Jump to content
IGNORED

Tiger Woods in Car Crash in California


Herkimer

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

Do you think Tiger intentionally crashed his car? No? Then it’s an accident. 

It comes down to the definition of "accident".  I've always been taught/understood that accidents are negligence or shared negligence. 

I still say it was a crash.

Semantics, perhaps.

Edited by Double Mocha Man
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
1 hour ago, Double Mocha Man said:

Well, the word "accident" is a misnomer.  Overly used by the human race to discount things we may have had a hand in.  In Tiger's case it is said he was going fast (the speed limit there is 45mph).  And apparently, he must have been somewhat inattentive to his surroundings, including the steep downhill slope.  If I'm skiing too fast, a bit out of control, and hit a tree, that is not an accident.  I could have prevented it.  What we don't know is if Tiger's brakes failed or if there was tire failure.  Since it wasn't his car and he had faith he was provided with a safe and fully-functioning car, then we could call it an accident.

So Mr. McGleno, let's call it an auto "crash".  More accurate.

I would agree with @Vinsk; just because things are in part preventable, or are in part a result of human error or negligence, I wouldn’t say those things would be disqualified from being an accident. They were not intentional...and if not intentional, but rather unintentional, then I would consider it an accident. I suppose everyone might have their own definition of “accident,” but I don’t think Tiger was suicidal, ergo I’d call it an accident. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

38 minutes ago, iacas said:
tiger2-scaled.jpg

It’s natural to wonder if and worry about whether Tiger Woods will ever play competitively again, but there are also other more relevant questions.

 

Good article, Erik.  Thanks.  I only take exception with one line: "Make sure your air bags are functioning properly."  How in the hell do you do that???

  • Funny 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

15 minutes ago, Double Mocha Man said:

It comes down to the definition of "accident".  I've always been taught/understood that accidents are negligence or shared negligence. 

I still say it was a crash.

Semantics, perhaps.

I think to the police an "accident" in the road traffic sense is anything untoward that happened they had to deal with, but for which current traffic laws do not provide a venue to bring charges against a driver.

In the civil sense an accident could be seen as something that happened for which tort law does not provide a remedy in negligence or nuisance.

But there's no plaintiff here, is there? The police are not interested in bringing charges, hence there will be no indictment. Something tells me Hyundai isn't going to be interested in suing Tiger or his insurer for the cost of an SUV.

Hence, an accident. Or, as you said, a crash.

Edited by ScouseJohnny
Link to comment
Share on other sites


7 minutes ago, iacas said:

I think the time stamp is obviously wrong here, but that's Tiger driving on the road a few minutes before the accident.

I'm surprised the van in front of Tiger didn't wipe out...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator
7 minutes ago, Double Mocha Man said:

I'm surprised the van in front of Tiger didn't wipe out...

It's not all that close to where the accident occurred.

I'm pretty sure it's from a few miles away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

17 minutes ago, Double Mocha Man said:

Good article, Erik.  Thanks.  I only take exception with one line: "Make sure your air bags are functioning properly."  How in the hell do you do that???

1. Make sure you haven't ignored the Takata recall.

2. Take note of the airbag warning lights on your dashboard.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


5 minutes ago, Shorty said:

1. Make sure you haven't ignored the Takata recall.

2. Take note of the airbag warning lights on your dashboard.

1.  I have checked the Takata recall list... not on it, thank goodness.

2.  No warning lights on dash.

But still doesn't prove that my air bags are functional.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

5 minutes ago, Double Mocha Man said:

1.  I have checked the Takata recall list... not on it, thank goodness.

2.  No warning lights on dash.

But still doesn't prove that my air bags are functional.

You might actually find that there is one, but it only lights when there is a problem :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites


11 minutes ago, Shorty said:

You might actually find that there is one, but it only lights when there is a problem :-)

True... lots of warning lights on my dash... newer Audi... they are all into lights.  But none are illuminated regarding non-functioning airbags.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

43 minutes ago, Double Mocha Man said:

I have checked the Takata recall list... not on it, thank goodness.

We have a car that was on it. It took 3 years before we could get an appointment with Ford to fix it, and that was only because we threatened to sue them for millions if we were killed in an in an accident. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

1 minute ago, CarlSpackler said:

We have a car that was on it. It took 3 years before we could get an appointment with Ford to fix it, and that was only because we threatened to sue them for millions if we were killed in an in an accident. 

I thought Ford famously ascertained during the Pinto debacle that payouts to survivors are much cheaper than mass recalls? It sounds like the logic holds up 40 years later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


4 minutes ago, CarlSpackler said:

We have a car that was on it. It took 3 years before we could get an appointment with Ford to fix it, and that was only because we threatened to sue them for millions if we were killed in an in an accident. 

Hopefully, during that three-year period you kept your speeds under 5 miles per hour. Or, wore body armor.

4 minutes ago, ScouseJohnny said:

I thought Ford famously ascertained during the Pinto debacle that payouts to survivors are much cheaper than mass recalls? It sounds like the logic holds up 40 years later.

Gotta love for-profit businesses, their Boards of Directors and their ethics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

12 minutes ago, ScouseJohnny said:

I thought Ford famously ascertained during the Pinto debacle that payouts to survivors are much cheaper than mass recalls? It sounds like the logic holds up 40 years later.

That’s the last Ford I will ever own. They didn’t care until I got nasty. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...