richard_smith237

24 minutes ago, MalcolmB said:

50 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

The sheer stupidity of that sign

Makes a lot of sense actually.

Have a good time but do it responsibly and safely.

 A recent poll show most members will have a couple and drive home. So it’s best they do it safely so they don’t cause any accidents with the locals.

You mean the utterly idiotic 3 option poll you created and crafted deliberately to troll as there were insufficient 'options which were loaded' to deliberately give the result you were aiming for...  all very transparent:...

Instead of: 

1) I have never consumed an alcoholic drink and driven in my life

2) I have never driven over the legal drink driving limit in my life

3) I have driven over the legal drink driving limit previously 

4) I habitually drive over the legal drink driving limit

5 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

This one is better:   The Widmark Formula estimates alcohol metabolism and Blood Alcohol Concentration (BAC) over time is based, adjusted to account for metabolic rate. 

 

 

Where:

A_ethanol = amount of ethanol in grams

W = body weight in kg

r = 0.68 (men) or 0.55 (women)

β = average metabolism rate, typically 0.015–0.020% per hour

1 standard drink = 14g ethanol (in the US; in UK, 1 unit = 8g)

 

 

3x 330ml beers for an 85kg male 1 hour after drinking

Where:

A_ethanol = 26.04 g

W = 85 kgW = 85 \, \text{kg}W=85kg

r = 0.68 

β = 0.015%/h

H = 1.0 hours

1 hour after 3 beers, the estimated BAC is ~0.0526%   *over the Thai limit.

Obviously, it starts to get more complex, as the driving over time: 

1 beer finished at 15mins, another at 30mins, another at 45 mins, another at 60mins.

Time since each beer at the 60 min mark

- Beer 1 finished at 15 mins → 45 mins ago (0.75 hrs)

- Beer 2 finished at 30 mins → 30 mins ago (0.5 hrs)

- Beer 3 finished at 45 mins → 15 mins ago (0.25 hrs)

- Beer 4 finished at 60 mins → just finished (0 hrs)

Using Widmark formula and subtracting metabolism

Subtract metabolism:

- Beer 1: 0.0225−0.015×0.75=0.0225−0.01125=0.01125

- Beer 2: 0.0225−0.015×0.5=0.0225−0.0075=0.015

- Beer 3: 0.0225−0.015×0.25=0.0225−0.00375=0.01875

- Beer 4: 0.0225−0.015×0=0.0225

BAC_total=0.01125+0.015+0.01875+0.0225 = BAC is ~0.0675% *over the Thai limit.

50 minutes ago, motdaeng said:

 

according to this simplified formula (not considering factors like body weight or an empty stomach),

drinking just one can of thai beer results in 1.32‰ blood alcohol level!!!!!

330ml x 5% ÷ 12.5ml = 1.32‰

 

This one is better:   The Widmark Formula estimates alcohol metabolism and Blood Alcohol Concentration (BAC) over time is based, adjusted to account for metabolic rate. 

Where:

A_ethanol = amount of ethanol in grams

W = body weight in kg

r = 0.68 (men) or 0.55 (women)

β = average metabolism rate, typically 0.015–0.020% per hour

1 standard drink = 14g ethanol (in the US; in UK, 1 unit = 8g)

2 hours ago, Ray60 said:

that would be illegal, they can keep the car until you sober or you paid the fine. If they really want to enforce it, then nobody who intends to drive home after dinner and a few drinks (not drunk) will ever buy a new car again for themselves or their Thai wives.

That’s a breathtaking detachment from reality. Enforcing drink-driving laws simply means that, like in any civilised country, most people will plan accordingly - designated drivers, taxis, public transport - just as they do across the West.

The notion that “if someone can’t drink and drive, they won’t buy a car” is not only absurd, it’s logically bankrupt. I genuinely struggle to comprehend how anyone could dream up such a spectacular failure of reason. 

2 hours ago, Ray60 said:

Another blow to the car industry, the tax uncertainty has already stopped many Farangs to send money over to Thailand to buy new cars.

And then there’s this gem: the idea that foreigners are some critical pillar of the Thai car economy, and that they’ll suddenly stop purchasing vehicles over drink-driving laws.

Another, daft, rather baseless fallacy - its delusional. 

1 hour ago, DezLez said:

1 hour ago, MalcolmB said:

I have forgotten more life skills than you will ever know.

Says he modestly with no knowledge of the person he is referring to.

What a plonker.

The mental handicap on display is astounding....  Any scraps of intellect or wit he may have once had have long rotted away, now a hollow, repulsive caricature of a human.....

