Sig

2 hours ago, thairookie said:

Doesn't the hotel have CCTV ?  It will show who entered the room.  If nobody entered the room, then it's clear that the Thai g/f took it.????

Except that no "Thai g/f" was mentioned in the story.....???? Only a woman who had her purse snatched outside when the thieves were making their getaway on their motorbike. And there is nothing in the article to lead one to believe that the Thai lady and the Dutch man had anything to do with each other.

56 minutes ago, Nicholas Paul KNIGHT said:

Whatever and however it happens, sorry only an IDIOT leaves CASH out in the open !!!!!!

I'm not sure I get what "out in the open" means to you. Leaving stuff out in your private, locked room qualifies as "out in the open" to you? If that's the case, when one goes to take a shower, they should lock up their laptop, wallet, jewelry, artwork, mobile phone, etc....? Personally, my laptop is on my desk and one may find my mobile there or on the kitchen counter at any given time.... I don't worry at all about leaving money or jewelry out on my desk either (I might think twice about leaving it there if anything had a high value and I were to leave my home, not just in the shower, but in the context of this story, we're talking very small amounts of money.). And I don't take any artwork off the walls or from other display areas they may be sitting when I leave my place, they are VERY MUCH "out in the open". I think I would behave similarly in the context of a hotel room as well.
Perhaps you misread the story and you thought the guy was in a public place rather than in his private, locked hotel room, which he hadn't even left, but was just in the shower?

It's almost comical reading all of the assumptions people make in their comments here.
The door was quite apparently locked. The article says, "Pol. Capt. Sontaya inspected Mr. Christian’s room and found traces of tampering." I'm doing a bit of assuming myself here, but at least there is some evidence from this that the door was locked and the thieves made their way in anyway. Anyone who has stayed in cheap hotels in Thailand can tell you that with many of them, it isn't particularly difficult to be able to tell, from outside a room, when someone is in their shower. No need to conjure up ridiculous scenarios about Ae conspiring with her friends to let them know when he's in the shower and that they can go for it or any other variation of nonsense I read in comments here. And especially when it doesn't even appear that there is any connection whatsoever between Ae and the Dutch guy! They are two completely separate incidents of her purse being snatched outside the hotel and the theft from the guy's room inside.

I haven't read many comments for a while on this site... and now I remember why... maybe about 1 in 20, at best, have any value in reading, while the vast majority are utter nonsense or just plain stupid.

3 minutes ago, RJRS1301 said:

does she and or family carry an EpiPen?
 

I guess "severe" is a subjective idea. She isn't allergic to the point of death, which I'd call mortal rather than only severe. No, I'm quite sure they don't have such a thing as an EpiPen. I'm not informed enough about that "pen" to know if it should only be used in cases worse than hers or not. I'm guessing some sort of strong antihistamine would be more recommended, which they have. But as I mentioned, I don't know a lot about the subject. I'm not particularly sure how common or affordable or well understood that "pen" is here in Thailand. Of course, if one needed to know, I'm sure the information can readily be found.

13 minutes ago, Jimbo53 said:

Looks like a clear case of you two pi**ing in each others pockets!

If I understand that colloquialism correctly (which I may not, since I read off of a simple Google search and sometimes the answers can be a bit askew - just as I was mentioning about how "news" articles can be askew), I'm not so sure why you'd appear to have a problem with somebody making a comment in agreement with someone? Is it just because it is very different in perspective to many of the hyper-critical comments that it becomes unseemly to support someone that I believe has a valid point from a different perspective than so many vociferous commenters who take what appears to be a strange situation and turning that strangeness against a person who suffered from a mishap rather than attempting to empathize and wonder about how it could have happened to a normal person or if perhaps the article got something wrong and if it were written accurately, suddenly everyone would say, "Oh! well no wonder that happened!"? If you haven't noticed, there have been MANY articles that appeared in this forum that just such things happen.
At any rate, thanks for expanding my vocabulary! That's a pretty funny and expressive colloquialism ????

