hobz

8 minutes ago, tootall said:

Bottom line GUNS are illegal in Thailand. Why do so many Thai's have handguns? Need to crack down on this problem or more of this happens. With all the crazy me first Thai men drivers and I do not care about you attitude will only lead to more deaths. The police need to start cracking down on checking Thai driver cars/vans/trucks or what ever in check points instead of trying to get easy cash from farangs for trumped up charges and putting the money in their pockets

Yeah, motorbikes sure needs checking as well, but a big muscular car can do much more damage.. Problem is that checkpoints cant stop too many cars at the same time without causing massive traffic jams. 

They need patrol cars.. Follow cars that drive suspcipusly or recklessly.. Pull them over.. Check for illegal stuff at the same time.. Not sure about legality of the last part as it may infringe on privacy etc.

24 minutes ago, louse1953 said:

Good,if you start early,plenty of time to party.

Amen :)

13 minutes ago, Deli said:

Hope they enclosed an envelope big enough

Nevertheless, 1 o'clock is a joke for a party spot which in the end created revenue and jobs for many who need it

Yeah chiang mai is so sad right now.. Completely dead after midnight

12 minutes ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

They were being chased by someone with a gun, get that very simple fact into your head.  Next time you are being chased by someone with a gun for a crime of committing a minor traffic offense see how guilty you feel.  They asked the man to get out of his car, that is not a crime despite your imagination and clear fear of Thai teens.

Imagine if this case goes to court. Dont you think the defense will argue that the teens intended to assault the man (or in fact assaulted the man,, (guy threw a punch)) .. And they will use the video footage to show their case, the teens agressively surrounding 

2 minutes ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

Why are you not sure about it being murder?  He is on the dashcam saying get the gun ready I am going to shoot them, he was in no way threatened, he could have continued driving, instead he chooses to stop them and shoot them, obviously he was not threatened and obviously he planned to shoot them so obviously it is murder, no way manslaughter as he was planning it in advance.

We can argue if he was threatened,, but you just won the case! Why did he not just drive away, that's what i would have done. You're right. When you're right you're right. :)

and yes, it was premeditated, so murder 1

4 minutes ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

They were being chased by someone with a gun, get that very simple fact into your head.  Next time you are being chased by someone with a gun for a crime of committing a minor traffic offense see how guilty you feel.  They asked the man to get out of his car, that is not a crime despite your imagination and clear fear of Thai teens.

Dude, i never said that its a crime to ask someone to step outside of their car,, as for fear of thai teens, sure, i admit i would shit myself if a bunch of clearly upset thais surrounded my car in an agressive matter like that,, but unlike the gunman i would just have driven away and prayed that i didnt hurt any of them.. But this is not about me is it...

2 minutes ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

They were being chased by someone with a gun, get that very simple fact into your head.  Next time you are being chased by someone with a gun for a crime of committing a minor traffic offense see how guilty you feel.  They asked the man to get out of his car, that is not a crime despite your imagination and clear fear of Thai teens.

I dont see evidence of the gunman chasing someone,, he claims the van chased him,, is there solid evidence of either one?

1 minute ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

I have no idea, no one does because we do not have that evidence, what we do have is a recording of two people readying a gun and speaking of shooting them before heading them off and doing just that.  Anyway, if they planned to beat the person who was chasing them down with intent to kill them, would that not actually be self defense on their part?

Yes, perhaps the teens were threathened and wanted to end the situation and talk with the man.. But their body language hints that they were angry / agressive more than afraid.. But yeah, thats why were discussing this vital part of the whole incident.. Because thats where its unclear... Everything up to that point is pretty clear (except i didnt see evidence thar the gunman blocked the van in at any point, but i believe witnesses should be able to clear that up).

Also we forgot to mention that the gunman claims that the deceased threw a punch.. Also no evidence but perhaps witnesses can clear that up.

As for sentencing the gunman should at least get the maximum sentence for the illegal firearm.. Not sure about manslaughter, murder or murder one

5 minutes ago, Shawn0000 said:

He spoke of getting his gun ready and shooting them before he heads them off down the road, do you think he could have just driven off without planning to head them off and them shoot them?  You are utterly shameful making excuses for this murderer.

As for being shameful making excuses etc... Im just trying to come to the full truth of the matter.

We can both agree that the gunman is not innocent. The question remains how innocent the teens were, that may not matter to you but it matters to me.

1 minute ago, hobz said:

Your lack of response to my questions makes me not want to answer...

 

I admit that the gunman is literally hitler. Now can you answer why the teens surrounded his car and wanted the gunman to step out. Was it really because they wanted to talk or was it because they wanted to assault hitler the gunman? Or do you see another reason that im missing here?

