richard_smith237

It’s just the way so many ride here… it’s so moronic…

Just this morning I was turning left (on my motorcycle), car in front turning left. Both of us indicating 

I was on blind it the left rear wheel of the car & protecting my position on the inside. 
 

Whooosh… a bike speeds past on the left through an impossibly small gap & surprises the shyte out of me…  felt his body brush past & the wind off him as he squeezed through…

… made me so angry that he could have knocked me off…. Felt like chasing him down but Thad be silly & I’m not one of the hard men posting on the ‘can you defend yourself’ thread…

The keyboard Warrior in me says yes.

The realist in me says no…  I was sucker punched at Uni… after that I was completely defenseless- so no, I can’t defend myself.

The only defense is to avoid all conflict where possible, never allow or engage in escalation…. I realize one punch or one stab could kill us. 
 

To add to this : I’ve played Rigby at uni am physical & fit, still relatively athletic & plays lots of football - in my late 40’s I’ve slowed down loads - noticeable when playing against guys…

they’d be quicker in a fight too… 

@nice15 which model is it ? Age etc ?

I sold mine a couple of years ago.

Went ti resellers here - they offered ridiculously low prices which left me giving up on trying ti sell in Thailand’s

Put it on eBay - nothing but scam attempts.

I ended up selling it in the Uk on Watchfinder  (similar to Chrono24).

They gave me a price range I was comfortable with.

i send the watch the them, on evaluation they hit the ‘mid point’ of the price range & I was satisfied with the sale. (Explorer II). 
 

There are some Rolex watch groups on Facebook - plenty of ppl selling, but obviously you need to be careful weeding out the scammers - only ever sell privately in person. 
 

I've brought loads of stuff into Thailand in rather conspicuous packages... 

- Bike (ridden, then re-packages in original bike box with labels on it)

- Ski's (3x times)

- Pushchairs (large pushchair / iso-fix / car seat combo systems)

- Bulky motorcycle clothing etc.

As long as everything is 'de-labelled' and clearly not for re-sale then I think you are covered. 

It would have to be an extremely difficult customs officer to even bother stopping you let alone charging you anything for customs.... 

Customs at the Airports here seem to concentrate on: 

a) People bringing in Cigarettes (or they used to)

b) women brining in a suitcase load of handbags (in original boxes etc) for resale.

Since Suvarnabumi Airport was opened - I've been back in about 6-10x per year (except Covid) and was only once asked to put one of my bags through the x-ray by customs and even then they were disinterested. 

Thus: I would suggest, go ahead...   its very unlikely you will face issues - people come here all the time for Traithlons etc....  (you could add a little 'mud to your bike' just to make sure you can show its 'used'... 

12 minutes ago, Lancelot01 said:

Many thanks. Yes I'm fit and healthy so I'll go and speak with my local hospital. 

Note - Most hospitals will not carry the Yellow Fever Vaccine, because there is no need for it in Thailand. 

Additionally - most hospitals will not have the Yellow Fever Vaccination Booklet...

... otherwise known as the 'International Certificate of Vaccination' (WHO approved format).

You will need a copy of this Certificate (*Yellow Booklet) at border control when travelling from an Country where Yellow Fever is a risk.

And... I want to deal with this point separately.

19 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

I get it. You live in a country where people are stupid. They don't switch off their engines at petrol stations, or wear helmets when driving scooters.

 

Therefore, that entitles you to be stupid too.

Firstly, the people of Thailand are not stupid - thats an insult to the many highly intelligent folk here. 

But, I would agree that it a 'national habit' not to turn off the vehicles while refuelling.

There are approximately 44 million vehicles on Thailands roads, 11.8 million of which are family cars. 

Assuming a family refills their car every week - thats 613,600,000 refuelling events each year.

1.68 Million refuelling events each day...  the vast majority of drivers are not turning off their vehicle - then why are there no daily 'vehicle triggered ignitions events'  if the risk is as high as you are implying ???

Could it be that the risk is so infinitesimally insignificant - its virtually non existent ???