This kind of situation with the server reminds me of a fairly regular happening with my best friend's daughter. She has a severe reaction to MSG. (He is Thai by the way, if that matters). Sometimes he informs the cook directly and sometimes only the waiter, depending on the situation, that his daughter is allergic to MSG and please be sure not to serve anything to their table with it. Sometimes they are even assured that the restaurant doesn't even use MSG and other times they are assured that they will follow his instructions. Nonetheless, I'm sure you know the results on far too often the occasion. And even when they say that they don't use MSG in the restaurant at all! It is truly bizarre. Of course none of them ever take responsibility beyond on occasion the restaurant won't charge them for her meal, but even that very minimal token of regret isn't always proffered. Refusal to take responsibility for ones actions and the whole losing face thing is VERY real. I have no idea how anyone can look at that aspect of the culture without wondering what on earth is up with that!? It can have its place, but it seems that often there is no discernment where the line is on where it should stop and taking responsibility should start. Oh, and you know what is one of the frequent excuses given by the restaurant - something like, "Well, we only put in a little bit"... OMG! Remember, this is all Thai on Thai - no foreigners involved. As so many of the issues in this forum seem to be thought of as issues between Thais and foreigners, usually they are not and happen among themselves just as well.

I can't even describe my relief after hearing from the kind officer that these were not hoodlums. Now we can all be at peace using taxis. I shudder to think what the outcome would have been if these weren't friends, but actual hoodlums!

"... Sompong was not about to engage in diplomacy. He took a step back from the older man then unloaded a .22 gun emptying six shots into Chatchai who managed to get off his bike but soon died."
"Chatchai bought the gun for 7,000 baht and always wore it about his person. He has been charged with murder and gun offences." (emphasis added)

That's a first! The dead guy is charged with murder.
I guess there's no need to remind you where this story is coming from in order to reduce the surprise....

I see a lot of comments here about the reason for the policy being to cut down on waste... to limit the wastefulness of food not being eaten and subsequently getting trashed. While that could possibly be something in the back of the mind of the restaurateur, I think most of them wouldn't care at all about uneaten food if that food were paid for. The issue boils down to $฿$฿$฿$฿. At an all-you-can-eat style establishment, how on earth are they supposed to make a profit if people just order tons of food and then dump most of it? Waste has pretty much nothing to do with it. They aren't in business to make food donations to gluttonous porkers. They are there to make money.

Sadly, no surprises here. Among other things, until Thailand can reform it's idea and practice of "education", I don't hold out much hope for this country.
Utter foolishness borne from an immoral worldview.

1 hour ago, Pabs said:

Totally Agree, good to see Thailand with taking a common sense approach. Western leaders are pathetic and weak and have only their own interested at stake. Just remember the west unsettled the entire Arabic world over notions of weapons of mass destruction that didnt even exist.

 

I'd like to see how consistent you would remain in that opinion if China decided to invade Thailand and indiscriminately bomb Bangkok, Udon Thani, Chiangmai, Phuket, Pattaya, etc. It doesn't matter what "western leaders" did with the Arabic world. That has absolutely nothing to do with the issue at hand. Trying to formulate such an opinion to support murdering terrorists because other people who you don't like did it to somebody else in a different part of the world over different issues is a very bizarre way to create a justification.

14 minutes ago, digger70 said:

You would think that the police Know the Law , just look at at this , 

 Golf carts are not allowed to be operated on public roads in Thailand, but are accepted within the Nichada Community. Nichada rules, as detailed in the March 2018 Nichada Thani Newsletter, clearly state that you must “Have a valid driving license on your person if you are the operator of a vehicle”.

Well, it sounds like it is something like I expected it might be, from what you say here. I would suspect that roads inside a "housing estate/community" are not considered public and there can be some exceptions, such as golf carts being allowed to operated on them.
I'm not sure what you intended by quoting from that community newsletter. It said that you must have a valid driving license on your person if you are the operator of a vehicle... ok. I would expect as much, wouldn't you? I'm not sure what you are applying that quote toward. Perhaps you meant that this quote was explicitly directed to people operating golf carts on the roads in the community?

