richard_smith237

Just curious... How old are you ?... Because at some point... escalation is far more harmful than the insult to your pride for getting a slap across the face... Additionally, if you are young and 'hard as nails' then there is the issue of 'one punch deaths'.... (i.e. where you punch someone back and they die or suffer serious brain damage)... I know its a lot of whatiffery... and some issues are avoidable.... In this case the guard could have avoided further conflict by not following the lady back outside.... although, if she was behaving strangely, he was doing his job.... Could the guard have de-escalated ?... I'm not saying the woman is not at fault for slapping him... but could the situation have been handled differently by the guard to the degree that she didn't get angry in the first place ?.... ... Was the guard rude to the woman which triggered her to slap him in the first place ? (again, not suggesting she had any right to behave the way she did - just curious about the trigger points). 100% the woman had it coming - but could the whole situation have been avoided if the security guard dealt with her politely ? of course, we don't know he was impolite, but something triggered that response... or is she just a complete fruitcake ?

This 'beta' - 'Alpha' comment is hilarious.... people making alpha and beta comments think they are in the lion kingdom or something !!!

Does it matter at all who hits you? Child, girl, woman ..... Apparently not - but I very much doubt he'd hit a child or a girl back... In this case, he'd have fair argument to justify slapping the woman back... she crossed a line...

100% agree.... her behavior makes her a typical spoiled dumb biyatch... But that behavior not specific to any nationality.... Though, this gives the option for 'Brit-bashers' to act in a typical manner and allow their bigotry to surface..

Mango... you are jumping to some conclusions and stretching to projecting what you would do if you were a phone thief to justify your preference not to use 'electronic payments' with your phone... This, I'm interested in - the idea that all of the security, face ID, numbers, two tier identification etc is a complete sham and all phones are readily accessible to anyone with a special code..... If this is true I'm taking all the crypto and banking apps off my phone !!! The reality is though - even with access to an 'open phone'... is there access to the Banking Apps, ApplePay, Google Wallet etc ? All my apps still need further face ID (or my passcode) to work even when the phone is open.

Ah got it.... According to Khun LA the Solar is enough to charge the car... I guess he has a bigger set up.

More of a curiosity than anything else... why can't she charge it at home ? Does she live in a condo ?? or a hut without electricity ?.... As you point out - for those with plenty of time - popping out for a coffee and charging is not a big issue.... Its only the same as popping out and getting a car cleaned...

Indeed... she was particularly stupid getting angry in the first place... Then that first insult, leaning across the desk and slapping the guard across the face - its surprising he didn't react then. He showed some restraint and then she pushed him again... by slapping him across the face again. He didn't need to slap her, he could have been the bigger man... But, I really can't blame the guard for his actions - most will be correct when they say... 'she had it coming'....

Yup... but the title on this thread is more accurate.... Foreign women assaults security guard. Guard fights back.

Something you are very familiar with....

haha - give over... as if you are the sort of person who'd stop and help at an accident !!... You'd be blasting through the junction killing those who had stopped to help..... And regardless of your disgusting sentiment wishing the death of a stranger, I conversely add, I hope you learn and don't end up killing anyone.... though I suspect your 'learning years' were very short lived.

And then learn to read the road ahead !!! In fact, I'm sure he [SAFETY FIRST] is perfectly capable of reading the road ahead, he's just chosen to ignore the danger signs because the locals ignore them.... .... meanwhile in his job (I'm assuming HSE guy in a factory, ship or rig etc going by his username) he preaches the opposite of what he practices. I get his point that he has to take into account of the manner in which locals drive for his own safety, i.e. not coming to an abrupt halt because the cars behind could drive into the back of you as the expect you to 'blow' through the junction at speed... ... I understand what he is trying to say there... BUT... that junction can be seen way back, so there is no need to come to an abrupt halt, but it can be approached with a degree of safety such that one can stop IF someone is already on the junction.

What cars are coming from the left ???? - you can't see because of the buildings, its a 'blind junction'... And you are suggesting you'd drive through at anywhere between 60 and 120 kmh - you are a fool and a danger to everyone around you. Hopefully it'll just be a truck that you t-bone and not an innocent motorcyclist or family in a small car.... but what I'm really hoping is that you learn not to be such a fool and drive with a sensible appreciation for the dangers around you so don't have an accident at all.

So you'll admit to driving 120 kmh on a road with a speed limit of 80 kmh though a blind junction.... hmm... I really hope you don't end up killing someone... you are playing a game of chance. That area is clearly dangerous....

The Grey Sedan did just that - it slowed then stopped because it saw the Trike entering the junction. The SUV was not even at the junction when the trike was in the junction - so its clear the SUV drive didn't slow and stop when something else was in the junction. Where is the SUV ????? As mentioned earlier - careful... It could be you t-boning someone at that junction next... and you'll be legally at fault no matter how others drive that road. Do you stop at pedestrian crossings ?... ... or are you one of those foreigners here who have gone 'so far native' that they claim they never stop at a Pedestrian crossing because the car behind will crash into you.... ??

