richard_smith237

I think is fair enough that you, Red and Rattlesnake get to say your thing without being censored - thats a primary facet of debate, but it needs to be carried out in the correct location... ... this sub-forum itself is designed to give you a place to voice your opinions, whatever they maybe.. but to do so outside of the 'main forum' where such misinformation is inappropriate. Anyone reading or posting in this 'sub-forum' knows its the place to discuss conspiracies and other theories.

Such an unintelligent argument, you make out this is a language issue with world isolation !!.. its nots, its a 'disinformation issue'... Your information flies in the face of modern virology... If your information is so correct - why do you not have your on published papers, why are you not famed for 'correcting' mainstream biology ? I'll believe published and peer reviewed experts over a forum troll... Nope - you've made up that 2 meters rubbish - such respiratory viruses can be spread as far as the 'water droplets' carry them... there is no 'invisible wall'.. Air samplers: Specialised devices (like bioaerosol samplers or impactors) can literally collect airborne particles - including viruses - when someone sneezes nearby. You keep making up these phantom arguments so you can refute them - its stupid. You keep quoting that golden droplet of bo!!ox... what answers does nature have ? Natural acquired immunity ?... Sure, that may work over millennia, but at the cost of millions - billions of lives.

In the Ops case, driving very slightly over the limit is quite different from driving after 12-14 beers. It could be argued that there exists a moral "grey area," where being slightly over the limit doesn't necessarily reflect the same socially unacceptable behavior of someone who is undeniably impaired and clearly exceeds the limit.... One is a minor lapse in judgment, perhaps even uncharacteristic, the other is pure idiocy and shows complete disregard for anyone else.

Looking at this with balance, the suggestion that he was 'sloshed' is a strong exaggeration: - He registered 'under' the England DUI limit. - He registered 'under' the Thai full license limit. - He registered 'slightly over' the Thai Temp license (no license) limit. Had he 'blown' 30-60mins later - his body would have already metabolised the alcohol and he'd have been under that lower limit. Its arguable of course, but its likely after that at that 'lower limit' his driving was completely unimpaired... a little different to being twice over over the full legal limit where your scorn would be wholly valid.

70-80 grams is how many shots ? I'm assuming he means 70-80 ml... In which case - 70-80ml of whisky would be 3x standard UK shots (which are 25ml). Which is about this much:

Look at you trying to desperately shoe-horn in an argument - Its rather amusing... Whether the comment used 'maybe' or not, it was rather direct, short and to the point, just as your attempts to call me a 'condescending prat' are... Are you one of those snowflakes without a spine who pee their panties when a policeman stops them ? ... is that why you're aligning yourself with those who do not understand Mango's comment ?

Wrong again, Dickie. The use of "maybe" is a suggestion, therefore not direct. I explain the difference, as you appear to be somewhat hard of learning. "you are a condescending prat" vs "Maybe, you are a condescending prat" But you didn’t use the word ‘maybe’…. so try again…. Apologies if you’re upset and think I’m condescending & looking down on you… I am.

Put you on an island & leave you unvaccinated ??? … you need antibiotics?

Those idiots I’m acquainted with though football who’ve been caught & had to go back to the station the following morning & taken to court…. Especially on the weekend when a few of the twits have been caught. ** (m)

Welcome back after your ban !! … bet you went through a few pairs of incontenence panties while counting down the clock when this thread lit up !!

An indirect & unnecessary snide comment. Wrong - it was very direct, no hidden meaning, nothing snide about it !! Learn your language !

Yes there was, drunk driving and the need tp appear in court the next morning. In which case every such example results in an overnight stay in jail which is not the case. Hence, the jail stay was uncharacteristic of the conventional response to such an offence.

Stopping for traffic lights, I recall getting pulled over to the side for speeding... the policeman said a police officer with a speed camera caught me further up the road... I asked how fast I was going, the officer couldn't tell me.... I asked him what the speed limit was - he said 95 kmh (I knew it was 90) - then walked away. Another officer came to the window, I asked the same questions, he couldn't tell me the speed but told me the limit was 90 kmh. ... I knew this game... I called both officers to come to the door (of my car) and pointed out of if they can't tell me the speed limit, where is the proof... Show me proof and write me an official ticket. Their response... OK.. Please drive carefully... I thanked them for their concern and drove on. Its perfectly acceptable to challenge things politely when we know we are not in the wrong - the BiB here are humans like everyone else.

