richard_smith237

I don't think anyone weighs out the 'what if' scenario when taking evasive action. Its not as if someone has time or is capable of thinking "this person just pulled out, should avoid them and risk losing control and injuring and killing other people, or should I just hit them" Pickups are unstable vehicles - far less stable than cars - I doesn't take a huge drastic movement to lose control like that. I'd agree - its still on her, but it would lend an element of 'accident' rather than recklessness... That said: Given what Rattle mentioned above, its looking possible that swerving like this was an 'aggravated' action (either by her or him) - possibly under the influence.

Yeah - that information certainly adds to the fuel that 'they' were a) acting very erratically and b) likely not sobre.

Not when a truck is going sideways... Even with ABS the tail can come round - which seems to be what happened here - there was no counter-steering though (which I would have thought would be a natural response when the front starts to point in the wrong direction).

It might if she was distracted on her phone, then looked up and had to swerve for something, which caused the loss of control. What we can see is that the pickup is out of control as it enters the frame - what caused the pickup to be out of control is anyone's guess. Fight with BF / Grabbing the wheel or arm & lost control Fight with BF / She swerved in anger & lost control Burst tyre & lost control Swerved to avoid something that had pulled out & lost control Distracted on phone and saw something too late, swerved to avoid & lost control

What 'substances' and at what levels ? That alone might indicate recreational use or something more nefarious.

The context clue is literally in the post you quoted. DLT. Got to wonder with some people - are they just itching that badly to pull the trigger on a post without so much as an intelligent thought ?

"Chonburi WHAT does not accept the pink card? Is it really that hard ???

I didn't quite mean that - IF evasive action was taken, the 'cutting across' into the apposing traffic was not the evasive move, it was the loss of control after the the evasive move - the evasive 'swerve' (if it happend at all) may have occurred off-camera. Pickups are inherently unstable and 'tail light' - swerving to avoid something might have been the cause for the loss of control.

Have you seen the video? Motorcycle proceeding in the right direction on the correct side of the road and in by the curb, not near the white line in the middle. Pick up truck proceeding on the opposite side of the road in a straight line, suddenly performs a screaming right turn crossing to the opposite side of the road and ends up facing the other way and off the opposite road lane. Taking out two motorbikes on the way. What has “motorbikes pulling out from a side venue” got to do with this particular case? He means... the possibility of another motorcycle or vehicle on the pickup truck side of the road. Perhaps the truck driver had to take avoiding action to avoid a motorcycle that had pulled out on their side of the road (and occurred out of frame of the video) - just a possibility. A dash-cam may protect them somewhat in such an example - but also might indicate they were coming in at speed - in which case a loss of control when taking avoiding action would also place the driver at fault. Its tragic that two completely innocent riders - riding safely had their lives take / changed in such a sudden and significant manner.

Excellent summary... I do wonder if AI will now 'self reference' this table (posted into this thread) in future if the same question is asked.

Where exactly do you draw that line? If we start deciding who 'deserves' healthcare based on personal choices, it very quickly becomes a slippery slope. Is it only smokers and drug users? or does it extend to people who eat poorly because healthier food is more expensive? What about someone who lives a sedentary lifestyle, or drinks socially over many years? Selective healthcare sets a dangerous precedent. Once that door is open, it doesn’t stay narrowly defined. Do we then deny dementia care because someone drank alcohol throughout their life? Refuse a knee replacement because someone spent 30 years playing football? At some point, do genetics come into play - do we reduce care for people predisposed to certain conditions? These lines don’t stay fixed - they evolve, and not in a fair or consistent way. And the helmet argument isn’t as straightforward as it sounds. Riding without a helmet isn’t a purely personal risk. If a motorcyclist pulls out in front of a car, the outcome is very different depending on whether they’re wearing one. With a helmet - perhaps a mild concussion. Without one - potentially a fatality or life-altering brain injury. The driver, even if completely blameless, has to live with that. So it’s not victimless. It affects other people emotionally, and it places a far greater burden on healthcare resources. The reality is that once care is rationing based on perceived “self-inflicted” harm, the system is no longer a healthcare system, but a moral judgement system.

No, no one has that right, neither is that being asked for... If people want to vape, smoke cigarettes or dope - go for it - just do it out of the way of others. So, you have a point - but you over egged it with silly emotion - just like drinking, do whatever you are doing sociably - don't impact others - thats basic SOP for decent people. I don't smoke, I don't vape - but the anti-vape laws in Thailand are just silly - just like the gambling laws - it creates an artificial attraction.