It's not easy to read the road when you have a projectile approaching at breaking speed from your blind spot. This suicidal, psycho, madman, on his very small vehicle (by the way has no tax or insurance) would have scared that poor woman in the SUV. Some people here are making this woman out to be a monster, I feel sorry for her. Then you are not reading the road ahead at all.... Because, it doesn't matter what is on the junction or approaching the junction, you read the road ahead and slow for the blind junction at which legally you are supposed to give way to crossing traffic. Additionally, reading the road ahead... the SUV was not even 'at the junction' when the Disability-Trike was in the junction... The Grey Sedan stopped and gave way. The SUV driver had no intention of stopping or slowing for anything that was in the junction - monster, of course not she made a mistake which could be fatal to someone else. You have consistently applied a binary approach to this incident... Swiss-man riding like a madman / SUV driver innocent. The reality is different - yes, Id agree the Swiss-man rode without care or regard for his own safety. The SUV driver drove without care or regard for anyone else's. But... you take it a step further and suggest the Swissman is terrible for 'scaring' the woman in the SUV - but she was the one blasting through a blind junction (as it seems many do - but that doesn't make it right).

Are you blasting through the junctions at 80 kmh ???

The white 'give way line' exists on the other-side (south bound)... and on the other junctions... I agree with you that we have to adopt to some of the 'local styles of driving'.... but what we see here is two people driving / riding with 'local style' and both shooting through a junction without stopping with serious consequences - if either rider or driver applied caution, the accident would not have existed. The junction is poorly designed and priority should perhaps be reversed - but that doesn't make those blasting through the junction correct, it makes it dangerous and causes accidents (as we have seen).

Indeed.... And then a Doctor is killed on a pedestrian crossing by a foreigner in his SUV... his defence, 'but the other cars weren't stopping'.... I get that - all junctions along that road are very poorly designed... there are two options: 1) Make the North-South roads (parallel to the railway lines) the primary road and 'East-West' roads secondary and have to give-way. 2) Or, put speed bumps and measures to slow the traffic on the North-South roads (parallel to the railway lines) because people have got into the habit of driving this road recklessly. Given your comments [SAFETY FIRST] - it would make a log more sense to have the North-South roads (parallel to the railway lines) the primary road... remove the white lines, and place clearly mark 'stop / give way' at the junctions of the 'East-West' roads.

You are saying because of the WRONGLY placed white line it is OK for a madman to come shooting out of a side street without looking or slowing, driving in front of an SUV travelling at around 80km/h. Can you confirm that is what you are saying? Is the white line wrongly placed ???.... You already highlighted that 'East - West' has right of way... so how are the lines place wrongly incorrectly... the White lines are place in accordance with the rules of that junction. I agree that the mobility rider rode without consideration for his own safety and was not riding defensively as he should have been doing... ... But blasting through a blind junction at 80 kmh is reckless - whether you are copying the idiots in front of you or not. It seems you still want to state that the SUV is not at fault, because thats the way everyone else drives - copying everyone else is not a solid defence for driving illegally - I don't copy the car in front when it goes through a red traffic light (as it seems some other idiots might). There doesn't need to be - the line itself is sufficient... Dangerous to lower your driving standards to the idiot in front... Do you follow them through pedestrian crossings and red lights ?

In some cases adopting the 'local way' is the only way to drive here otherwise we'd not get anywhere.... or we'd place ourselves in greater danger.... ... Such things as driving with a degree of assertiveness so that we can 'merge' into traffic because people never give way unless we push in a little etc... But that doesn't mean we should jump lights and not stop at pedestrian crossings just because the locals (or many of them) drive that way.... The same goes for blasting through a junction at 80 kmh... particularly one at which right of way is questionable.

Absolutely agree.... SAFETY FIRST is backing is original conclusion because he knows the area's and thinks its ok to drive through a blind junction at 80kms... because if he doesn't someone will rear-end him. I get his basic premise - but blasting through junctions like that is craziness, I don't know how any western (UK) trained driver can think this is acceptable unless they've gone completely native. Of course, we can't drive to UK rules or exactly as we would in the UK as we'd end up in an accident - this is the excuse given by SAFETY FIRST and I agree with him, but not to the degree we go to the extend of adopting the complete recklessness of 'some' Thai drivers as that places us at greater risk. I'd ask who drive in the same manner as SAFETY FIRST a what happens if its a Bin-lorry or truck driving across the junction from the left ??? - Approaching that junction at 80kmh means there's no chance of stopping...

I'm sure a top contributor are these reckless foreigners. Given your comments - you are one of 'these reckless foreigners' !!!...

I agree with you that risk starts with low alcohol levels and increases rapidly... however, the risk is negligible up to 0.035% BAC after which point risk factors increase rapidly. Regarding risk factor, having one or two beers over a couple of hours presents less risk than driving with a cold, while on cold / flu medication, driving while tired, driving while angry, studies have shown different music to be distracting, even having noisy kids in the car... the phone to be highly distracting - there are so many factors that elevate the 'risk level' (risk of accident)... So... I get and understand the point you made - but its better saved for someone who doesn't understand how the 'other factors' are more significant than one or two beers over a few hours. I'm not defending drink driving - I'm stating that 1 or 2 beers over a couple of hours and remaining well within a legal level is not the horrific crime you claim it to be - your protest of such in this thread is a ridiculous over reaction. However, had you choose to react in the same manner to someone who drinks 5 beers and drives home - I'd be backing your argument.

How does an ICE give a more rewarding riding / diving experience ??.. is the noise, vibration, something more visceral, or is that we've grown up with it and there's an element of nostalgia ? Perhaps our kids will look back fondly and state... I prefer EV, its a more rewarding experience than this nuclear cell power. I've no idea.... I think EV's will be around for a long time, government have backed EV's too much, but I suspect ultimately hydrogen will be the best option...