3 minutes ago, Stupooey said:

Like most 'accidents' there is blame on both sides. The motorbike driver was probably travelling too fast, but speed normally lessens the chance of a collision, it just increases the severity of the outcome. Looking at it from the point of view of the bike rider, he would have seen the buggy slowing in front of him, presumably without indicating, and maybe assumed he was stopping, so felt it prurient to overtake. No doubt the fact that the buggy was LHD (why???) contributed, as I suspect the driver didn't check if there was a vehicle to his right. Both to blame, i would apportion 60-40 against the buggy driver.

I must say, I've never heard that one before! You say that driving at a higher speed normally lessens the chance of a collision? Did you actually type what you meant there? If so, let's put that to the test. You drive down Sukhumvit at something like 120kph and I'll follow at 40kph and we'll see how long it is before I come across your wreckage ????
Then you got me again by somehow inserting (no pun intended) sex into the equation! "...it felt prurient to overtake"!? wow... never knew people could get turned on by the idea of overtaking!
You lost me on the "LHD" thing. Not the faintest clue what that could mean. The only exposure I've ever had to that acronym is Landing Helicopter Dock - A Naval vessel. I'm curious about why the driver would be expected to check if there is a vehicle to his right, being on a single lane road? You "presumed" the buggy driver didn't indicate his turn and you "suspect" the driver didn't check to his right. Well... I understand that a LOT needs to be assumed/presumed to make a judgment from the scant evidence provided by the video, but why the need to make that judgement when you cannot make a proper judgement? The police can do much more investigation and come to a much more clear verdict. And since they are actually siding with the foreigner (shocking, I know!), I would guess that they took into account many factors in order to come to the conclusion that they did. But who knows.... stranger things have happened.
 

1 minute ago, digger70 said:

One Question about the Law ,Who's in the Wrong?

 

Golf carts are not allowed to be operated on public roads in Thailand,

If so, than the Buggy is Wrong,Right.

If that were the law, then you'd certainly be correct as far as I can tell. I would think that the roads inside this "luxury housing estate" would be the same as any other road, but who knows... maybe not? Maybe inside private compounds like this, they can allow golf carts, assuming it would otherwise be illegal. One would think the police would know the law on Golf carts and would handle it likewise, but again... who knows....

23 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

The driver was on the left and had a passenger to his right. He could not have put his arm out to signal a turn.

You claim to be a qualified driving instructor and you say this!???? Are you serious? I have no idea what country you are qualified to instruct in, but in my home country, one may signal a left or right turn with the same arm without needing to stick his arm out the side of the vehicle to which he is turning! Not sure if I should laugh or just shake my head and roll my eyes....

You know why it is (or was) called the Land Of Smiles, right?  Because just about everything here is a comedy!

On 1/26/2022 at 10:24 PM, richard_smith237 said:

The term used by Brits is 'zebra crossing'.... not 'zebra is crossing' !!! 

 

Now.. who cares what its called by different nationalities ???

we all know exactly what is meant whether its pedestrian crossing, pelican crossing, zebra crossing, crosswalk, street crossing or just crossing...  

 

On to the bigger subject....

Can we trust cars to stop in Thailand at a crossing ? clearly not.

Even in the UK I don’t trust that - but crossing the road there is a far less risky endeavour.

Here... we just have to be patient and wait as long as possible, and even then we have to watch out for the motorcycle we initially didn’t see approaching at 120kmh... 

 

 

 

NSS
Who put that wild hair up your bum? Are you seriously that clueless as to what a joke is? Or are you just too sour and if you don't find it funny, you feel a burning need to make an unneeded disparaging comment? That somehow make you feel better?

5 hours ago, malt25 said:

A substantial speed bump just prior to the crossing would help.

Back home, they frequently have a number of different systems to draw the attention to drivers at pedestrian crossings.
There is sometimes a sign right in the middle of the road, signs on the side of the road, signs and flashing lights overhead, and what has seemed most effective to me as a driver are the flashing lights right in the roadway at the crossing area. But in the end, there is always going to be the numbskull who thinks they are more important and will violate the warnings. That doesn't mean I don't think they should be there. I think the flashing lights are a great assistance to draw the attention of drivers otherwise perhaps not noticing a pedestrian.

