burman

Simple - he killed a man - maybe unintentionally, but still the guy is dead.

Chasing burglars does not give you the right to kill them.

Is this honestly your first thought on this case? Three men break into a guys home and he returns to disturb them, so they attack him with an axe badly injuring him and all you can say is that 'he killed a man'. You almost sound like you are backing the attackers.

I give the guy 10 out of 10 for having the balls to chase them and unintentionally kill a man because they could have so easily unintentionally killed him. They had no right whatsoever to be on his property and hopefully this might just deter others from trying the same type of burgulary.

I would like to ask what you would have done in this situation given that you are so quick to criticise his actions.

Rick

They attacked him with an axe badly injuring him - on his own property -

They were in the process of taking away his possessions -

He was in a life threatening situation - three on one -

Thank God he had the courage to persue them -

He wasn't in a life threatening situation when he killed the guy, he was in a van chasing them.

how do u know so much mybe his friends will put a claim in as well . he didnt kill the guy . he killed one of the three that were trying to kill him at his home not thire homes get real mate mybe were put some money in a pot so he can repair his truck

I just pointed out he was not in a life threatening situation at the time. Pretty obvious to anybody who can read the report of the incident. Generally when you are chasing people, those people are not immediately threatening your life. That means the self defence card is out of the window if it comes to court.

Simple - he killed a man - maybe unintentionally, but still the guy is dead.

Chasing burglars does not give you the right to kill them.

Is this honestly your first thought on this case? Three men break into a guys home and he returns to disturb them, so they attack him with an axe badly injuring him and all you can say is that 'he killed a man'. You almost sound like you are backing the attackers.

I give the guy 10 out of 10 for having the balls to chase them and unintentionally kill a man because they could have so easily unintentionally killed him. They had no right whatsoever to be on his property and hopefully this might just deter others from trying the same type of burgulary.

I would like to ask what you would have done in this situation given that you are so quick to criticise his actions.

Rick

They attacked him with an axe badly injuring him - on his own property -

They were in the process of taking away his possessions -

He was in a life threatening situation - three on one -

Thank God he had the courage to persue them -

He wasn't in a life threatening situation when he killed the guy, he was in a van chasing them.

Did you really see this Mike?

Fair enough on your unintentional comment then, but I guess that might only move the guy down to a manslaughter charge were he outside of France and in the UK or USA for example. In Thailand I guess some baht to the family will be enough.

I give the guy 10 out of 10 for having the balls to chase them and unintentionally kill a man

Rewind a bit, where did it say he unintentionally killed the man? Maybe that was his every intention. If you are going to judge a case at least judge it on the evidence provided, don't make things up.

They of course have no right to be on his property. On the other hand he had no right to to kill one of them did he?

Wonder where everybody stands on this, doesn't seem to be many responses to this thread.

Should the guy walk free or should he be up on a murder/manslaughter charge?

Well, lets say he put up a real fight ,chances are at least one of them ( the thais ) would be up on a murder charge, then how would we react, strange isnt it, its almost as if you have double standards,.i see this as a normal reaction, if some b@stards were in my house and had a go at me id have done exactly the same, i say good on him, this will be an interesting outcome for sure,

Who has double standards?

A few years back in Jomtien, I was walking on the beachside of the road with two other Farangs, one of my buddies saw a nice looking Thai chick, all he said was hello to her when this little Thai dude came out of no where and started yelling at us, saying that she was his girlfriend and told us to "F" off and would not stop talking shit.. We were already about a block away, when one of my friends said, lets go back and kick this dudes ass, but common since told us, this dude is not alone, so we kept on walking..

And without picking on your post Neion, there is a nice bit of evidence that farangs like to fight when they out number the other guy too.

Wonder where everybody stands on this, doesn't seem to be many responses to this thread.

Should the guy walk free or should he be up on a murder/manslaughter charge?

Don't discuss about it anymore you know the result of fight with locals anywhere in the world Thailand, UK or hel_l

Best advice you can get, don't fight with the locals. Especially not in the red light districts of the world.

The difference of course is that these Thais knew each other whereas you don't know the guys in the pub or the neo nazis. Different scenario.

How is it a different scenario? Where is the evidence that all the Thai guys who turned on the Estonians knew each other??

In any case, If my mates were kicking the sh*t out of two foreign guys in the street, it's OK for me to join in because I KNOW them???

Your logic is totally flawed!

How is my logic flawed? I didn't say that it is OK to gang up on someone and attack them as long as you know the person. Where did you read that?

But I was pointing out that perhaps the Thais didn't all randomly jump in just because they saw a farang getting a beating. I don't think there is much of a race issue here at all to be honest. If a few Thai guys from out of town had the same trouble with the same group of Thais then it would have been a very similar scenario.

From the look of the initial report I would certainly assume all the Thai guys involved knew each other. Not sure they were all strangers who happened to be in the same place at the same time looking to bash a farang.