Super simple question, if the teens just wanted to talk, why did they ask the gunman to step out of his vehicle? 

Just now, Shawn0000 said:

He spoke of getting his gun ready and shooting them before he heads them off down the road, do you think he could have just driven off without planning to head them off and them shoot them?  You are utterly shameful making excuses for this murderer.

Your lack of response to my questions makes me not want to answer...

I admit that the gunman is literally hitler. Now can you answer why the teens surrounded his car and wanted the gunman to step out. Was it really because they wanted to talk or was it because they wanted to assault hitler the gunman? Or do you see another reason that im missing here?

2 minutes ago, Shawn0000 said:

Because he headed them off and blocked them in.

Is there any evidence that he blocked them in? The van looks completely free to leave when the teens step outside.

Do you think the teens wanted to talk with him? Or what was their intention when coming out of the van? Why did they want the man to come out of his car? If you just want to talk the man can surely stay in the car and talk through the window. The only probable reason for telling the man to get out of his car is because the teens intended to assault and possibly kill the man (a couple of kicks to the head of a 50 something man can surely lead to death)

39 minutes ago, Shawn0000 said:

It was the man who was disrespectful in the first place, he was the one who started with the name calling, he drove off saying on his dashcam that he planned to kill them, all they did was approach his car once he had blocked them in, then he did what he was planning, murder.  What gives you the right to call them punks?  Because they blocked his car for a total of 1min?  Or because they ignored him while he gave them a barrage of abuse?  Its pretty clear who the punks were and it wasn't the young people.

Why again did the teens surround his car?

17 minutes ago, ThaidaGwaii said:

THis is a load of crap.  All bullshit.  mostly lies.  It's becoming legal around the world so stop the BS and get on with in.

So wait drugs dont kill people? and the war on drugs does not increase cost for society? What drugs are you on?

4 minutes ago, Wilsonandson said:

Positive Side :-

1/ You get very laid back, very calm.

2/ Everything gets funnier, you can laugh about the weirdest stuff.

3/ Your senses seem to be sharpend, listening to music or watching a movie becomes a different, somewhat deeper experience.

4/ Food and beverages taste better.

5/ Time flows differently, 5 minutes can feel like hours, hours can feel like seconds.

And psychological issues that you have supressed can come to the surface, for good or bad.

2 minutes ago, Wilsonandson said:

Risks of marijuana :-

1/ Studies show cannabis use is likely to increase the risk of developing schizophrenia, other psychoses, and social anxiety disorders. It can also raise the risk of depression, studies have found.

2/ Heavy marijuana users are more likely to report thoughts of suicide and heavy use of the drug can worsen symptoms of bipolar disease.

3/ Learning, memory and attention are impaired after using cannabis and there's some evidence that they are damaged even after people stop using it.

4/ Studies have found some evidence cannabis use can raise the risk of unemployment, and users earn less than non-users.

5/ It can impair driving.Use may raise the risk of testicular cancer.

6/ Smoking marijuana may trigger a heart attack.

7/ It can worsen bronchitis and chronic cough.

8/ Babies born to women who smoke marijuana while pregnant can weigh too little.

http://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/report-marijuana-users-risk-schizophrenia-drug-helps-pain-n706196

 

Yes, drugs kill, but, making them illegal does not prevent people from using. The war on drugs just increases the cost for society. Legalize and tax to fund harm reduction programs. This is the pragmatic way.

This is a great step forward. Drugs destroy lives but making drugs illegal clearly just makes everything worse and makes the overall cost to society higher. Legalizing is the pragmatic thing to do.

1 minute ago, DMC1 said:

 

Yes, just take a look at the first video and how it links up with the second video footage. Until I watched the first video and listened to everything it looked a bit different.

There was really no need for him to overtake the van beeping his horn and it doesn't look like the van chases him. He passes them, beeping his horn and then pulls in - he could've driven off at any point, reversed and drove away or just continued around the corner or even driven at the van occupants. The way he was talking with his wife, he was itching to use the gun.

 

Ok, i have seen all the videos, but what you said about him being able to just drive away, the same can be said for the van at the end. In the video where the shot actually happens the van is clearly parked in front of him and the teens came out for him, not the other way around. 

It takes two to tango..

47 minutes ago, DMC1 said:

Hobz, when the van drives off after the parking incident why didn't he just let them drive off?

Why did he overtake the van beeping his horn (whilst gobbing off further about guns with his wife)? Why did he pull-in further up the road in front the van?

He was raging by then and he knew there was a chance that they would stop in front of him and continue the confrontation, but they didn't know he had a gun at that point.

