4 ms·

Other than the legal side that is only relevant to EU and NA countries, there's a practical side of "trespassing". When you enter an abandoned building you tak

Other than the legal side that is only relevant to EU and NA countries, there's a practical side of "trespassing". When you enter an abandoned building you take a huge risk. It's called abandoned for a reason - it's not maintained. Steps you step on may collapse. Plastering may fall on your head. Some drug addict may leave a used syringe on the floor for you to step on. Same goes for undeveloped areas outside of cities no one cares about (that are owned by some private entity and are not public). You may stumble upon on a wild animal, spider, snake. Find a poisonous fruit or berry. Ground may be unstable, some river may overflow. I've done a lot of wondering around of different areas in different countries but every time I enter an abandoned structure I hope today is not the day it collapses.

riffraff 7y ago
I see the parent post downvoted, but I don't see why. Indeed, that was my first thought when I saw the title, and since it's a very long read, I just ctrl+f "danger", which doesn't come up once. When I was a kid, I went into abandoned houses, churches, private land, and on a few occasions I crawled into old etruscan tombs looking for interesting bits (bits of broken vases, coins and such). It was very fun, and also very stupid, and I count myself lucky that nothing ever happened to me. One should be mindful when deciding to break into unmaintained areas, rather than charge in with a the hope of getting a nice instagram picture yelling "YOLO!".
- jandrese 7y ago
  I'm actually curious how many people are injured during "urbex" type activities? It might be a little harder to figure this out than you'd expect because the statistics would also likely count the homeless person that breaks into a warehouse and ODs. While the people are definitely in a more dangerous environment than usual, they are also likely to be on guard for hazards so I'm guessing the number of people actually hurt/killed doing these activities is very small.
  - slavik81 7y ago
    There was quite a sad case here recently. A midnight bobsled run. They'd done it before. It was great fun and relatively safe. What they didn't know was that this time the track had been set up for luge. The luge entrance blocked the bobsled track with a big metal gate, and they slammed into it at high speed. I occasionally went places I shouldn't have when I was a kid, but there's definitely risks to doing so. It's pretty hard to know what you're getting yourself into. https://calgary.ctvnews.ca/mobile/trespassing-tobogganing-teens-perish-on-canada-olympic-park-s-bobsled-track-1.2767457 https://calgary.ctvnews.ca/mobile/trespassing-tobogganing-te...
imgabe 7y ago
Yeah, life is risk. Whatever you do, something terrible might happen. You could have a random brain aneurysm just sitting on the couch. At some point you have to take a risk and do something or what's even the point of being alive?
- big_chungus 7y ago
  It's a straw man to pretend that the risk-reward trade-off for every choice is the same. A father with young kids and a stay-at-home wife probably ought not to go skydiving; though driving is a risk, he probably ought to go to work. Men make choices based on potential risks and rewards; the rewards of trespassing are at best intangible, and robben1234 was making the point that the risks can be high.
  - imgabe 7y ago
    It's also a straw man to pretend that everyone who might consider going in to an abandoned building is a parent with young children, or that they're going to Leroy Jenkins their way in yelling about Instagram. Anyone with half a brain realizes that there are some risks in going into abandoned buildings. "Don't eat random berries you find" is something most people learn as a toddler.
  - Invictus0 7y ago
    Off topic but there is a significantly lower risk of injury while skydiving than driving.
Nasrudith 7y ago
One thing that always struck me as strange was the liability from tresspassers for "natural" conditions. I mean there are good reasons for laws against boobytraps or other active threats but it seems insane when disused quarries are ringed with /barbed wire/ to prevent lawsuits from fools diving into it. I wonder why "assume your own risk" for any sort of casual tresspassing (as opposed to say fringe circumstances where it would be legally justifird as the lesser evil) hasn't been a legal standard. I guess kids falling down the proverbial well set the precedents for everyone.
agent008t 7y ago
And yet, it seems like the West has become so obsessed with safety (in every sense) that it has become so sterile, no fun. Helicopter parenting is just one manifestation of that. You can barely explore or experiment. Start fires and throw random stuff in them. Is it still even legal to build treehouses? Hang a tire from a tree? Or does everything needs to be certified and inspected for safety, hot cups of coffee labelled “hot”, lest you be sued into oblivion?

riffraff 7y ago

I see the parent post downvoted, but I don't see why. Indeed, that was my first thought when I saw the title, and since it's a very long read, I just ctrl+f "danger", which doesn't come up once. When I was a kid, I went into abandoned houses, churches, private land, and on a few occasions I crawled into old etruscan tombs looking for interesting bits (bits of broken vases, coins and such). It was very fun, and also very stupid, and I count myself lucky that nothing ever happened to me. One should be mindful when deciding to break into unmaintained areas, rather than charge in with a the hope of getting a nice instagram picture yelling "YOLO!".

jandrese 7y ago
I'm actually curious how many people are injured during "urbex" type activities? It might be a little harder to figure this out than you'd expect because the statistics would also likely count the homeless person that breaks into a warehouse and ODs. While the people are definitely in a more dangerous environment than usual, they are also likely to be on guard for hazards so I'm guessing the number of people actually hurt/killed doing these activities is very small.
- slavik81 7y ago
  There was quite a sad case here recently. A midnight bobsled run. They'd done it before. It was great fun and relatively safe. What they didn't know was that this time the track had been set up for luge. The luge entrance blocked the bobsled track with a big metal gate, and they slammed into it at high speed. I occasionally went places I shouldn't have when I was a kid, but there's definitely risks to doing so. It's pretty hard to know what you're getting yourself into. https://calgary.ctvnews.ca/mobile/trespassing-tobogganing-teens-perish-on-canada-olympic-park-s-bobsled-track-1.2767457 https://calgary.ctvnews.ca/mobile/trespassing-tobogganing-te...

imgabe 7y ago

Yeah, life is risk. Whatever you do, something terrible might happen. You could have a random brain aneurysm just sitting on the couch. At some point you have to take a risk and do something or what's even the point of being alive?

big_chungus 7y ago
It's a straw man to pretend that the risk-reward trade-off for every choice is the same. A father with young kids and a stay-at-home wife probably ought not to go skydiving; though driving is a risk, he probably ought to go to work. Men make choices based on potential risks and rewards; the rewards of trespassing are at best intangible, and robben1234 was making the point that the risks can be high.
- imgabe 7y ago
  It's also a straw man to pretend that everyone who might consider going in to an abandoned building is a parent with young children, or that they're going to Leroy Jenkins their way in yelling about Instagram. Anyone with half a brain realizes that there are some risks in going into abandoned buildings. "Don't eat random berries you find" is something most people learn as a toddler.
- Invictus0 7y ago
  Off topic but there is a significantly lower risk of injury while skydiving than driving.

Nasrudith 7y ago

One thing that always struck me as strange was the liability from tresspassers for "natural" conditions. I mean there are good reasons for laws against boobytraps or other active threats but it seems insane when disused quarries are ringed with /barbed wire/ to prevent lawsuits from fools diving into it. I wonder why "assume your own risk" for any sort of casual tresspassing (as opposed to say fringe circumstances where it would be legally justifird as the lesser evil) hasn't been a legal standard. I guess kids falling down the proverbial well set the precedents for everyone.

agent008t 7y ago

And yet, it seems like the West has become so obsessed with safety (in every sense) that it has become so sterile, no fun. Helicopter parenting is just one manifestation of that. You can barely explore or experiment. Start fires and throw random stuff in them. Is it still even legal to build treehouses? Hang a tire from a tree? Or does everything needs to be certified and inspected for safety, hot cups of coffee labelled “hot”, lest you be sued into oblivion?