Sign in to follow this  
Jack Bricker

Why were cannons in the USA non-shooting?

Recommended Posts

the one thing id love to see is a technic electric motor MOC built into a ship so it can fire several cannons automatically. something along the lines of: a bit of string with one end attached to the cannon and the other end to a rotating rod (which winds up the string thus pulling back the cannons spring) - "bags not" collecting all the cannon balls though!!

Yeah, that is what I had in mind. If you could connect the moter to a receiver and then fire the cannons remotely. It wouldn't be realistic but it would be cool. :pir-sweet:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wouldnt be supprised if it was caused by a law suit, lets face it in western society there are too many lawyers and too many idiots who dont take responsibilty for their actions thus when they hurt themselves they sue which in turn takes the fun out of it for the rest of the population.

You forgot to add too many people looking for easy ways of getting rich :)

an example here in Australia would have been when some guy got drunk and went swimming in the surf late at night/early morning BY HIMSELF and got toppled over by a large wave and had his neck/back broken when he got slammed into a sand bar... he sued the life guards (who weren't even there as they dont patrol at night) ..... what a twat

We have a big problem with this in the Untied States. We have a litigious society. I can tell you lots of stories about people getting sued and not taking responsibility for themselves or their kids. We had a mother in New Hampshire who wasn't paying attention to the road while driving. She had a small child in the passenger seat instead of safely in the back seat. While playing with the radio and looking down, she got into a bad accident. Obviously her fault. Well she sued the car manufacturer and then went on to make a new law that states kids a certain age and height sitting in the front passenger seat must require a booster seat. We have so many laws it's taking away our freedom. It's common sense that a parent keep a child safely seated in the backseat and use a booster seat when needed. The lady never took responsibility.

My friend's mother who has some major issues of her own, did the same thing as that other lady except also spilled hot coffee on her lap. She sued the car manufacturer because when the car slammed into tree, the seat broke and bent forward. I personally would not be surprised if I slammed into a tree and my car parts broke off. She got a ton of money and my friend got a messed up nose and plastic surgery which left a weird awful hanging skin wrinkle on his face. She also never took responsibility.

It is unfortunate. A lot of things get banned from people not taking responsibility for themselves. Lots of scenarios with parents blaming everything but themselves. Which is why the government feels it has to come in and do some parenting for them now. I don't like it but I can understand why.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha, how about that lady that splilled her coffee at Mcdonalds and sue them becasue it burned her. Apparently, she didnt know it was hot. She got tons of money for it. I watched her interview-she is dumber then a bag of rocks. Some people just need to be smacked for their stupidity.

I own shooting and non shooting cannons, and do to the fact that I never use them to shoot those bricks out of them, I really dont care what kind of cannon it is as long as it is lego cannon I am fine with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you really need to ask why??? Americans love to act without thinking and sue someone for not telling them not to do that. THAT'S WHY! :pir_laugh2::pir-hmpf_bad:

edit: admins, lock topic. just another no brainer question again :p

Edited by Voodoo Hand

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember the cannons when I was a kid having a little bit of play in them, so we would stick a round 1x1 in them, pull back the little dealio, and then flick it really hard. That was the only way we could make them at least kind of shoot. We never knew that they were any different anywhere else, though, so it never bothered us. I think we were too musy building stiff to worry about how well the cannons shot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you talking about the new line? I live in the US, and I snatched up all the 2009 Pirate sets when they came out, they all had shooting cannons. I had a few sets from the '90s that had non-shooting cannons (with the symbols on top) and the first shooting cannons I got were with the re-issue of Fort Legorado.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the first US pirate sets DID come with the shooting cannons, but they didn't have the spring in them, and there was a stopper in the barrel that prevented you from pulling back the knob.

we discovered this when my brother got his first Pirate set and it didn't shoot.

it was simple enough to pop the end-cap of the plunger end off, remove the stop, and replace the spring with a pen spring, which actually gave it MORE power, and lobbed the cannonball pieces clear across the room!

My guess is, we weren't the ONLY ones to make this modification, and that's why they stopped shipping them with the firing cannons (that had been neutered) and switched to the single-piece construction.

I do like the non-firing cannons insofar as design, but I like the firing ones for their functionality. IMO the perfect middle ground would be a firing cannon that featured the touchhole and emblem.

as for the emblem and touchhole not looking very Lego-y, I guess it all depends on what you grew up with.

But what made them unsafe? A puncture hazard?

There is a US law in effect that says any spring-fired projectile has to be 2" in length or longer. It has nothing to do with injury to the eye, and everything to do with blockage of the windpipe. Dumb kids were shooting the damn things into their mouth and choking on them.

or rather, a kid did that with a Battlestar Galactica toy in the late 70s. It was enough to get that toy manufacturer to change the molding on that toy immediately, but the appeals process left the fate of every other launching toy up in the air for the better part of the 80s. In the late 80s the new law took effect, just as the first pirate sets were rolling out, and that's why the transitional cannons, with the stops were released, until they could produce the new mold for the non-firing cannons.

which is why all the Transformers Reissues either come with strangely elongated missiles, or non-firing launchers. I do not know how Lego is now allowed to use the firing cannons in current sets.

Edited by Mister Blisterfists

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The story I herd was some kid chocked to death from a missile in a Battle-Star Galactica "Viper". And then some law suit happen, then new laws passed for new toy safety. The original Boba Fett action figure from Kenner was going to have a shooting missile backpack. But, the new safety laws forced them to get rid of the shooting missile. I hope this gives some insight of what might of happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One think I can't stand about the USA is the sue-happy, mambypamby whiners who aare only looking for a get rich quick scheme (and I live in the US). If someone is injured, compensate them, but don't go crazy with it. Now that I am off of my soapbox. I like the non-shooting cannon. I think they look just fine. I even cut the cascabel (Protrusion off the breech) from the guns to make it easier to pose minifigs around the cannon on the deck. It also looks more like a carronade. I'll post photos soon, it looks really cool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The story I herd was some kid chocked to death from a missile in a Battle-Star Galactica "Viper". And then some law suit happen, then new laws passed for new toy safety. The original Boba Fett action figure from Kenner was going to have a shooting missile backpack. But, the new safety laws forced them to get rid of the shooting missile. I hope this gives some insight of what might of happen.

Man, that brings back memories. My brother and I were of the right age when this happened. We received the Colonial Viper and Cylon Raider for Christmas, both were the firing kind. We had so much fun with them. I tried to save these from the garage sales later but my mom still somehow got a hold of them, and they disappeared. I also remember the death and lawsuit in the news and how disappointed we were with the switch to non-shooting Boba Fett. My brother still got him for his birthday.

BTW, I love the new shooting cannons in metallic ABS. Just bought 5 more Cannon Battle sets just for the cannons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think I remember (don't know the source anymore) that TLG initially released sets with shooting canons even in the U.S., but it was quickly changed. This must have been 1989, because canons were first used in pirates sets and 1989 was the debut year of pirates.

I was little when my parents bought me the 'Forbidden Island' set (my first pirate), and it had a shooting cannon. When I was older, I asked for the '92 Imperial flagship, and it came with the non-shooting cannons. I never thought anything about it at the time, since the shooting came with a pirate set, and the non-shooting (featuring the Imperial logo) came with the Imperial ship. I always just thought the pirates, being bad, would have an actual weapon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.