DualSportBiker

Well, I've read it cover to cover several times. I found it to be criminally immoral. It's the least important book I have ever read, including the Hungry Caterpillar. FYI, quoting the bible to non-believers is never going to work...

Your 5-15% is more than likely five to ten times too high.

I think you are mixing your metaphors. All I am saying is that you can't state "I don't need to [insert anything you have never done] to have fun." You don't know. It is ok to not know. I don't know about a great many things. What's the expression again "Stay in your lane."

Your reckoning is off. You are arguing from ignorance. You can't take a position on something you nothing about. I am ignorant of the bliss of flying gliders - hence I make no ignorant opinions about it. If you have never experienced something, it's best to stick to asking questions.

Helpful without reservation! Ubon Joe was a legend on this site. RIP.

Is that really true? Killing ones customers is never a viable strategy. Opium from Burma came labelled to give its customers confidence it was quality product. Ecstasy pills come stamped to show their source. LSD was put into complex paper prints so users could tell roughly what to expect. I did several years of prison visits for a European embassy here in the 90s. The guy I visited was in Khlong Prem for dealing ecstasy. I learned much from him. He sold to wealthy Thais as well as expats. If he dealt a bad batch he was given a hard time by his influential customers. He looked down the barrel of a gun more than once. He told me he built up a small group of testers for each new batch and would only sell once he was certain it was up to grade. Now, I am not one for 'argument from personal experience' and I only have one source, so you can chose to ignore it. However there is logic to his story.

Who decides which drugs are legal and not? Your use of that term as your justification means your thoughts on this topic are as you are told to think. You might be surprised to know the issue is way more intricate that you can imagine.

Indeed that would be a major difference. I wonder what percentage of consumers buy from irregular suppliers? Anyhow, that boils down to quality controls, not the reason for, or ethics of consumption.

It is a fair assumption because firstly, when making chemical batches that are metered out in such small doses, kilos of the stuff are produced, not individual pills. Secondly, It would be very hard to get a batch to crystallise without it being mixed sufficiently to have even distribution of all component elements.

Except that there is now a growing body of knowledge that MDMA, LSD and Psilocybin have semi-permanent positive impact on PTSD and other chronic mental issues. The label 'illegal' is too simple to use a reason to dismiss them. As for stating "I do not need them." Well, how do you know if you have never tried? You don't and you can't argue that you don't. In psychology that is known as an 'argument from ignorance.'

Have to come to page 2 to find some sense... Last week I was at a Road Safety event where the Governor of the BMA and WHO reps, senior police and others were also there. I spent five minutes talking road safety strategy and policy to a guy who runs a road safety charity. He immediately took to meet the WHO guy and they asked to come back for a proper discussion. Most of your points above were covered in our chat. They agreed with me then, and would agree with your post.

According to my Thai friend who lives there, crossings for foreigners are now open. In years past I did my 90-day crossing there as it is a fun ride up from Bkk. He told me I could pick up my old habit, but I no longer need to...

That certainly used to be the case. Young kids with fancy cars would meet at the petrol station and food court just after the 10 Baht toll heading north. Now I often see police parked there instead. I can hear them racing when they do, and I'd reckon it is less frequent these days, but not totally gone. Slow steady improvements...

How much power do you think a dash cam uses? You could leave it on for a couple hours and it would not dent the battery's ability to start your engine. I turn the screen off to reduce consumption, but mainly so it being on is not discernible. I have two cigarette lighter sockets, one via a relay that needs the engine on, and one direct to the battery. The joys of having an old car you can cut holes in and futz with as needed...

I leave my front and rear cameras on, but it would still be problematic for sure. Like I said, I don't do it often, and would not be gone far or for long...

I drive an old Land Rover with big crashbars on the front. Not often, but on occasion I just push the stuff out of the way, take a pic and walk off. When I come back I check for nails around my tyres!

You are right, but that still constitutes pressuring the rider to move. He was moving before the lights changed and had to stop when the bike failed to.

The driver with the dash-cam bears some responsibility by putting pressure on the rider. He was moving before the lights changed and by beeping his horn the rider react and didn't look. It might be a reasonable assumption that he would not have looked anyway, but he would have done so later when he realised he could move. The ambulance would have been closer and the result might have been different. Then after a few choice words, he seems to up and meander off. He was witness to an accident and is legally required to stop.

So do you think that their core message is 'times have changed' not 'in my day, we were tough'?

Those comments from old people saying "When I was 24..."? No, they are statements suggesting that times should not have changed.

I moved here aged 22 - had my moments! Still here and I have all my fingers and toes despite riding here! I don't get the 'when I was 24' comments. Times have changed, the ease of instant communications embeds expectations. If one interacts with a 24 year old child via social media daily or every couple of days then that stops. Who wouldn't be concerned? More so when that kid is in a country with a justifiable reputation for large numbers of accidents with, and deaths of tourists. I wrote to my parents less than once a month when I first lived here, I think we spoke by phone 4-5 times a year. Then, when my parents got on Skype, we chatted weekly. We all felt an uneasiness if we had not chatted in three weeks - we never felt any concern when there was a two month gap between letters. I hope he is off the grid and having great time. If you are reading this Tim, call your mother!

Thai schools are for-profit, non-tax paying businesses. I spent several years demonstrating to schools that they could save money and generate a healthy return on technology to reduce energy consumption. Even with clear evidence of savings they were not interested: 16 months to break-even was too long (unrealistic expectations of ROI on capital equipment) their engineers claimed existing equipment would be damaged (too lazy to deal with new stuff) "your product only works when demonstrating. Once installed for real it will not save." (abject lack of trust and fundamental failure to understand how stuff is made) "how do I benefit when my school saves money?" (my salary is too low, if you help me I can help you) When you add this approach with the 'preventative maintenance is for idiots' attitude to risk reduction, it does not surprise me that schools don't care about things that might happen. Only when it has happened will they take notice, and most likely only to say that it won't happen again. Schools here are run to print money as hard and as fast as possible. Protecting children is not a priority, whether short-term with tech like in the OP, or long-term by reducing environmental impact. The school's owners, their COOs, and the owners of the vans and the company that operates them all should be held liable for failures. The six deaths mentioned should have resulted in 6 groups of defendants in court, then prison. The 129 near-miss events should have resulted in fines of hundreds of thousands of Baht. I'll stop dreaming soon...

I'd warrant the ratio of will/will not use the meter to be 95 to 5. "Almost none." is not even close to me experience. Might be location based - I don't go to or get cabs from places tourists hang out.

There is no known lethal dose of mushrooms - understandable to try and instil fear, but best done with facts. Watch "How to change your mind" on NetFlix - clearly stated in Ep.01

These rankings need explanation. How does Armenia get 9th with 7.35 overall score when 17.1 per 100,000 die there? Compared with Israel in 10th, with just 4.2 deaths per 100K? Over four times the rate of death. Armenia also outranks countries with deaths per 100,000s in the 2.x and 3.x range! That is a seven times higher death rate in Armenia that Switzerland, ranked 13. It makes sense to have a basket of factors, but deaths / 100,000 and/or deaths / million car-km have to carry more weight in the aggregation. Thailand is #1 in the deaths/100K category, so they can claim a win in the most important category ????