kwilco

or a suitable story made up by the hospital or authorities

more likely is that you have only just noticed how internet sites have ALWAYS been heavily censored in Thailand

THis is a decision not based on any science or reason - it is purely succumbing to the prejudices of others. THe legalisation of cannabis in Thailand was chaotic and mismanaged and the reverse will be the same. THere is no evidence to support claims if increased crime or violence just media hype. All it will do is put a load of small businesses out of action and increase the influence of organised crime. It won't improve the nations health it just shows further how inept the current administration is.

The 5 tenets of road safety are as follows Enforcement Engineering Education Evaluation Emergency. You can't have one without the others. Education is not just a single test or course...it is a matter of life long learning. Most countries have road safety education campaigns. A lot of the posters on AN got their licences at a time when road tests for licences were a joke. What is more important is what you learn afterwards....and in many cases that can be nothing. What is really needed is not the learning by rote so typical of taking a test, but giving people the tools to learn and develop as they continue to use roads. Sadly that is rare

It seems this article's primary purpose is to publicise the GFM . I don't see how this death warrants do much column space and the tragic death in a road accident of the woman is reduced to a foot note....yet the latter clearly raises more issues.

So presumably he knows that it has burst into flames again?

like Brexit, moon landings and vaccines? You don't have science, you have symptoms.

apparently in the 1970s and 80s they were working for Exxon. - ExxonMobil: Oil giant predicted climate change in 1970s - scientists. One of the world's largest oil companies accurately forecast how climate change would cause global temperature to rise as long ago as the 1970s,

" Warming helps humans as cold kills far more people and crops." - how sad, so very sad don't even understand what "warming: is ......People crave explanations, control, and connection. Conspiracy theories, even if far-fetched, can provide a simple answer, a sense of power, and a community of like-minded believers.

ALL accidents in Thailand need to be analysed properly - they are not - this is the basis of any road safety.

no such thing

"the driver of the car, told the police that he had parked there after a doctor's visit." - what does heshe mean by "after" - this may or may not be true - but the main witness is dead and why would he park on the hard shoulder to see a doctor? - there is a huge open space off the road for parking there. There are a few dentists there and also the "Mind" clinic but I know of no doctor - they may have opened recently I suppose - there are enough pharmacies around there. Saying "after Doctor" hardly makes it more believable.

I'd say that is not a given at all. It also depends a lot of what the SUV was doing.

sad and feeble - you only attack the messenger and not the message - so QED, I guess.

Why don’t people understand how to analyse a crash Firstly they seem to think because they have a driving license, they are some kind of expert. Everyone overestimates how good a driver they are and take views on other drivers that are basically racist. There is a clear difference between people's confidence in their road safety knowledge and their actual driving habits, that leads them to pointlessly play the blame game. They suffer from an ego and overconfidence, they think they're better drivers than they are. They focus on their successes (e.g., avoiding accidents) and underestimate the risks they take themselves (e.g., speeding a little). People may know the rules none of the nuances of safe driving. For instance, they might know speeding is bad but underestimate the danger of going slightly over the limit. They attribute any kind of aberrant driving to others but consider that they are above all that. They approach the topic with a combination of critical thinking fallacies cognitive dissonance, confirmation bias and a selective knowledge. They focus on avoiding danger to themselves again immediately apportioning blame to “others” e.g they perceive as different to them. they prioritize their own safety over others road users - , forgetting about pedestrians, cyclists, and any drivers who could be impacted by their decisions. As they don’t understand the basics they pick on one single issue without realising it isn’t a solution. They love to hone in on “driver education” but in reality it is their lack of education that leads them to believe this as they don’t actually know what that is. So many people on ASEAN NOW focus on passing the test, which is not learning in any country. In fact it normally is geared towards passing the test rather than long-term safe driving habits. And what they mistakenly call their own experience is in reality a lifetime of picking up bad habits. I notice that many people can pick up bad habits from poor observation, friends or family, and develop a false sense of security due to their experience without accidents, mistaking that for “good driving”. lifelong learning is great but it needs one to be open to new ideas so that driving skills and road rules can evolve, so encouraging drivers to stay updated can improve safety – I see none of that on this thread – just assumption and false confidence in their own superiority. However, whilst it is true that Thailand has very poor driver education the average local drivers are in fact more skilled than most foreigners at driving on Thai roads. Many foreigners miss out on crucial knowledge about traffic laws, (.e.g. priority to the left in Thailand) and more general defensive driving techniques, and in this case, the physics behind crashes. The latter being particularly obvious on this thread. If this thread shows anything it shows a failure to understand the complexity of road situations both static and dynamic. Traffic situations involve multiple factors. More than just the driver(s) it involves the environment, the road engineering vehicles weather conditions (heat etc) Analysing a crash requires understanding not just the immediate cause, but the chain of events leading up to it. This is particularly important when trying to understand a video – which otherwise can be very misleading. In this thread the only phot shows nothing of the surrounding area. Although it is a place I am familiar with. Another factor seen on this thread is the abundant reiteration of common misconceptions. People believe myths about safe driving (e.g., a rolling stop is okay) that can lead to bad habits. Force of impact, safe zones on cars as opposed to amount of visible damage. So before making rash, baseless and prejudiced judgements about this particular RTI, I think people should begin by understanding their own knowledge gaps, so then we can work towards creating a culture of safe driving and true understanding of the issues of road safety.

No - I"m saying no such thing - I'm saying that it is quite clear that peope on this thread no nothing about road safety or looking/analysing RTIs.HEnce why playing the "blame game" is a fool's errand.

why would I bother when all you are doing is sealioning? You are not worth a respone because you aren't even a part of the discussion.

No I mean ,many countries implement the 5 tenets of the "safe System" which is basically the blueprint for road safety. As someone who has driven extensively in Europe, Australia and Thailand as well as several other countries I can tell you I've never driven in a country with a shortage of idiots....just read t posts on this thread.

putre guesswork and lack of road law knowldedge.

Undertaking is not necessarily illegal - it can be construed as reckless driving. In that part of the road - I would suggest that the SUV's activity needs to be investigated - was it stationary or just pulling out.? If the bike was going at "high speed" what about the vehicle on is right which doesn't appear to be included in the incident at all. At least they would hve been a witness or did they fail to give way to the bike or were thy travelling even faster than the bike - why didn't they stop? Remembr that traffic on thr left can have priority.

I've neever seen a XMAX 350 only 125, 300 and 400 - the point is so WHAT??? - the fact is the maximum speed is unlikely to be 160kph regadless of the dimensions of the displacement and the engibe size has little or no bearing on the causes of the crash.

so you believe an article on a website claiming a bike was travelling at a speed it is very unlikely to be able to achieve. I think you ability of critically absorb information is somewhat limited.

what do you base that assumption on?

If you look at the photo both vehicles are aligned perfectly to the direction of travel. Why would there be any skid-marks?

THe crash seems to have taken place outside a shopping lay-by. there are road-side rot-ken and a lot of people pull up on the hard shoulder here - it looks like tht is what the SUV has done - either that or he pulled over in front of the M/C. THis piece of road has lots of parking off the road but it doesn't stopp people pulling over on the hard shoulder. THere is a convenience store there so people stop for snacks of their breakfast take aways. I think we really need to know what the SUV was doing there and how long it had been there.