Watch a bouncy house float away into power lines


#1

[Read the post]


#2

Best birthday party ever!


#3

Reminiscent:


#4

i bet they aren’t getting their deposit back.


#5

I don’t know what was more horrifying, the thought of a child in the bouncy house or the use of vertical video to film it


#6

A child in the bouncy house may make it too heavy to be blown away by the wind.


#7

When is YouTube going to adjust the aspect ratio of their player for the content?


#8

That’s what the helium is for!


#9

What if it was a whole bunch of screaming, lightweight children? Or ordinary children, but it’s a tornado? The possibilities…


#10

“Is everyone accounted for??” - sure hope so, or we’re in deep shit… :wink:


#11

I was hoping it would land on a witch.


#12

All you would get is a bigger image of wrong. YouTube isn’t the problem. People who don’t know how to shoot video, is the problem.


#13

Stilettos are a no-no.


#14

It’s not the user, it’s the camera manufacturer’s fault.


#15

Sadly, that’s not necessarily true.

Also, it’s interesting that it’s a “bounce house” or “bouncy house” in the US, but a “bouncy castle” in the UK. That’s a transatlantic difference I hadn’t heard of, and I thought I knew most of them (being a dual citizen with family on both sides of the Atlantic).


#16

I love it that Rule 34 is pretty much universally applicable. It’s not “If you can imagine it there’s porn of it” anymore. It’s “If you can imagine it there’s video of it”. Every time I’ve seen a bouncy house I’ve kind of wanted to see it fly away. Hitting power lines was a bonus.

Admittedly I’m sure that’s also someone’s fetish.


#17

It is because we Americans reject your monarchy and all the trappings of it, such as castles.


#18

No, nobody was inside at the time.

I was hoping for the dramatic return of Balloon Boy.


#19

Ah, that would explain why it’s a bouncy castle in Canada as well.


#20