Let's examine the logic of this for a tick... Sweetchariot, I do not know what country you come from or your racial background, nor do I care to be honest. However, hypothetically, if you went down to your local pub/bar and saw a bunch of guys who were from your own race and lived in your area beating the living sh*t out of two Thai men, would you join in and land a few punches and kicks on the Thais yourself without knowing the reason for the altercation?

Hypothetically if I see some local Romper Stompers (Neo Nazis) in my area beating some Asian guys to a bloody pulp should I join in because they are the same race as I am, regardless of the fact that I don't share their political convictions or racist tendancies, or even know the motives behind beating them up? Because let's face it, there is little or no difference between this scenario and what occured on walking street that night.

The only difference is of course, the morals or lack there of. i.e. In the above scenario rather than help the Neo thugs, I'd be calling the Police or at least try and help the Asian guys getting beaten by trying to break up the fight etc. Where were the Morals on Walking Street that night?

The difference of course is that these Thais knew each other whereas you don't know the guys in the pub or the neo nazis. Different scenario.

The Thais have a specific form that involves huge escalation, by attempting to greatly outnumber their opponents, use weapons, and then beat them well beyond what's "necessary."

I just explained what happened (in the article above) to the teerak, without giving an opinion, the first thing she said when I said Thai men killed a farang was "farang steal something?" And then after hearing the full story, she said, "yes, i see 20 Thai man fight 2 Thai man."

So it's not just a "gang up on the farang" thing. It's just their way.

I then commented to her that, "they have no honor" (without specifying whom I meant by "they"). Her response was, "yes I think too."

Most farangs are accustomed to 1-on-1 fights using only their own body parts, and consider it shameful to introduce weapons in a fight or receive help from friends. Stupid on their part to assume that things operate the same way throughout the world, but that doesn't mean they're deserving of severe beatings that may lead to death, as it did in this case.

Farang have more honour and are accustomed to 1 on 1 fights and not using weapons? Sorry but what a load of b/shit, in the UK it's often 5 on 1 in a fight, and bottles, knives and whatever else is to hand are used. Only difference in the west is we film it and put it up on youtube.

He could be up on a murder charge here. Or at the very least he will be paying out some money to the dead guy's family.

Sorry if I read you wrong Lao Pao I thought you was giving their class and education status as some kind of argument against them being human debris. I was a poor working class backpacker once too.

To comment on the article, it seems like the writer is a bit of a snob.

May I remind you that the majority of these youngsters are from middle to upper class families in the west; most of them don't come from the poorer working class families. These back packers are educated and a lot of them just finished a higher education or university.

And what if they do come from poorer working class homes and don't have a higher education? I assume they are are welcome too?

And of course some expats would look at your current accommodation and wonder why a 43 year old man would move to a third world country to live in a tiny 2 bedroom condo.

I guess financial status is a factor too isn't it? But of course you knew that already.

Maybe they are quite a big younger than you and making their way in life? Surely you didn't live like a lord for all your life Bendix?

I have 2 months, which should take me up to mid March. To claim the next 2 months(to mid May) do I go to an immigration office or do a border run. At the end of that period (mid May), I should be able to pay for a month's extension, at the behest of the immigration office of course. After that I should be able to then start doing the 3 sets of monthly border runs.

You do realise you can extend your double tourist visa twice? First extension can be done in mid march when the first 2 months/visa runs out. So that takes you to mid June. Then you cross the border, come back in and get your second lot of two months. When that runs out you can extend again for a month. So your visa is actually good for a 6 months stay.

Extension cost is 1900 for 30 days.

But are we discussing human misery or a scam? If it's the latter (which it probably is) then your comment doesn't make much sense does it.

But you should know Khao San is not near a skytrain station. Good place to hang around and meet people though.

Letting people know your budget for a room might help.

The BEST film I have seen in the last few years is "Superbad".

You the man McLovin!

I watched it the other day, pretty good film for that kind of genre (though Nap Dynamite beats it hands down), best parts were undoubtedly the coppers and mclovin. It was the two guys who played the cops who wrote the film.

Keep the wallet in your front pocket, should never have a problem.

If you knew that two of your friends (but not really friends) wifes were doing the dirty behind their backs would you tell them??

I am now faced with this problem and don't know what to do!! On the one side it's nothing to do with me so don't get involued BUT on the other side their wives are complete sluts!!

Please give me some help here

Well not your friends so I would say leave it well alone, coz you really have no idea of the situation now, and how it might turn out for you should the shit hit the fan.

Secondly, it seems you want the husbands to know not out of concern of their own welfare, but because you want the wives punished for being 'complete sluts'. Again, I'd leave it well alone.

^^ Exactly.

Thanks for pointing out the rather obvious flaw in the father christmas theory, didn't think we would have to go to that level myself.

I think the truly scientifically minded person will have to be undecided about ghosts until proof is found which may well happen as science improves. There have been too many reported ghost sightings in history to discount them totally because hard proof has not be found yet.

The thief obviously dumped the bag, and it got sent back by someone that found it.