'll feel safe knowing any damage to my house will be covered.


A cannon is just a really big gun. There are even explosive rounds.

No one was hurt, Sooo.... What's the big deal again?

Californians don't know how to deal with temperatures below 60 degrees F, so they'll die due to the hole in the wall.

Well that kind of blow. Funny, but I hope things work out before Mythbuster disappeared due to lawsuits.


I can vouch for this; even with no holes in this house, its freezing inside right now.

They have de-evolved into an inferior species then! We must cleanse the human species of them!

Californian Genocide? Not needed, they're going to break from the United States anyways and go live off on their own island in the Pacific. We can just pretend the don't exist.

Same, pay for the damages and move off into a more remote location. :shrug:

That report makes the mythbusters sound evil :sadvaultboy:

Isn't that reporters job? To make things sound evil? :teehee:

This is true

But remember, the true evil ones are the reporters, they are minions of satan

if mythbusters already agreed to take care of all the damages there won't be much ground to sue for

Don't underestimate the sue-happy nature of us Californians and vague claims of psychological damage.

Mythbusters is one of my favorite shows, and will continue to be well after this accident passes.

I have always had the utmost respect for their safety precautions, even when I disagree with some of their methods or conclusions.

Their value to society far outweighs the threat they pose. Their approach to science and logic is unprecedented. They are able to fascinate young minds (and stupid ones like mine) with science and technology like no other group of people has ever done.

They have never hurt anyone. They have never done something without using the safest process they could come up with. They hire experts and consult with professionals, they build to codes and beyond, and they solicit co-operation with law-enforcement and rescue crews. What else would you ask for?

I can't think of something I wish they had done to be safer, that they haven't done.

In this case, Risk < Reward by a huge margin. Mythbusters, you do, and will, have my support.



Little known fact: You can't sue for psychological damage without some physical damage attached to it. If the families have already agreed to settle for the damages, then that's that. They are barred from any further claims.

The only time you see lawsuits for psychological damage are when the claimant refuses to settle. In this case, I can't see anyone refusing to settle, because the Discovery Channel has pretty deep pockets and is probably willing to go way over the top. I foresee all sorts of home improvements and a new mini-van coming out of this. These families would get a much better deal settling with Discovery than they ever would get from a courtroom.


And this is exactly why. We (society and the law) don't want people suing over bogus psychological claims without ever having been injured or affected in any tangible way.

Watching that video, and seeing the damage that cannonball left behind, has given me great psychological strain. I'm always looking over my shoulder for a rogue cannonball. I must sue them, for all they're worth!

actually this is not true, you can sue or be sued for any reason at all.

it is up to the court and the presiding judge's discretion whethor or not to sustain or reject the dispute.

watch peoples court some time, people have claimed some really rediculous stuff, and have won.

No, you can't sue for "any reason at all," you can only sue for a certain collection of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_remedy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claim_(legal). If you try to sue for something that is not one of those things, you will be summarily dismissed from the courtroom.

Combine Mythbusters with Extreme Home Makover. Profit.

actually you can, like i said. its up to the courts discretion and interpretation of those legally recognized claims and whethor or not a suit falls in or out of those perameters.

you can sue for any thing, but your suit can be regected. it is a right to sue (all though i think that it is one that is being abused of late) for any reason because it is one of the few judicial defenses that citizens have against the govt. and each other.