Sig

Yes, I do think they (the majority) are going to say, "Oh, that's a shame", and return to their home country. I like to believe that the majority of people are not criminals. I suppose you could say that making laws exacerbates problems, much like those who argue that speeding laws exacerbate traffic issues. However, I don't find that argument logical or convincing. A country can't simply, willy-nilly hand out work visas to everyone who requests one. I know you didn't say such and may not intend that, but it could be seen as a logical progression from your position. Certainly, there will always be individuals who engage in criminal activities and contribute to the 'Black Economy.' This is precisely why we have laws — to provide recourse against such lawless individuals who demonstrate a disregard for the societal norms reinforced by a legal framework. Agreed, there are unscrupulous employers who criminally exploit these individuals for their own selfish gain, thus further necessitating laws to address such antisocial behavior. It may indeed be in the best interest of society not to allow such individuals to operate businesses.

Yes, really. You still don't seem to be able to comprehend what is written at face value, but insist on applying your own interpretation, reading between the lines. As I said, AGAIN, I wasn't making any claim. You strongly imply that I was, yet at the same time use language that would show that I wasn't making a claim, but that I "suggested", which I didn't and I explained what I was doing, which of course you reject because apparently you seem to think you know my intended meaning better than myself. Either way, if it were a suggestion, as you posit, such modality is not a claim. Yeah, well... maybe Reading 101 is too advanced for you. You need the prerequisite of attitudinal adjustment and reform of know-it-all syndrome. I'm done. No use in continuing... Have a better day.

I figured as much... It's a bit of an annoyance, but even low brow morons should be replied to at least once, if it isn't terribly time consuming. Beyond that, it may become an issue of casting pearls to swine and be useless.

And the UK The number of Thais working illegally in the US is mindboggling. It seems like every Thai restaurant has illegal workers. I don't believe that's the case, of course, but sometimes it is so obvious from talking with many of them that there are a LOT of them illegally working. From polls and studies I've come across in the past, Thais alone represent many thousands of illegal workers in the US, and they are a small minority of the problem. It's no wonder the US is so strict about giving visas to certain demographic groups.

Your English hasn't shown deficiencies like this in past postings I've seen... It appears that your extreme bias is blinding you. I was giving an example of how places of worship have been and continue to typically be viewed by cultures across the world in both common practice and law. I wasn't making any claim that there would be any sort of "legal protection" applicable here. And I also didn't claim or even remotely imply that acts of war would be applicable here, so why on earth would you mention that? Remedial reading 101....

Why? Are worshipping offenders granted immunity whilst in their club houses? I don't think it's too difficult to grasp. Historically, places of worship have been sort of like sanctuaries, and in some cases, legally such. Culturally, I think it can be pretty easily understood in Thailand, if you imagine a bunch of police coming to a Buddhist temple for a random check on worshipers for their passports and/or ID, I believe it would be highly likely be considered to be incredibly disrespectful. I could be wrong, but unless there were some clear reason of suspicion of a crime occurring or having occurred on the premises, I really doubt it would happen. I know that if it happened in some countries, it would be expected that there would be some serious public outcry and possibly lawsuits. This protection can also be seen in how places of worship are given special consideration during war, when it is considered a war crime under international humanitarian law to attack a place of worship and specifically prohibited under various international treaties and conventions, such as the Geneva Conventions.

well that didn't work Hard to know... Good luck can come in funny ways. It might have taken out some ne'er-do-wells! 😅 In reality, sad for those bystanders who may be suffering for a while to come...

Yep, about the same amount of time for me, since 2000 and I've been to one national park. My Thai friends paid because they were too upset to let me pay that and felt they sort of needed to apologize by paying for me. I was new to Thailand at that time, but I never went to another place that set charges like that. For one, it is too humiliating for both oneself as well as any Thai friends one is with, and secondly, it is a detestable policy to abide by, so I pass. I'd love to go to many of those places, but I find alternative destinations and smaller operations to support financially.

Ok, no need to read further when you have idiots saying nonsense like this. They instantly prove that whatever issue they're dealing with is a non-issue. So-called "overtourism" is not the issue. The issue is horrific mismanagement and corruption in the tourism sector.

lol I meant for digging, approximately 6 feet....

Of course there were no signs of illegal activity! How could there be such a thing in the most family friendly tourist venue in the country!

Hopefully there's no key involved, but maybe a shovel.

And I guess you'd be fitting to wear a tight brown uniform....

Hard to fathom that an educated, moral person could write this. Maybe it's a safe assumption to make that you are neither? Answers to your questions: 1. Is it really a crime to find money sitting in an ATM machine? Of course, no. And nobody was suggesting that it is. And nobody suggested that the thieving couple did anything wrong in discovering the money there. 2. What person would not take it if you saw it sitting there? A normal moral person. A person who is not a thief. What kind of person would take that money, rather than safeguard it for the person who might even be a poor person for whom that could be a massive amount of money and could cause tremendous hardship for, if it were lost? That kind of person, from what I gather from your comment would apparently include you. It would be an immoral, self-centered piece of trash that has no business being free in society bringing problems, likely everywhere they go. They should be locked up and have their freedom taken away from them, while being educated and taught how they need to behave in society. For a crime like this, I'd give them 3 months in jail with a penalty of restitution to the victim of double what was stolen from him. After the 3 months in jail, a public flogging with advertisement made in the media with his name and what he did. I doubt they would do it again. If they did, double the penalty and so on. If recalcitrant, and continues 4 or 5 times more, put them to death. Simple. Done.

Yep... one would think that elusive, seemingly nonexistent in Thailand, concept known as logic would bring about some change here. But... initiatives? lol --> TIT