Article
How does anyone ever think it’s a good idea to reach into a vehicle gas tank to remove something? This must have been fun trying to rescue him as they worried about a gas fire the whole time.
I have heard of candy giving someone gas, not gas giving someone candy.
sounds familiar
What a terrible piece of journalism. They didn’t say if the guy got his candy or not!
The headline doesn’t say what they think it says:
That indicates the firefighters were trying to retrieve the Snickers. And it indicates it clearly, in normal usage – this isn’t the sort of error that only a Grammar Nazi would catch.
That article raises more questions than it answers.
Saw a candy bar in the gas tank? How? What kind of car?
Reached in? Again how and what kind of car?
An unleaded fill pipe has a restrictor the size of a quarter so I’m guessing the vehicle had to be pre 1975. Still doesn’t say how he could see into the tank.
It’s nice that they accidentally freed the guys hand while chasing the snickers though.
On another note - who the hell puts a chocolate bar into a gas tank?
And yet another note - who the hell looks into the gas tank and would SEE the candy bar?
Someone who doesn’t want someone else to steal it. For proof of the effectiveness of this, read the linked article.
Of course they send a guy named Plummer to write this article.
My guess is that the chocolate wasn’t actually in the tank, it was just lodged in the filler tube. Likewise, his hand wasn’t stuck in the tank, his fingers were stuck in the filler tube. You know how there’s that little one-way “door” on a spring-loaded hinge? It’s not hard to imagine how you might get your finger(s) stuck in that like a Chinese finger-trap.
I am guessing that the article is just extremely poorly written and by “gas tank” they mean anything beyond the gas cap. My theory is that someone shoved a candy bar in the fill pipe, this guy saw the candy bar in the “gas tank” and stuck a couple of fingers in there to get it out.
ETA: what voltaire said