🚀 go-pugleaf

Walt Horning <whorning@pipeline.com> wrote:
> 
> "Scott M. Kozel" <kozelsm@richmond.infi.net> wrote:
> 
> >Walt Horning <whorning@pipeline.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Well, if you have an accident, even if it truly is an accident, it is
> >> no longer to be called an "accident" by one federal agency, but a
> >> "crash". In otherwords, it will no longer be called "accident
> >> statistics" but "crash statistics".
> >
> >"Crash" is a poor word, IMO.
> >
> >What if a car goes into a creek?  It doesn't go "crash", it goes
> >"splash".  What if a car catches fire, it doesn't go "crash", it goes
> >"whoosh" or "foom".

What if a car's gas tank explodes, it doesn't go "crash", it goes
"boom".

> Yes, and if the car goes off a cliff with no guard rail, while
> airborne, it may only "whistle" for awhile. (The impact with the
> ground is merely incidental and after the fact that it left the road
> and went airborne, so it does not count.)

Depends on where it landed.  If on land, it could be called a
"whistle-crash".  If in a lake/river/creek, it could be called a
"whistle-splash".

Of course, I'll be satisfied to continue use the traditional term
"accident".  Unless a motorist actually does it "on purpose", then it's
an "accident", IMO; even if there was reckless driving, that doesn't
mean that it's not an "accident".

-- 
Scott M. Kozel    kozelsm@richmond.infi.net  
Highway and Transportation History Websites  
Virginia/Maryland/Washington D.C. http://www.richmond.infi.net/~kozelsm
PHL area http://www.geocities.com/CollegePark/Campus/5961/pennways.html