This is a separate post from the bike wrecks to highlight why I keep referring to motor vehicles as WMDs. First a WMD is a device that can destroy buildings or kill or injure more than one person at a single use (actually the definition calls it a “shot” but motor vehicles aren’t shot, they’re semi-guided projectiles).
First up is a building destroyed by a single vehicle. Family looks for jobs, new home after Monday crash The house was destroyed by a pickup truck, not the much larger vehicle the truck was bounced off of. Imagine the destruction that would have ensued had the house been hit by the tanker truck. One hit from a single vehicle and a 150 YO house was destroyed, damaged beyond repair. This is one of the descriptors of a WMD, the ability to render a structure uninhabitable with only one projectile or usage (high explosives are a class of WMD).
Another instance why I call motor vehicles WMDs is this wreck. 4 injured by out of control taxi The wounded were in a large arc, not concentrated in any one area of the street. This is similar to the spray pattern of a machine gun, again with a single projectile. This is another descriptor of a WMD the ability to engage multiple targets with a single weapon.
The last reason I call motor vehicles WMDs is the Sand Springs OK incident that killed 2 out of 3 people in a single impact event, a third descriptor of WMD, massive lethality in a single engagement. I don’t know why the Iraqi were blowing up cars when they could have just driven them into the troops and done almost as much damage, maybe more if they hardened the vehicles up a bit. Hardening a vehicle is much easier than turning it into a bomb. Having done both the only thing that would have made adding explosives easier than hardening would be an inability to procure sheet steel in quantity. Well that and a lack of desire to live…
Billed @$.02, Opus