Sig

"English lessons"? Lesson for the 21st century - Electrocution/Electrocute: Oxford Reference: "The injury or killing of someone by electric shock" Collins: "If someone is electrocuted, they are accidentally killed or badly injured when they touch something connected to a source of electricity." Merriam-Webster: "to kill or severely injure by electric shock" Longman: "If someone is electrocuted, they are injured or killed by electricity passing through their body." StackExchange: "The term electrocute was originally coined in 1889 by splicing the prefix electro- into the word execute. It originally meant execute (by electric shock). However, its meaning has evolved over time: first to also include accidental death by electric shock and later to include electrical injury, generally serious in nature."

That mean you don't know how to read?

Although I can understand why you may want to equate your experience in some way or another to the point at hand, basing an opinion on personal anecdotal experience isn't the wisest way to form an opinion from which to judge other people's disasters against. Organ damage or brain damage may not be readily known and the unborn child may also be affected. As you mentioned, we don't know the voltage or amperage. We also don't know how long they were shocked for. They don't know either. They have their ideas, but it is not knowable (unless there is something that wasn't reported) if it happened during the last few seconds before they were able to get out or if it was a low level long term exposure. There are so many unknowns, it is ridiculous for people to make their judgments toward this family with such callousness. Electrical shocks also do not affect every person in the same way. You can shock different people in the exact same way and have completely different outcomes - from death to near no effect. The crude mental toxicity on this forum is insane (that isn't directed toward you. I'm just stunned by the level of lunacy in here.).

That is irrelevant to my opinion re my point on compensation. But if you must know, to suit whatever presupposition you may be holding, my parents are not American and I grew up in a few different countries. Depending on how you define where one is "from"... I also did spend some years in America. I know absolutely that the kind of compensation I was mentioning would be offered in at the least 3 or 4 countries that I've lived and worked in. I know that the idea of compensation for mental/psychological pain/suffering is well established in both UK and Japanese law. And I would assume that if it is in two quite different cultures and juridical systems like that, it is likely common in many if not most countries. It is not anything that somehow Americans hold some sort of exclusive idea about. Not by any stretch. Now, as for Thailand.... I don't know as much in terms of law. But I do know that different Thai friends of mine who own businesses would certainly step up and try to do whatever they could to compensate the family to make them feel like they were cared about more than just paying for hospital bills. It is so absurd, it's unfathomable.

"minor incident"? Do you have any idea what electrical shocks like this can do to you? It could damage internal organs and cause brain damage, which of course can lead to all sorts of other complications. I don't quite get how people on here can laugh this off like it's nothing. And depending only on some little news article to form such opinions over something that could have lifelong consequences for these people, including a small child for God's sake, is mindboggling. There's a thing called empathy that seems to be severely lacking around here, not to mention the ability to grasp the potential seriousness of a variety of things.... smh

I thought it was pretty much common knowledge that "damages", in personal injury cases, refers to losses including things like time missed from work, medical bills, as well as "pain and suffering", which can be both mental and physical. I have no idea how courts in Thailand tend to award damages along these lines, but I would think it exists to some degree. They most definitely have a case for it. And if negligence can be proven, there should be punitive damages too IMO, but that is unlikely to happen in personal injury cases, from what I've heard. I have a feeling that may be because the money awarded for pain and suffering may be deemed to take care of that "punishment"....? By the way, electrical shock can cause serious injuries. And the fact that she is pregnant makes one wonder what the effects could be on their unborn child. If that were my wife and 3 year old kid, I'd sure as hell be looking for any kind of punishment possible, IF it were due to negligence. If that couldn't be proven and it was purely accidental and all work on the jacuzzi and electrical system were up to par, but some unforeseeable incident brought it about, then I wouldn't pursue punitive damages. But their vacation was destroyed and a child has been affected in who knows what way, being only 3 years old. There could be a variety of mental issues to deal with. And more could be argued.... At any rate, it shouldn't have happened and the hotel should bear responsibility a hell of a lot more than just medical bills! That's ridiculous. If the family could afford the time away from their home country, maybe a couple of free weeks stay with meals would be a nice offer, even if it were only accidental, let alone the possibility of negligence. But only medical bills? For nearly being killed? Seriously???