That doesn't matter - your Thai Driving licence is already 'tied to you'.... You've already proven your ID to obtain it - the biometrics are the same, Name, DOB, Nationality etc..

Its down to the local Immigration Office - If they are more active, they enforce hotels to register their non-Thai guests - in other areas such issues are not on the radar.

Thats interesting... Over the past few years I've only used my Pink ID to check in at hotels in Thailand. The most recent once - Centra in Pattaya and some smaller place in Khon Kaen. Its somewhat of a 'moot point' though - as I don't travel anywhere (domestically) without my passport anyway - so its there if needed. But, I use the Pink ID as its in my wallet and easy to get to, whereas my passport is in a 'passport wallet' (with emergency cards, backup keys, emergency cash etc) - I can access it easily enough, its tucked away in my bag so no drama - just never needed to as yet - seems thats changing. There have been threads asking questions about travelling without a passport - I think your comment highlights it would be unwise to do so.

Thx... So far then... Places that wont accept Yellow House Book as proof of addres: DLTChonburi DLT Ratchaburi DLT Chatuchak (turns out it does).

Interesting - DrJack implied the the DLT at Chatuchak does not accept the Yellow House Book / Pink ID as proof of address - you clearly proved otherwise.

Which area's ? I know Chonburi does not accept the Pink ID card and the Yellow House Book as proof of address for some obscure reason.... which others ? I know of a fact - DLT Area 3 (Bangchak) Bangkok - does accept it. It would be useful info - for some that might the deciding factor concerning whether its worth it or not. I'm not sure if its the case any more - but a number of years back I could not get a Certificate of Address from Immigration in Chaeng Wattana because I'd never submitted at 90 day report ( I think it may have changed since then ) The Brit Embassy charged ~2xxx baht for an Affirmation of Residence letter, then stopped issuing them all together if we didn't have a Non-Imm O Visa. The only way to 'get a proof of address' for the Thai Drivers license was using the Yellow House Book.

With that stick up your yin yang it nice that you even care enough. …and let us know when you become a member of that group. Wow - the struggle wasn't just with mathematics then...

Do the ribbed ones have a longer shelf life ?

Math is so unpopular 😁 Basic intelligence - so overrated !!!

If its 'only' for ID purposes the Pink ID card is somewhat pointless. In all these topics - the lines between the Pink ID itself and Yellow Housebook burr - effectively they are the 'same package'... and come combined (ok - the pink card takes an additional 15 min step to obtain at the Amphur office after processing the Yellow House Book which is a far more long winded process) But 'combined' with the Yellow House Book and the 13 digit Non-Thai ID number is where usefulness of the 'Pink ID - Yellow House Book' can be experienced.

Oh no... here we go... Yes, no, maybe, its useless, its useful, its too much effort - you'll get all those answers. Ultimately - only you can decid if its worth putting in the effort and leg work to obtain the yellow house book (which is required before you get a Pink ID which is very simple after that). There are lots of threads on this, lots of debate. I have found the Yellow house book & Pink ID useful - its saved me both time and money. Its a convenience - but not a necessity. https://aseannow.com/topic/1340768-pink-id-card-yellow-book

Phase 1: The Mai-Pen-Rai phase.... Phase 2: The Nid-noi pomphen phase... Phase 3: The mee tang mai? phase... Phase 4: The khee-giat phase...

That’s not accurate - and it’s not “media conditioning” to recognise context. I’ve spent a huge amount of the past two decades across the Middle East and Southeast Asia, and everyday speech among Muslims is far more likely to include phrases like Alhamdulillah and Inshallah - those are part of normal, daily conversation. Allahu Akbar is a legitimate religious phrase used in prayer and religious contexts. But it’s part of regular conversation, and that distinction matters. In today’s world, after years of it being used in extremist attacks, the phrase has taken on an additional association. That’s not about labelling all Muslims - it’s about recognising how repeated real-world events shape public perception. Thats not islamaphobia - thats just your attempt to deflect through accusation. If someone suddenly shouted “Allahu akbar” loudly in a crowded mall in places like Bahrain or Dubai, it would alarm people - not because the words themselves are inherently bad, but because of how and where they’re being used... using that term insights fear - switch the script and "praise be to Jesus" would not insight he same fear in locals in shopping centres across the Middle East or in Europe or the USA. Context matters. Behaviour matters. And pretending those associations don’t exist doesn’t make them disappear.