hobz

53 minutes ago, lvr181 said:

And you're certain that none of the drivers were on drugs (legal or otherwise) or alcohol?

 

(rhetorical question)

Accidents didn't go up when they legalized cannabis in Colorado. Perhaps because legalization doesn't make more drug users. Or perhaps because cannabis users drive safely. Who knows.

6 minutes ago, Krataiboy said:

Obviously just a coincidence that this populist measure is being hustled through shortly before a general election.

Yeah, but isn't this how politics should work? I mean, politicians and leaders should always give people what people want. As long as what people want is reasonable. I mean, dictator or elected, they are supposed to be good to their people.

43 minutes ago, lvr181 said:

Thank you for your "creative" thinking.

Thanks for thinking I made it up.

It's facts.

Legalization/decriminalization prevents deaths.

So if you care about people you are for legalization/decriminalization.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/portugal-decriminalised-drugs-14-years-ago-and-now-hardly-anyone-dies-from-overdosing-10301780.html

25 minutes ago, Peasandmash said:

"I passed my car Licience , motor cycle Licience and 2 different classes of Truck Licience all while high on Marijuana!!"

 

there's a difference between smoking marijuana, being high and being delusional. Let me see,,, you drive well enough to pass several driving tests when you were high. At the very least,  you're a danger to the community. 

I would rather share the road with high people (friendly, cautious) than share the road with tired and angry people. 

10 minutes ago, seancbk said:

 

Actually several of my friends have died as a result of drug use.  Suicides and overdoses.  But more of them have died in road accidents and I still use cars and motorbikes.

Was drugs illegal when your people died? Did the law prevent their deaths? No. 

16 minutes ago, lvr181 said:

Until you or a member of your family lose a life to one of them. 

Making drugs illegal will not prevent my family members to take drugs. All it does is make it harder for my family members to get clean drugs and know what is in them. Most overdoses happen because the drugs are suddenly much stronger or they are tainted with fentanyl. Making it legal reduces deaths and harm from drugs. Also it saves taxpayer money that can be used to catch rapists and killers. Maybe when you or your family members gets raped or killed you will reconsider where you want your tax money to be spent.

9 hours ago, sirineou said:

 Laws a la Carte where the subject should be allowed when the laws apply or not.  Interesting concept.

Lane change signals. only if other cars are around if subject thinks there are no other cars around , no need to signal, what can go wrong with that?

  No other cars coming , why wait for a red light? Waste of time

No one around,  light a cigaret, If someone shows up while you are smocking, no problem, extinguish your cigarette, bring out your personal,HEPA equipped,  air scrubber, Problem solved.

 

I see your points, can't have laws like that. But in reality this is how most smokers do it, they walk away from people, and if people come they put it out or they walk further away. At least that's how I did it when I used to smoke, and i've seen other operate in the same fashion. It's a matter of showing respect and consideration, something that most people have naturally, but for some people it needs to be enforced with laws. Since laws are not as flexible they tend to hit both good and bad.  

8 hours ago, mommysboy said:

I guess I just never take much notice- it doesn't bother me.  I'll keep a look out. But I think this is grossly over-egged, and it really can't hurt or smell that much.

grossly over-egged,,, no, it's not a big deal, nobody said its a big deal, just it should be made illegal, if the law is broken a small fine will be paid,, we are not talking about jail sentences or huge fines are we? literally the smallest possible penalty, that is, a small fine. How can that be grossly over-egged?

can't hurt or smell that much? Yes it can. 

"There are, however, lingering concerns about whether the authorities will be able to efficiently control marijuana once it is allowed for patients to use at home. "

This is beyond stupid statement. They already can't control it when it's illegal. I hate these anti-drug fantasies where if something is illegal its controlled. Marijuana is and always will be everywhere wether its legal or not. 

1 hour ago, Aatsi said:

How about smoking in own balcony or terrace? 

How about if have own house must I run 5 meters from my home house?

Can I smoke inside my condo or in own house?

Your house is private property. Not public building.. Your smoke going into neighbors balcony seems annoying... Might be part of condo rules.

5 hours ago, wabothai said:

Of course we are talking about enforcement.

Who said anything about enforcement, this topic is about law. Not enforcement. Anyone that knows anything knows that this will not be enforced properly.

3 hours ago, mommysboy said:

They are, or should already be, away from you. What do you mean 'away from the rest of us'?

It means it's up to the smoker to make sure that their smoke doesn't come near anyone. Meaning if there is other people around they shouldn't be allowed to light up. I think this is reasonable. 

Compare it to guns. If everyone was allowed to carry a gun and was free to shoot it. It would be up to the shooter to make sure it's safe to shoot before shooting the gun. Can't just shoot into a crowd and say "I'm free to shoot my gun! The crowd should had stayed home".

Ofcourse I'm not comparing gunfire to cigarette smoke. I'm just making a logical point about responsibility.

On the other hand if someone deliberately runs across an active gun range it's that persons fault for getting shot.

Same goes if someone tries to follow a smoker who has already gone out of his way to get away from the crowd to smoke. Smokers should only be fined when they haven't shown reasonable attempt to make sure the smoke doesn't bother others. 

That's how I would make the laws. And yes, 5 meter away from an entrance is perfectly reasonable as people will be expected near the entrance.

For all you people making comparisons to alcohol and gasoline cars.

Alcohol is already limited and regulated. 