I got curious because I've seen it used both ways - injury & death, so I looked it up. If the article and the woman are to be taken at face value, they were electrocuted. "Electrocution" encompasses severe or bad injury, not only death, which it appears you may have been inferring. Of the 5 dictionaries I checked, one of them only had death in the definition. All the others included injury.

The details of the crime are not necessary to be known in order to have an opinion that the civil government should impose a death penalty for rape (Which apparently you conceive to be murder? That would be a very odd idea. Or maybe you are referring to some other comment that I haven't seen.). What is known to have happened is that a child was raped. Is there any need to know more than that in order to have an opinion on what should happen to the perpetrator? Justice should be carried out by the laws of the land and by the rulers thereof. Anything less than death for the rapist of a child is not justice IMO. But I do not agree with torture, beating, etc... (I view a lifetime in prison as nearly equivalent to torture) a quick death is preferable. The perpetrator is still a human and therefore, personally, I think the body of any such criminal should be treated with respect, while doing the unfortunate necessity of ridding the world of the person.

Yeah, I have no idea if convicts react the same here as I know they do in the US. But it would be better if the civil government meted out justice properly in order to better bring about orderly society rather than society to start looking up to lawbreaking thugs to mete out justice.

No idea what it might be like in Texas, but if it is, more power to 'em!

Thanks for reminding me about Bolt! I haven't used them in ages (2 years??). Last time I did, their price was a LOT cheaper than others. I wonder if they've upped their prices since then.... Don't know why I forgot about them....

I used Grab last time I went through. Worked great.

I agree, a perp who does this has no place in society and isn't worth feeding, but I believe the concept of justice is more important to fulfill and is why anyone guilty of this crime should be put to death. Edit: And I'd say probably rather than possibly not his first time. But, of course, there has to be a first time, so who knows....

Just my opinion... but I don't think it matters whether or not he can repeat the act. If he is found guilty, true justice requires his death IMO. Letting a rapist live is not just.

Upon conviction, the penalty should be death to be carried out as swiftly as possible, preferably a public execution - after the obligatory appeals. And the sentence should be mandatory with no discretion on the judges part. I can't fathom why people won't be for the death sentence for people like this. Just wait until it's their daughter. I'd like to kill him personally before the police even got to him for arrest and trial, if it were my daughter (assuming I saw it with my own eyes, otherwise can't be certain until a thorough investigation is done).

It would only be conjecture on my part, of course, but it appears that by what the other commenter was saying about over-representation of Brits in this kind of news and your response being "Is there a culture problem?", that you are alluding to a Brit cultural problem? I'm not completely clear on your intended meaning. Either way, I would say that in the years that I used to hang out at clubs and occasionally bars, I didn't often go to ones where farang were represented much at all. And I saw plenty of fights involving various different Asian people with Thais. Never did see any that I recall, other than verbal stupidity, involving farang in those 10 or so years. But that shouldn't be too surprising since I only occasionally went to places in which there were a good number of farang. But even when I did go to those places and saw fights, it was never involving a farang. So, in my limited experience, if there's a cultural problem, it seems to me that it is a media cultural problem of preferring to report the more sensational story. And that narrative would be older farang as opposed to reporting on what seems to be more viewed as squabbles between equally Asian people. Just imagine if Brits or Americans were doing the things that the Chinese tourists and tour groups incessantly do across the country! I'd put my money on the reporting being covered a LOTTTTT more and with a LOTTTT more invective.

Not sure how you could possibly say he might have "deserved it". The "it" being, "a swollen head, a broken nose and three teeth knocked out." and a "cerebral haemorrhage." And you somehow equate that with "a smack on the mouth!" ????????