5 minutes ago, connda said:

I was almost hit the first week in Thailand.  From that point onward when crossing I keep my eyes turned in the direction of traffic the entire trip across.

Yes, same here.
AND be sure to look for ghost riders coming from the wrong direction as well! That whole thing I was raised with as a child has never been more helpful than when living in Thailand - "Look BOTH ways before you cross". And as you noted, that phrase could be appended with, "and keep looking until you're safely on the other side."

1 hour ago, RocketDog said:

As a general rule it's better to consider ANY street or highway crossing to be dangerous, only slightly less than driving these roads.

It's been said countless times but bears repeating:

Anybody on/near/within sight of a road in Thailand is at risk of injury or death. Drive and walk defensively at all times if you value your health.

In hearty agreement with you on that one. I pay attention to what traffic is doing even when I'm on a sidewalk around here. Why on earth anyone would depend on the supposed safety of being within the confines of a designated crossing area is beyond my ability to fathom.
That said, I'm not going to join those looking down their noses at this latest push for enforcement in this area. It may well go by the wayside, just like seemingly every other political or traffic related campaign. But can't we at least be pleased that they are actually bringing the issue to light and hold out a modicum of hope that it may make somebody think a second or two more than they ever have in their life about the issue? I didn't mean to say you were saying that, but a lot of other posts were going off on that whole "Thailand is full of nonsense" kind of rant/put-down, rather than appreciating the point of what's being done, even if it may not be the end-all panacea.

11 hours ago, Kwasaki said:

Only foreignes call em Zebra crossings they are not called that in Thai. 

I've lived in a few different countries and never heard them referred to as "zebra crossings" until I moved to Thailand. It's quite odd though... personally, I've never seen a zebra crossing the road in Thailand.... Your experience may be different than mine though ????

On 1/13/2022 at 1:29 AM, Cake Monster said:

Anywhere there is a congregation of Young people, violence will not be not far away. That much I do know from my experience as a Instructor in a large College back in the UK

However it is completely offensive to pigeon hole a single section of Society for that Violence, and to label them Low Class.

Violence is in all Countries, Thailand, Your Country , my Country, in all walks of life, and is committed by people of above intelligence, and those that are mentally challenged.

I note all the Violence portrayed in Thailand , and it just does not come from students, it comes from every sector of the Community .

From the Police, to the Vocational Schools, the Grandma,s to the School Kids, the violence here seems to be a thing that is not to do with Students, but is a thing that has deep ingrained issues within Thai Society.

Maybe its to do with a kind of Tribalism, as akin to Soccer Hooligans, or a Cultural thing dating back to when the Thais went to War on the backs of Elephants.

I dont know the reasons why,  and I guess many better people than me have tried to understand the wanton violence that is displayed across Society in Thailand.

He made a generalization, with a number of caveats. It was a good generalization IMO. All generalizations break down at some point if you try applying the idea to the whole, that's why it's called a generalization. It's not intended to apply to the whole, but to a large part of the whole. Get over it. If your pride can't take it, I don't have any positive encouraging words to proffer. He was very obviously not intending to be derogatory, but to plainly state it as it appears to be and even went out of his way to cast positive light on people in the trades. Pride schmide. How about if people who are overdosing on their pride learn how to make a feeble attempt at taking what someone says at face value rather than imputing all sorts of meanings and motives that weren't there so that one's idiotic pride can be falsely justified and defended. So utterly boring.... and so typical of what I experienced with so many numbskulls in the trades.
My life in trades and unions sure bears out what he (@robblok) said, in spades! It can be fun working with a bunch of Neanderthals sometimes, but it gets old. Of course, I met some fantastically gifted people in the trades and some extremely bright cookies who would garner respect anywhere they went, but by-and-large it was like working with a bunch of knuckle-draggers still hoping to evolve.

So a witness supposedly can tell that the gun used was a Thai made gun. That's incredibly observant for something that is happening in a flash by them! But he/she couldn't figure out how many people were chasing the guys down the soi? hmmm seems a bit weird to be so unobservant on the more obvious thing.