• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

The media is just full of suck.

tekshogun

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2009
Messages
1,052
Location
Greensboro, North Carolina, USA
imported post

I'm not sure what the issue is here.

The full quote: "Woods was not required to talk to police about the wreck and declined to talk with investigators on several occasions."

You are making an assumption on a non-existent implication.
 

Nutczak

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2008
Messages
2,165
Location
The Northwoods, lakeland area, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

Phoenixphire wrote:
Really? So, in the United States, the police can require you to talk to them? But they showed Tiger some favoritism, and did not require him to?
Umm, I think you may be a little confused on a few things. There is no requirement to speak with the police. You do have the right to remain silent.

You are not required to talk to police, plain & simple. Some mistaken cop may wrongly arrest you for obstruction, but I ask how can one be guilty of obstruction when they said nothing to obstruct. Ever been arrested? Ever hear the miranda right being read to you? What is the first sentence? "You have the right to remain silent" I suggest you learn and live that sentence.
 

Phoenixphire

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2008
Messages
396
Location
Battle Creek, Michigan, USA
imported post

The comment was sarcastic.

And the relevence is that the media is annoying in that they try to intentionally mislead people in order to sensationalize the news.

The way this line is written, would lead the uneducated reader to think that Woods was not REQUIRED to talk to the police as an exception. The fact is that noone is required to talk to the police. The line only makes sense if people could be required to talk to police; this line makes as much sense as a line saying: The sky was dark that night because of the shadow of the Earth. That is always why the sky is dark at night.
 

tekshogun

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2009
Messages
1,052
Location
Greensboro, North Carolina, USA
imported post

Phoenixphire wrote:
The comment was sarcastic.

And the relevence is that the media is annoying in that they try to intentionally mislead people in order to sensationalize the news.

The way this line is written, would lead the uneducated reader to think that Woods was not REQUIRED to talk to the police as an exception. The fact is that noone is required to talk to the police. The line only makes sense if people could be required to talk to police; this line makes as much sense as a line saying: The sky was dark that night because of the shadow of the Earth. That is always why the sky is dark at night.

 

I think we got the sarcasm, or at least I did, but the basis for your argument is not there. CNN did fine on their wording.
 

Alexcabbie

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2008
Messages
2,288
Location
Alexandria, Virginia, United States
imported post

Hey. Guys? Eff Tiger Woods. This is Open Carry, not Open Caddy and besides, who cares?? I was just thinking that if I heard another word about TW I was gonna scream and now my larynx needs some bourbon and honey. Sheesh.
 
Top