No one on here is defending either side but some people on here are almost suggesting that Suthep was in an almost unavoidable confrontation and had to use the gun.

He was the one who started the verbal abuse which obviously pissed off the van people, even though they shouldn't have double parked. He was the one that decided to escalate the situation by driving past the van again (once they'd driven away) and further goaded them by beeping his horn and pulling in.

Good point about him pulling up in front of the van,, is this true? I thought the van chased him.. And the van does pull up in front of him at the end.

If you are right that he pulled up in front of the van, then i agree that it looks like premeditated murder (he instigated the situation and was waiting for the right time to pull the trigger).. Still nobody forced those teens to come out of their van...

6 hours ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

Have you read the script from the recording?  They are getting the gun ready and talking about shooting them as they drive off.

Are you saying that it was premeditated murder?

It could be.. But it would require that the man knew that the teens would come to his car so that he could shoot them and make it look like self defense.. I know. Im repeating myself again..

But lets make another exanple.. Lets say i live somewhere in the united states where im allowed to carry and im allowed to shoot intruders on my property.. I could walk up to you somewhere near my property and call you all types of names and throw a pissjug on you. Then i would run back to my property and if you follow me onto my property i shoot you.. This would be premeditated murder if it can be proven that i planned the whole series of events.. You know what im saying?

5 hours ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

Have you read the script from the recording?  They are getting the gun ready and talking about shooting them as they drive off.

So that confirms that he is either psychic, or a jedi, or both.

Think about what you are saying.. He is driving off and saying that he will shoot them.. He somehow predicts (or jedi mind tricks the teens into) the coming after him and coming to his car so that he can shoot them. If this is true, that he is indeed psychic or a jedi, then yes, he PLANNED to murder.

I think he got the gun ready for defending his family in case that it would escalate. It did escalate when the teens got out of the van .. 

You see the difference between planning a defense and planning an attack?

Lets say some people threaten your life (not saying that the teens verbally threatened the man as i dont understand / cant hear them). Lets say u have a gun.. You getting the gun ready to defend yourself from the people that threatens your life is not the same as getting your gun ready to find some people and shoot them because you're angry because they made u wait a minute (i believe this is what you think happened). 

You see, to make it even more clear.. His intention for getting the gun ready was to defend himself.

His intention for getting the gun ready was not simply because they made him wait 1 minute. U know why? Because if that was his intention he could simply (and now im going back to "my logic") have shot them right during the first altercation while the van was still double parked.

But no, he did not. He left. The teens followed. The teens surrrounded his car. And he defended himself and his family. End of frigging story.

5 hours ago, Shawn0000 said:

Using your own logic, if they wanted to deliver a beating why did they not, why did they get in their van and drive off?

You are not good with logic are you? 

The teens wanting to deliver a beating must have happened some time after the initial double parking incident. Presumably after the gunman honked his horn after passing them. 

Why do you think the teens all came out of the van and "surrounded" the gunmans car? Do you really believe that they just wanted to talk? How would that have ended if the gunman did not have a gun?

22 minutes ago, Shawn0000 said:

Yeah, quite a serious crime indeed, and you're right, their body language says lets have a gun fight over this, sure.  But the man in the car saying get the gun out I'm gonna shoot them because they held him up for a minute is clearly innocent because, um...what?

If he wanted to shoot them for holding him up a minute, why didnt he just do it right away,, why risk letting them get away.. Are you saying he did a jedi mind trick to make them chase him and make them all come out of the van to make it look as if he was being attacked so that he would get away with murder? Is he yoda?

17 minutes ago, Shawn0000 said:

Yeah, quite a serious crime indeed, and you're right, their body language says lets have a gun fight over this, sure.  But the man in the car saying get the gun out I'm gonna shoot them because they held him up for a minute is clearly innocent because, um...what?

I never said that the gunman was innocent. Im just saying that the teens started the situation and i never said that the teens wanted a gunfight. It looked more like they wanted to deliver a beating. 

17 minutes ago, balo said:

That video has been posted before.  My point was he started it , not the van full of teens. They parked only for a couple of minutes , he could have waited. 

 

Imagine your life is in danger just because you have a verbal argument with someone .  The man with the gun is to blame, he is a killer and will kill again . 

 

 

Actually the teens started it by double parking. Its illegal to double park. And when told to move they didnt move, despite being ilegally parked. 

And if you watch the dash cam when they all come out of the van like a bunch of clowns you can tell by their body language that they wanted to do more than just talk. 

I wonder if the van driver will get a ticket for double parking... Probably not.. Traffic police dont have time