Why is it when the main stream media is reporting about an accident, if one of the vehicles invoved is an SUV they go out of their way to point that out? Even as far making it sound like an SUV is some kind of life form in the article headline. Example: “SUV Slams Into Gas Station Cashier Booth” Why isn’t it “Driver Slams into Gas Station”.
If we used the same logic to report bank robberies the headline would be “Pistol Robs Bank”.
Well, since the driver is, in fact, inside the vehicle, it is correct to say the “vehicle slammed into such-and-such”. And as far as I can tell, they use the term “SUV” to denote a class of vehicles, the same as “car”, “truck”, “bus” and “tractor trailer” are. An SUV isn’t a car, nor it is a truck. I don’t see anything strange about the usage.
flickster,
Rush is making jokes. Laugh at them. Don’t take them seriously. Repeat, do NOT take them seriously.
SUVs became a life form, the same time that planes and jets did. People don’t talk of pilots crashing into runways do they? No, it souinds silly. Planes crash into run ways. Cars crash into things. Tractor trailers crash into things. Trains crash into things. People don’t say, The engineers of two trains ran into one another, 40 people were killed. Cars crash into things.
Sometimes. Rush just makes stuff up. Someitmes he thinks it is funny. Just laugh. Don’t take it seriously.
SUV is fun to say. It’s not that popular to say people can’t drive, but when you say people can’t drive SUVs, you get at least half the audience’s approval. Besides, that driver could be driving anything. As per that logic, there were just some dudes driving around Tianamen Square. God knows what they were driving. Often details are important.
…Is this really a serious question?
Is it a “serious” question? Just as much as some of the others on here.
IMHO, there is a tie-in between SUV indentification in negative news stories and the anti-SUV crowd and it’s gotten to the point of one fueling the other.