DualSportBiker

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.