eisfeld

I didn't say you are posting misinformation. I said toast1 is in a vulnerable position regarding misinformation so maybe we should take extra care when it comes to advice on health care. Personally I wouldn't take what strangers are posting on this forum nor Youtube videos as credible sources on this topic. The CDC and the American Cancer Society are way more reputable, yes. There are probably even better sources. If combustion or vaping is causing the ingestion of carcinogenes and if treatment for sideeffects of chemo is a goal then maybe the OP can look in alternative forms that don't come with the same problems, if there are any. I am not an expert so don't dare to suggest anything specific.

https://www.cdc.gov/marijuana/health-effects/cancer.html https://www.cancer.org/cancer/managing-cancer/treatment-types/complementary-and-integrative-medicine/marijuana-and-cancer.html When it comes to health questions I stay far away from Youtube videos or listening to what dealers say. It's best to try to find neutral reputable sources that don't have a monetary incentive to promote something. I have no doubt that canabinoids can help with some side effects of chemotherapy. It can also have its own bad sideeffects. But I have not seen any credible widely accepted study that seriously says canabis can cure cancer. That's just wishful thinking by the potheads. Sorry but I have a close friend who has the exact same "arguments" and when I refute them with proper links etc he just ignores it and spouts the same baseless claims a week later. If I had a dollar for every illness that he claimed canabis can cure... toast1 is in a bad spot and I fully understand that he'd like to try anything and everything to fight it which makes him vulnerable to misinformation. I hope he can go through it. Good luck.

The word carcinogen literally means a substance that promotes cancer growth. Can't be more clear than that.

I agree if they were to pull all the tricks in order to block MF+PT to form a proper government then it would probably get ugly. But it doesn't have to be black and white. The senate holds a lot of power. They could extract concessions from the house. For example the topic of mandatory conscription. MF said they want to abolish it. For that, they have to pass a law through the house. But the senate which is controlled by the military has to approve it. So that wont happen. But then what? It's an interesting situation because afaik the house can't push changes to the constituion which enshrines the power of the senate. And because the senate is not elected by the voters, the voters can never push for a change to the current system unless they find a way to get senators on their side.

The senate can block any legislation introduced by the house of representatives. So yes, the house can vote for some PM but if the senate doesn't like it they can just grind everything to a halt. When it comes to voting for the PM it's not a 500 seat chamber, it's National Assembly = house + senate = 750 seats. In theory 183 house seats + 250 senate seats = 433 seats which gives the majority. I'm not sure if such a house minority proposed PM nominee is possible though. But I'm pretty sure if something like that came to pass it would result in massive civil unrest.

I agree that a minority government probably would just result in a deadlock and re-election. Extrapolating from the unofficial partial counts so far MF+PT will probably get 320-330 seats. So they'll need to sway something in the order of 50 senators and even then it'll be too close for comfort. I'm not familiar with Thai politics enough to opinionate if that is realistic or not. If they were to bring in Bhumjaithai they'd be pretty much guaranteed to have a majority government. I guess it'll depend on what Bhumjaithai will be asking for in return.

Note that even with the close to 300 out of 500 seats in the house at 85.6% count for Move Forward + Pheu Thai, it might not be enough to have a majority government if the 250 seats of the senate don't align themselves. A whopping 376 out of 500 house seats are needed in order to have a guaranteed majority. Which means 75% of votes. From what it looks like right now either Move Forward + Pheu Thai have to get Bhumjaithai into a coalition or hope that they can sway enough senators.

If someone is carrying their gun on their person then obviously at that point they don't need to lock it away. So no issues with carry laws. 4th Amendment probably is a more interesting matter though I'm pretty confident a reasonable solution can be found. I disagree regarding the expenses. A secure safe wouldn't cost much. I'm not aware of any juristiction that implemented this method but I have not tried to research it either. The vast majority of countries have nothing like the US 2nd Amendment and have drastically lower gun ownership rates. The US has twice as many guns per capita than the second country, Falkland Islands and about four or more times as much as most others. The other countries also have drastically fewer school schootings so they probably don't feel the need. I grew up in Europe. Gun crime was so rare that you really don't think about it. Nobody I know of even contemplated obtaining a gun. And so school mass schootings really weren't a thing to begin with. From January 1, 2009 to May 21, 2018 https://edition.cnn.com/2018/05/21/us/school-shooting-us-versus-world-trnd/index.html I think it's a very clear picture.