Gasoline cars will hopefully be taxed like hell as electric vehicles become better and more common.

52 minutes ago, CeeGee said:

In all this I feel sorry for the first time tourist, how are they expected to know all these rules (and changes),they look at Thailand,read all the TAT hype and think,yes that looks a nice place for a holiday.

Are they then expected to sit down for few hours and try to understand all the rules and get very confused when they get here and they see a Thai person(or a Chinese) seemingly ignoring the rules and getting away with it.Then getting fined for doing exactly the same thing.Are we now going to see booklets handed out at the airports giving a full list of what you can do and cannot.

I am not just talking about smoking, it is almost every aspect of daily life that can impact the unwary tourist.(and I am not talking about expats,if you live here you should over time be aware of the rules,just the guy,girl who steps off the plane for their first holiday here) who then gets hit with a fine,

Anyone being considerate will have no problem. Walk away a bit from people as most smokers already do and they should be fine in most cases.

3 hours ago, mommysboy said:

This is what I don't understand: surely there are no longer smokers in malls, sports centres, restaurants, and the ilk.  As for outside, I don't see hordes of smokers lingering at the doorway. I do see the odd smoker out and about who appears to be causing no nuisance.

 

Where are these establishments where one can smoke? Why do non smokers feel magnetically drawn to them?  It would be a laugh if we're really just talking about sleazy bars (nothing against them mind).  You have to take the rough with the smooth in these places.

Any place that draws crowds will draw smokers and non-smokers. Bus stops. Markets. Entrances to big buildings. Etc.

6 minutes ago, sanemax said:

And the law will soon state that you cannot smoke near anywhere , do follow that law, when it comes into force

That's never gonna happen. It has been tried multiple times and it just creates a huge untaxed black market and smoking doesn't decrease.

2 minutes ago, wabothai said:

I would be all for it if they would include the burning of fields and forrests and the blue plumes from cars and motocys.

All those things are illegal already.

Just not enforced properly. Ofcourse the smoking laws will not be enforced properly either.

3 hours ago, juice777 said:

Yeah and apparently 10 000 people die a year in London form diseases brought on form pollution.So God knows how many in BKK, but hay lets worry about a little bit of second-hand smoke form the smokers.

I agree with no smoking indoors but this is just ridiculous.




Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
 

Pollution is really bad in Chiang Mai as well certain times of the year. Many people die. And the government is not doing enough to stop it. Just like they won't enforce this smoking ban.

Don't worry. You will be able to smoke outside. You might have to walk 5 meters but it will all be ok.

1 hour ago, Shaunduhpostman said:

If they were sincerely interested in people's health instead of just attacking people, or creating more pretexts to fine people they'd also be trying to manage the country's waste problems which are largely, out in the countryside, dealt with by burning the waste on site, ie, at people's homes. The smoke from plastic waste can be overwhelming, sickening and linger for hours, especially when people start burning altogether, which often happens. No doubt the very poor health of even quite young people in the villages is caused by the several hours spent daily inhaling the cocktail  of toxins from burning refuse. Cigarette smoke outdoors is nothing by comparison.

They are trying to deal with this. Before in Chiang mai there was mostly burning in March,., they made it illegal in march so now its happening all year around instead.... They have failed so far but they are trying! 

9 minutes ago, mommysboy said:

And so is vaping!  And the simple fact is right now we have a major problem with air pollution which could even threaten our future existence on this planet.

 

No one could possibly get sick passing a smoker out on the street. It's rightly banned inside buildings.

It's not only "passing" and it's not only "a smoker". Sometimes its waiting for a bus near a bunch of smokers. Sometimes it walking in a crowded area with tons of smokers. When doing those things it's a constant inhaling of second hand smoke.

Some smokers don't realize how much and how bad it smells. Its the way smell works..just like you don't notice your own sweat smell etc.

10 minutes ago, juice777 said:

Can pepole really die form second-hand cig smoke from smokers outside as they are walking past them?

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
 

Depends how many times they walk past there.. what if they don't want to walk past the smokers but want to stay in the area where the smokers are filling the air with smoke? Say waiting for a bus, or whatever, I don't need a reason for standing somewhere.

4 minutes ago, mommysboy said:

If we based laws around that one inconsiderate idiot just about everything would be banned!

Actually we do base most laws and rules around that one idiot. If we didn't have inconsiderate idiots we wouldn't need any laws. Think about it.

4 minutes ago, mommysboy said:

I'm talking about outside not in a restaurant/bar, where it should be banned.

In crowded places if lots of people smoke it becomes a problem. They have banned smoking in walking street in Chiang Mai for this reason. 

1 minute ago, mommysboy said:

I'm talking about the odd, and possibly frightening sight, of you squirting indeterminate chemicals at or near bystanders in public. 

 

Smoking is known, and is harmless in small measure.  The fact that you find a puff of smoke (fictional in the main) so invasive points to you having the problem.

 

Meanwhile, we know the air pollution caused by the cars zipping past just a few metres away do untold damage both to us and the planet.

One puff of smoke should be allowed then. But only one puff per person. And only one person Will be allowed in my vicinity. 

As for cars, yes, they disgust me as well and I can't wait for electric vehicles to take over. And also I think most newer cars are pretty decent? I hate the old cars that spew out some black smoke.. illegal too btw.. but ofcourse not enforced by Thai police.