Spoken like a true woke leftist. You can't resist casting personal aspersions even though I was being completely polite and respectful with you and you put words into my mouth that I did not say. And you divert from what you originally said once backed into a corner because you were wrong and can't back out of it, so you think that by moving the goal posts you can salvage your sunk ship. This happens seemingly every time I waste my time speaking with someone on an ideological, but illogical, bent. I specifically stated that I was referring to my experience in the 3 States that I had lived in, which happen to be much more liberal, politically, and strict in their gun laws. And in your context, you were referring to what another individual commented on here, referring to "<deleted> the Slaveholder South." I mentioned that I had not experienced anything remotely similar whatsoever to your claims of being able "to buy and carry any gun of any kind any where (sic).... little to no training or restrictions..." Then, you now respond with a narrowing of your context to 2 particular States, which still doesn't match what you said, but does still match what I had said. For example, in Georgia you cannot carry a gun into a post office, into government buildings, onto college campuses, or in historic sites or recreational areas or parks. To interpret for you, since you seem to be the "clueless" one, rather than how you said that I "obviously have no clue" - this means that you cannot "carry any gun of any kind any where (sic)..." There are plenty of other examples I could use to show other aspects of your statements to be false (e.g., "Carry your gun into a bar or store, no problem" as a blanket statement, in Georgia, also inaccurate/false among other things you've said.) and make it appear to be a kind of fearmongering with no basis in reality, but you've already proven that it is very likely useless to go any further with you, as you immediately jumped into the usual sort of tactic that I encounter with ideologues spouting nonsense by denigrating my character and diverting the point at hand in an attempt to suit what appear to be disingenuous purposes. Or perhaps you were just having a bad couple of days? I don't know. I hope that's the case. I imagine you have friends who will agree with you. Maybe you could enjoy refining your ill thought out ideas, and learning to discern fact from fiction and general statements that are incorrect without qualifications, with them and dig a bigger darker pit because I won't be responding further.

Guns, guns, and more guns? Interesting how there are so many guns, but I've never seen one or heard one shot in a place other than a shooting range or hunting. I've also asked at least dozen or more friends in different parts of the US and neither have they. I guess none of us live where gangs proliferate. It's not some kind of widespread craze, which is how it seems that you are portraying. Not sure where you live/lived. I've never even seen anyone carrying a gun openly, other than police and security types. Buy and carry a gun anywhere? Wow, never heard of such a thing. Never seen any guns for sale at any stores other than sporting goods stores or gun stores. They sell them at novelty shops and supermarkets where you lived!? Sounds like you lived in an area that I can't even fathom existing. Carry a gun anywhere? Good luck with that one! Not happening. Carry a gun in the vicinity of a school, post office, government building, etc, etc, etc, you're likely to end up in some hot water with the police quickly. The restrictions are so severe in the 3 different states that I've lived in that it's nearly impossible to get a permit to carry a concealed gun, let alone openly. And the laws about carrying or transporting one at all are likewise very strict. And they change so often that I'm a bit paranoid to even carry one in my trunk to the gun range! God forbid a neighbor or a passerby sees me taking a gun from my house and putting it in my trunk! So many freaks around these days that they're likely to call the police and get me hassled. And it's largely because of the kind of mentality that you are promoting. An unfounded fear. Yeah, of course there are areas that you should be careful and rightly wary of being in. Just like some areas of Bangkok where there are shootings on a regular basis. They rarely get reported, unlike in the US. So many foreigners have no clue how often there are shootings in Bangkok. I lived a short distance from one of those areas and in less than three years, I heard a dozen or so shootings and witnessed the aftermath of two of them, blood all over the place that didn't even get cleaned up until the next day. It is not uncommon, if you didn't know. There are some areas that you definitely need to keep away from, just like anywhere.

Not sure what that stat might have to do with the likelihood of being shot in this same kind of scenario in the US...? Am I missing something?

That is such an ignorant comment, it is truly ridiculous. You apparently have no clue whatsoever about gun crime statistics in the USA. You say it's "likely" they'd have shot each other? That is so completely not likely, it is a pretty silly aspersion to cast. There are stereotypes, some of which make sense. That one does not. Unless you're specifically talking about gang member "friends" fighting, the likelihood of this happening, particularly among college friends, is so small, it is not worth even considering. I find the US bashing in this forum a bit humorous, but sometimes it's just too far and too ridiculous. There are good statistics out there on the demographics of gun crime in the US, if you care at all to see how far off you are. I don't imagine you care, but if you do.... check it out. It seems apparent that you'd be shocked at what you find.

Completely missed the point and made a side note your thing.... nice deflection.

Is that code for Prime Minister $2.5 Billion?

Don't know why you'd equate anti-Thaksin people to such a thing...? How about being anti-corruption. Does it matter if it's this habitual liar or Prayut? And with both of them, a lot can be added on top of simple corruption. Mass murder sure is taken lightly around here....

What a dumpster fire this country has become. continues to be, as it has been for decades....