6 hours ago, fredwiggy said:

You start a topic about an incident based in Europe and then make it about a girl that was in another topic here. Why? 

Once again... the provocation couldn’t be more blatant if he lit it on fire and waved it in our faces.

Yet another feeble routine to stir the pot, thinly disguised as ‘informative posts’. It’s laughable, really, if there weren't so many others who can't see through this facade.

Whether it’s an anti-Farang jab, a snide swipe at the Brits, or a deliberately needling remark about Israelis, it’s never about genuine discussion. It’s calculated. It’s transparent. And it’s tedious.

Nothing he posts comes from a place of real concern or interest - just the same old weaselly tactics, engineered to spark outrage among anyone gullible enough to take the bait.

This is another thread that is only about provocation, against the Brits... he didn't get an early enough bit so he 'threw' Israeli's out there too....    I'm surprised he gets away with it.

Just now, spidermike007 said:

I think it's a great concept when it applies to repeat offenders, and it could be seen as a deterrent, the likes of which are which are sorely lacking here, but I doubt that it will ever be implemented. Law enforcement here is so weak, the police are so feeble, and if this law is implemented I fear will be highly selective and the worst type of people will get away with it, and the people that are the least deserving of the punishment will be harassed. 

The concept is great, but there is too much legal framework to make this apply, plus the logistical nightmare of confiscating so many cars.

Best Option has always been: Unwavering commitment to enforcing existing laws:

- Drunk Drivers are processed and charged - no 'flexibility' - placed in holding until bail can be paid.

- Drunk Drivers cars are impounded until they can 'pay' to have them recovered.

- Court date set and 'real' fines and license penalty points applied according to severity.

- Repeat offenders lose their license. 

- Driving without a lincense  (current penalty of 1000 baht is too low new proposal 50,000 baht fine)

As far as vehicle confiscation - the legalities are too complex: 

- Who owns the car ?

- Is it a dual use car (i.e parter also uses the car)

- Is it on finance etc

- Impounding / storing the car until bail is paid and a 'sober driver' can collect is the way to go here I think. 

And.. NO !!...   drivers cannot pay the DUI fine and then drive on, thats just outrageous...   The on the spot graft has to be stopped.

1 hour ago, daveAustin said:

Careful what you wish for. Ok, drunks shouldn't be on the road--cars that is, I'd never drive under the influence, but bikes aren't such a huge issue? If you kill yourself, it doesn't really matter. 😋

I would just be careful of the let's-make-everything-normal-and-cosy here, because all of a sudden you're in your boring country again.

Flawed comment...   have a drink motorcyclist smash in your car and enjoy the inconvenience while its of the road getting repaired.

And possible, extra cost of a hire car while yours is being fixed.

Or worse, a drunk motorcyclist suicides themself while your wife is driving, hits her car...  she she's it all, blood, brains, splatter - why should she have to live with that because some ayhole wanted to drink drive ?

Its just like the 'helmet' argument - just because someone might be on a motorcycle - it des not make this this victimless.

1 hour ago, scorecard said:

10 hours ago, scorecard said:

 

And against kidnap. 

Kidnap, yes it does happen. There's about 1 toddler / small child disappears and never found every day in Thailand. 

Wow... thats frightening....    any verifiable? link ? - thats a massive concern for any parent.

1 hour ago, impulse said:

I implore you guys who have money and kids that age. 

 

Buy them a car.

 

This would have been a very different story had they been in a car.

The assumption there is that the parents can afford a car...  they most likely couldn't.

But.... strict and professional driver education and licensing as we are more familiar with in the West may have gone a long way towards ensuring these girls rode with knowledge of the risks and not undertook a slowing vehicle. 

1 hour ago, blaze master said:

This is a key point. This is a widely accepted practice in thailand. 

 

Question is ......is riding your motorbike on the shoulder illegal in Thailand? Regardless of the social acceptance as that is irrelevant when it comes to actual laws.

There has been a great deal of debate on this issue on this forum alone.... 

I am of the opinion that the 'shoulder' is just that - its not a riding or driving lane, and riding in it is more hazardous than commanding your position in the road and travelling at the same speed as the traffic...  Of course, thats not so easily done on 'faster roads' with smaller scooter style motorcycles.

Others are of the opinion that the 'shoulder' is actually a motorcycle lane - the confusion arrises because in 'some areas' it is - and what I have called the 'shoulder' is actually marked (with road paint & / or a Sign) as a 'motorcycle lane (in some areas).