I think you were correct with your original assumptions, my point was that he could also have been locked up in parts of the UK at these levels as what you are quoting as a UK limit is much lower in Scotland. Agreed - I was mistaken when quoting the UK level... I should have written the England and Wales Level. The DUI limits for Scotland are less - and the same as Thailand (full licence) at: 22 micrograms per 100 ml / equivalent to 0.05% BAC

School of Hard Knocks followed by the University of life ?????

Nothing wrong with that at all - Enjoy !!!...

I can understand that, people don't like being wrong or called out for their rubbish and take things personally and get defensive.... I've called you out for attacking another poster with flawed commentary - naturally you don't like it because you lack the emotional tools to sit back and recognise your commentary was flawed... You will probably read MangoKorats latest comment, recognise that you were incorrect -but face and ego will prevent you from openly admitting that.

Only in parts of the UK. In others it's 22 micrograms or 0.05% BAC so the OP could have been locked up there too. Valid point: I may well have been wrong in my initial assesment of the Ops numbers: It actually depends on the exact units the Op was measured with. He was given a percentage and a 27 value - which is somewhat contradictory... Thus: his value could have been: 0.027% BAC equivalent... ..which is under the UK limit (of 0.08% BAC) / 35 micrograms per 100 ml Or 27 micrograms per 100 ml which as you rightly point out is over The Thailand limit of 22 micrograms per 100 ml / equivalent to 0.05% BAC Thus: The Op hasn't been quite specific in his figures - I went with the % and BAC equivalent but may have been mistaken and his reading was actually 27 micrograms per 100 ml... in which case he was over even with a standard driving license (but still under the equivalent UK limits).

Again - a perfectly reasonable response and wholly accurate example of normal life in Thailand. Those who don't see things in a similar manner are either limited in the experiences, perhaps due to only being in certain area's of Thailand (such as central Pattaya) etc... and project from that experience, or they simply have not been here to garner sufficient well informed base of understanding.

The continued problem you have with your barstool Richard is that its higher than everyone elses, its why you are always looking down your nose at people who dare challenge you. I don't... I’m no stranger to sharp, reasoned debate - many here challenge me with arguments of substance and intellect. You, however, now take offence not because I condescend, but because your flimsy notions collapse under the weight of basic common sense. It’s not that I’m looking down on you; it’s that you're craning your neck to glimpse the lowest rung of reason and you now get defensive.

Always makes me giggle when posters think they can large it up by saying how long they have been here, what you trying to say, you haven't been here as long as me? 🤣 I've been here for long enough to know how things work here... thats not 'larging it up' ye daftie, its simple fact. I don't disagree with your comments on corruption - its part of the game we have to get involved with here to make life simpler and avoid delays etc... but other 'disagreements' you expressed with MangoKorat highlight your flawed opinions... i.e. you stated he needs to take a reality check, when his driving here is perfectly legal etc... ... you've only sought to contradict him deliberately avoiding common ground that lengthy experience if being here brings... This indicates you either live in a very different area of Thailand (i.e. a farang Ghetto in Pattaya) or you are simply inexperienced to the realities of general life in Thailand - particularly when it comes to the interactions with the average policeman etc....

Oh... this thread is like cat-nip for the usual idiots, who won't be able to help themselves while peeing their panties a little bit before questioning his nationality - "Ali is not a French name"...

Which is perfectly reasonable for anyone with basic levels of intelligence... That they were treated this way either indicates there is more to the story, or the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents were abusing their powers, acting without common sense of an intelligent level of discretion. Its pretty pathetic to not to understand that young Europeans from a G8 nation may want the basic freedom to make their choices as they move rather than get locked down to something they may not want - this is extremely common for any youngster travelling. Additionally - linking this to the Trump administration is utterly ridiculous and idiotic.

Carry on like what exactly ?? someone with a spine who is capable of politely challenging a police offers decision ? The reality of being here for well over two decades is good enough thanks... Seems you are scared of your shadow. Your "the falang is always in the wrong'" argument is also very flawed... seems you only have 'bar-stool' experience if you believe that tosh...

Highlight exactly where / how MangoKorat is driving illegally here.... pls specify.