I think this is indeed better. But what about the fact that most school mass shooters obtained the firearm from their home or friends/relatives? They didn't buy it themselves so the minimum age of 21 might not help much. But nonetheless I would agree they should prohibit sales to under 21 year olds. This should at least help to some degree. Same for the proposal regarding drug dealers and convicted felons, they are not in those categories usually. And for the first one I'm not sure if someone with such strong mental issues that they commit a mass shooting in a school would care much about a 5 year prison sentence. My suggestion: anyone who wants a gun needing a license which would carry a requirement to keep it securely locked away from anyone under 21 via biometrics or two factor auth. This is not perfect but could go a long way. Subject to randomized checkups and failure to do so carrying a strict punishment (not sure what would deter people enough). Should the weapon be involved in a crime by someone else then get 50% of the penalty of the one who committed the crime for negligently enabling it.

You are trying again to divert attention away from this specific topic. We are not talking about swimming pool or traffic accidents. The topic is about students protesting gun violence at institutions like schools. Obviously without access to guns these mass shootings would not happen. The question is how to solve this issue. What would you propose?

Wise does post cards to Thailand. Opening a Wise account with e.g. his UK address having other side effects is something only the OP can consider if it's sensible for him or not.

If the account is not a Thai account then you can get a debit card from Wise and even have it shipped to your Thai address. So if you have a UK address then open an account on Wise using that. But if the account is set as a Thai account they wont issue a card.

And homicides are about 0.1% of crimes in the country. So clearly we should not care about them and just think about the bigger picture. (sarcasm) It is as much obfuscation as well as it is deflection. There evidently is an issue with mass shootings in schools and tighter gun controls would be one of the important measure to counter it. No matter what stats you bring about other crimes and trying to draw attention away from the very specific topic will change that. You don't need to solve a bigger problem before trying to solve a smaller one.

Homicides by firearm 2021 Canada: 297 with population 38.21M so one in 129k USA: 12,520 with population 332.18M so one in 26.5k USA has nearly five times the amount of homicides via firearm as Canada. The US is clearly doing something terribly wrong when it comes to guns.

No money for food but has money for canabis. Got $10k USD but "can't widthdraw". Probably married to a nigerian prince too. The journalist writing the article could have spoken to her and question the strange circumstances but I guess that's too much work.

You'd hope it would be faster than a printer.

Yes there is. The Vehicle Act speaks of "vehicles" and not "cars". It covers motorbikes. If the DLT issues no red plates for motorcycles then one is not supposed to ride the bike without plates. In reality in many places the police will accept it if the rider can show the purchase papers and if they are recent (as if the bike had red plates) as you said. I think we both agree on the real situation but it still doesn't change that the laws exist and prohibit people from riding these bikes. Most dealers in Thailand (cars or motorbikes doesn't matter) are absolutely terrible when it comes to registering the vehicles, I've experienced it with Honda (car) and Ducati (motorbike). It took months and it was completely the dealers fault. This created all the mess and why police don't enforce the rules too strictly in the first place. The lawmaker should introduce a 5k THB per month and vehicle fine if a dealer takes more than 14 days to submit papers to the DLT for registration. This would probably solve the whole nonsense.

What do you mean by "backed by the local police station"?. And in any case a license plate being available or not does not change the general restrictions for vehicles as per the various acts. The fact that the law is not widely enforced and riding without proper plates being common is another story.

Same as for cars I would assume. The Vehicle Act speaks of "vehicle" and not some specific variation like "car" or "motorbike" in that regard. See Section 27. Link to ininitial version of the Act. I'm sure there have been amendments but I don't have translations at hand for all of those: http://web.krisdika.go.th/data/outsitedata/outsite21/file/Vehicle_Act_BE_2522_(1979).pdf

I don't think motorcycles are different in the eye of the law when it comes to red plates, are they?

It is possible to drive the vehicle outside the province with the necessary entries in the log book as mentioned earlier. Also sometimes the laws are indeed enforced. I was fined for driving a red plate car outside province (dealer paid the fine as they messed up the registration).

How about Google or the search engine of your choice? What restrictions do you know about so far?

Funny because his nickname translates to "searcher" ????

Oh no, this is a tragic loss. He was a shining beacon in times of trolling and bickering with all his helpful posts. He spent a lot of effort curating and sharing up2date knowledge. He never ever missed the beat when it comes to posting factual, empathetic and helpful posts. I think it's not an exageration to say that Ubon Joe was by far the most helpful poster on this forum considering its origin (ThaVisa, visa related topics). May you rest in peace Ubon Joe. And may your post history continue to serve as an example for us all beyond your passing.

Or just pay buy card. No need for change.