This inconstancy has led to much conflicted debate...  Nevertheless, the girls were undertaking a slowing turning vehicle, with greater awareness they too would have slowed and saved themselves....  

A tragic loss and a horrific way to die.

1 hour ago, rattlesnake said:

One big problem in Thailand is that indicating is used to show you are manoeuvering, rather than to warn you are about to manoeuver. Drivers will often start indicating and switching lanes/turning at the exact same time and expect other road users to adapt.

Yep... I've noticed that too...  

1 hour ago, rattlesnake said:

1 hour ago, quake said:

 

Side mirror, its a big truck

 

Indeed, and they typically have several mirrors to see all angles.

They do, but there are also blind spots...     undertaking a slowing truck as it approaches an entrance way to a petrol station does show an exception lack of foresight on the motorcycle riders behalf... 

Its why 'rider / driver training' is so important - and why so many here place themselves in positions of grave risks that seem madness to many outside observers...  

Its doubtful the rider had any training at all - but training and education of the risks when undertaking may well have saved her life.

1 minute ago, dddave said:

Many times every day I see families such as this family, four-up on a motorbike, frequently one child in front practically overhanging the handlebars. More often than not, the children are not wearing any form of head protection.  

I can somewhat understand adults making the decision for themselves not to bother with head gear, they are after all, adults, albeit idiots

To not care enough about your kid's well being to provide that child with head protection is criminal negligence

100% agree....   While this tragic incident is the result of the car driver’s actions in turning across their path, it’s difficult. As harsh as it may seem, the parents of the poor deceased child are surely complicit for at least not protecting her with a helmet. 

I fully recognise the financial pressures that compel many families, unable to afford a car, to rely on motorcycles. I also recognise that riding as a family of four on a motorcycle is deeply ingrained in the local culture. However, what continues to astonish me is the reckless indifference shown by the sheer number of children I see on motorcycles without helmets. It’s a risk no parent should take.

2 minutes ago, Beerzy65 said:

Its strange how Thailand's safety laws don't include the car's locking mechanism is disabled if the key is in the car lock

.... this comment doesn't seem to make any sense... 

Cars are no longer locked / unlocked with a key, but with a remote keyfob... 

Any older cars that use a key pre-date any auto-locking tech.

Just now, PETERTHEEATER said:

Why could the car not be unlocked using the remote or key carried by the parent?

.....because they were stupid and careless enough to also leave the keys inside the car with a 1 year old child....  

1 minute ago, KhunLA said:

I'm waiting to read about an accident that wasn't driver error, usually driving too fast for conditions.  Maybe some year, before I die. 

 

OK, road work on Rama 2 collapsing in front of or on one's car ...

... but that's it.  Or Phuket hill collapsing while driving over it 

Come on... None of them are ever driver error...  Brakes fail.... the roads are too slippery due to rain... some roads are too steep...  or the roads are too dark....     of course, none of this is the fault of the driver when they crash !!!..  

On 5/10/2025 at 3:53 PM, redwood1 said:

Well Grabs new taxi area on level 1 section 4 is pretty new and this is the first time I have used it....I was disappointed with how the prices were higher than expected......Just letting everyone know there are no cheaper rides there.... 

Grabs prices have been increasing for months... For regular service in and around Bangkok and their 'busy period' surcharging is much higher as well...    I've 'nearly' stopped using them and mostly choose bolt instead.

17 hours ago, MalcolmB said:

17 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

Well done 'award winner'...     so desperate to be relevant - hilarious... 

.. 

 

 

 

 

Gee another award, I hadn’t seen that one, thanks for the head up and proving my point. 
I think that is the first time you have ever admitted you were wrong.

Nice to see you finally growing up.

We will make a man out of you yet.

 

... still so desperate...   & so easy to catch your pathetic lying... 

You had seen it, you boasted about it with pathetic pride on April 24th...     

Way to go you 'award winner' you !!!! 

Just now, MalcolmB said:

Oh dear, looks like our resident snowflake has been triggered again.

 

Suprisingly you haven’t contradicted the report yet and given us your own version of “what really happened”. 

Most popular thread of the day like my poll yesterday. There will always be the same handful of muppets that get their knickers twisted in a knot. There is only seven of you. 
 

Meanwhile I just keep racking up awards from the AN team and thanked by the silent majority in my inbox

 

Stay tuned. Tomorrows thread is going to be a chart topper.

Well done 'award winner'...     so desperate to be relevant - hilarious... 

..