Driving the roads themselves present significantly greater risk to well being that leaving the engine running while filling the car and thus...    when placed in balance with other factors of far greater risk, the thought of one getting their knickers in a twist about turning off an engine while refuelling is as earlier mentioned, really over egging it.... 

I wanted to deal with this point separately: 

18 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

While refuelling a car, gasoline vapours escape. They are heavier than air, and can travel considerable distances - more than 10 metres.

Do these heavier than air gasoline vapours miraculously miraculously disperse the moment refuelling is complete and we re-start the car / turn the ignition ?

Or would you suggest that all petrol station forecourts have massive fan (bug blower) to disperse any 'heavier than air' gasoline fumes that have pooled around the vehicle ?

IF the risk of ignition exists during the process of refuelling itself, surely the same risk exists seconds after refuelling is complete and the car is re-started ??....  

I want to approach this debate from a scientific aspect rather than an emotional perspective - If parking attendants ask me to turn off the car, I'm happy to do so... The reason I don't usually bother is because I dont consider keeping the engine running to present any additional risk.

Also consider - If there were additional risk.. then the methods we use to refuel our vehicles are quite flawed...  of course, they are not, otherwise we'd see fires all the time.

Just now, Lacessit said:

The #1 rule in most Western countries at a fuel station is to switch off the engine. Rules are not conjured out of thin air, they are there for a reason. Risk management.

 

While refuelling a car, gasoline vapours escape. They are heavier than air, and can travel considerable distances - more than 10 metres.

 

Obviously, you live in a perfect world where no attendant overfills the tank of a car.

 

I get it. You live in a country where people are stupid. They don't switch off their engines at petrol stations, or wear helmets when driving scooters.

 

Therefore, that entitles you to be stupid too.

 

I don't disagree with any of information you are providing - but consider the 'reaction' somewhat over cooked and sanctimonious... 

... Do you really consider the act of filling your car with Petrol to be so risky that a running engine will be the difference between a fire starting and not ???

IF the risks were so high, we'd have massive fans dispersing the fumes...

The greatest risk is actually re-starting the car - which generates energy / electrical surges / spikes it is at this point there is a greater risk of 'ignition' but only in an environment where the LEL has been exceeded.

The real reason we are asked to turn of our engines - On some much older cars the fuel input could be close to the engine, the risk exists when fuel can leak onto a hot engine and ignite - the reality in this situation is that the engine is already hot, so whether the car is running is somewhat moot.

The realty is - these measures / regulations are in place for insurance purposes.... 

Thus: If you want to 'consider stupidity' consider the realities and real reasons... 

We are at far greater risk of an 'incident' on the actual road itself - the risk you are claiming at petrol stations nationwide is significantly over-egged. 

I understand your points - but would again direct you to my earlier comments that if the risks were so high - Gas station fires would be an hourly event nationwide and refuelling practices would be significantly different than those we currently utilise. 

33 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Even if people don't post every detail by themselves, their "friends" do a lot. 

At some stage I was interested in a girl who had very few post on her one facebook page (or at least I couldn't see them).

But her sister, obviously on her friends list, was so nice to publish some picture of the last birthday party with her sister and her sister's boyfriend...

Some people may find disturbing to check facebook pages from their special girl and her friends and other contacts. But sometimes it's better to find out early what is going on and not too late.

Thats somewhat 'stalky'... but again, its not really is it, the info is public and just requires a few 'smarts' to learn what you are getting into...  a very common sense approach IMO... 

A mate on a footie team was once dating a girl to me looked like a harsh bit of brass... 

He introduced her as some sort of 'assistant at a school'...  up to him I thought.

He posted a photo on FB, linked to her... and sure enough - given her friends, the photos etc she wasn't a school assistant...    'somewhat stalky'... yup - curiosity got the better of me - I just wanted to know if my instincts were still 'up to date' !!... 

Another mate on the footie team had a missus who looked like a ho...   but he never said anything about that...   my wife spoke to the girl and within minutes the girl had offered her life story, she did not try and hide her previous in the bar - a nice girl, seemed friendly enough etc...  

3 minutes ago, stupidfarang said:

2 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

No point as there is no such video, as you well know, if there was you would have linked to it.  It is actually on this thread, that is, the video that clearly does not show her being kicked!

There is a video, yes cannot see that he kicked her as the video moves around a lot as he goes down the steps, he did say at the time he stumbled. Only he and the Thai lady will know the truth and they both have their own versions, I belive her version. As for not supplying you the video link, you are a big boy you can find it yourself. 

Looking at the video itself... (and ignoring all other comments).

1 - the Swiss-man is extremely hostle.

2 - the video does not show a kick

3 - Its more than possible there was a kick (but that cannot be seen).

4 - If there was a kick, sufficient to cause injury, would the lady on the receiving end of said kick, not be holding the area she was kicked or at least 'scream out' in response to being kicked ?

I'm not siding with the Swiss-man by any means, his actions were that of an animal, no matter his nationality, the victims nationality or whether they were in or outside of Thailand - the behavior is still that of an utterly despicable character...

... But, there is no clear indication a kick... or even a 'slip' for that matter.

13 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

Or perhaps you could grow a few brain cells, and comprehend your actions are placing yourself, your family, and others at risk.

 

You can't bear to be without AC for the few minutes it takes to fill your car up?  What kind of snowflake are you?

Really - you guys are hilarious... 

If refuelling of vehicles was so dangerous there would be numerous petrol station fires across the nation on an hourly basis...    

If refuelling of vehicles was so dangerous, we'd all have to exit the vehicle while it was being refulled by a 'trained professional' and have fire fighters on standby.

If refuelling of vehicles was so dangerous due to a cars operational circuit, we'd have to push it into place (with the ignition off).

If refuelling of vehicles was so dangerous due to a cars operational circuit, we'd have to push it away from the pump (with the ignition off).

You are really over egging the pudding with this 'putting family and others at risk' statements - If the dangers were as extreme as you suggest, things would be done very differently.

Think instead of buying into all the myths.

And yes, one of you will now post an example of a petrol station fire - but once digging, it will be found that there was another failure beyond the norm of simply filling up a car... 

1 minute ago, Dan O said:

If you think that's virtue signaling then you have no clue what virtue signalling is and your using it out of context. Its recommended that you turn off any vehicle thats being refueled as a safety precaution 

Yes... you are wonderful and virtuous for strictly adhering to suggested safety measures while no one else (mostly no one else) does because its so hot...       

If the risk of vehicles exploding while being refuelled was so great, the 'act of refulling itself' would be very different to that which we see today.... 

If the risk of vehicles exploding while being refuelled was so great, the same risk exists when the car is 'restarted' - in fact the risk is perhaps greater due to the electrical surge of the ignition being turned back on, starter motor turning etc... 

... But go ahead miss daisy... keep telling us about the dangers and what a virtuous rule follower you are !!! 

We've just hired a Pest Control company in Bangkok (called 'rentokil' I think).

Before, someone would come around the Moo-baan with the 'mist' and at the same time offer services to 'spray pest control liquid' down the drains etc...       this year we were overseas a lot and missed that then forgot about it until we've noticed an increase in roaches. 

We go out - then come back and find 4 or 5 of them scurrying around - Its brilliant watching the wife turning to a Roach Terminator, frenzied smashing and spraying... 

.. But, its too much...   and we have a load of roaches under the house somewhere. 

The house is impeccably clean, no food out etc... Yet, we see the Roaches out whenever we come back late at night - so something needs to be done.

Thus: This company (Rentokil) I think - will come 6x per year and spray down drains, plugs, under the house etc...  (I think it something in the region of a 9000 baht yearly service).

4 hours ago, Lacessit said:

Leaving an engine turned on while filling up is a safety risk. It means more of the electrical circuits in your car are active, Petrol fumes and a short anywhere are not a good combination.

 

As our EV friends never tire of reminding us, an ICE fire is 60 times more likely to happen than in an EV.

YAWN... OK...  Feel free to remain in the minority while others remain in the comfort of AC.... 

Perhaps we could 'turn off the ignition' and coast into the bay....  and then ask to be pushed out of the bay... y'know... 'cos those petrol fumes are so dangerous... 

5 hours ago, LennyW said:

Leave your ignition on the gauge will rise, no need to wait till you start your engine!

Good suggestion...   

...  The fan will keep blowing the remainder of cool air too... 

3 hours ago, Dan O said:

Pumps auto clear so no reset is needed manually unless your pump is 40 years old

Its not an issue I have encountered... But the scam was one that was reported quite widely on this forum (when it was ThaiVisa.com) years ago...

One of the stations I recall that was complained about numerous times was a Shell Station on Sukhumvit road in Pattaya (maybe some members will remember those threads).

Those threads are still easy to 'dig out' from the annals of ThaiVisa history: 

3 hours ago, Dan O said:

19 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

They often ask you to turn off your car when pumping gas - so yo don't see the gauge increase.

 

Its only after you turn on the engine again and wait for the gauge to recognise the increase in fuel or not, that its possible to tell - by which time many have driven off and not looked.

 

One of my previous cars used to take about 60 seconds for the 'fuel needle' to start increasing.

Expand  

They ask you to turn off the car as a safety precaution since they are pumping fuel. 

At some petrol statins they do, at others they don't.....  

I keep my AC on, unless they ask me to turn off the car, in which case I do so. 

I know someone will get up on their soap-box and start virtue signalling about the staff breathing in fumes, or being un-environmentally friendly while leaving the car running, or that leaving the car running presents a fire risk etc...   yadda yadda - thats just pathetic virtue signalling... 

3 hours ago, Scouse123 said:

18 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

Did you deserve it ??

 

Are you suggesting that all victims of scams now deserve being scammed ?

 

But first of all... who gets out of their car at a gas station in Thailand ???? - I never have.

 

Me!

 

I get out of the car.

Not me, not my Wife, not anyone else I see getting their gas 'pumped'... I'd just too hot to get out... 

So, you (and Simon) are clearly in a minority - not that it matters...   until people suggest that not getting out is 'lazy and entitled' (Simons post) which is really quite a pathetic suggestion... 

5 hours ago, simon43 said:

18 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

Did you deserve it ??

 

Are you suggesting that all victims of scams now deserve being scammed ?

 

 

But first of all... who gets out of their car at a gas station in Thailand ???? - I never have.

I always do! I never sit in the car like some lazy, entitled guy.  I get out, chat to the pump attendant, count my wheels, that sort of thing....

You have concerns that when pulling into a Gas station you may not have the correct number of wheels on your car ???....     or is it just the practice of being able to count to four that you need ?  

Most people stay in their car - thats neither lazy, or entitled - its imply normal behavior for the vast majority of society... except those who think they are 'salt of the earth inclusive characters' and which to engage across all spectrums of society... 

... Your epithet will read... "wonderful guy, he'd speak with anyone, even while counting to four' !!! 

On 8/23/2024 at 11:50 AM, Scouse123 said:

 

 

If there is one thing that cheeses me off more than anything on this board is loudmouth people using the mantra ' blacklist and deport '

 

You do not know the full story, you have heard one side only, but you rush to judgement.

 

Then you use generalisations and stereotypes to describe British tourists, which is wrong on every level.

 

There are many decent, kind, hard-working, friendly and good British people in this country.

 

Yet you wish to rubbish an entire race, based on circumstantial evidence and guesswork.

 

Finally, get it through your skull, you have no power whatsoever to implement immigration policies regarding deportation and blacklisting.

 

That is a matter for the relevant Thai authorities once they are in possession of all the facts.

 

"Why can't we all just get along "  your words.

 

Well, it's a bit difficult and made even more so, with people like you rushing to judgement and spouting nonsense when not knowing the full facts.

You only need to look as far as the name of the poster to realise nothing within said post is of any intelligence or meaning... Its simply idiotic puerile bumf of a halfwit posting to trigger reaction... 

Frankly, I'm surprised anyone still even bothers acknowledging the fools existence, let alone respond to him. 

30 minutes ago, DonniePeverley said:

The vast majority of British in Thailand are racist imbeciles. 

 

But the Chinese are worst. 

Thats like a generalisation that the vast majority of posters on this forum are idiotic imbeciles - but posting evidence clearly suggest its just a few with dumb opinions !!