Tummamuang

Is this enough to leave the country and return while keeping my PR valid? Passport stamp: “Non-quota immigrant visa. This visa is good for multiple return journeys to Thailand. It must be utilized before September 2024.” Blue book stamp: “Endorsed on September 2023. Valid until September 2024.” Got the above stamps September last year before going on a trip. Paid 5,700 Baht (if I recall correctly) and made sure it’s multiple entry. Is this sufficient to leave the country again and return before September 2024? Or do I need to do anything else for this second trip? For example, when I got these stamps, the IB asked for my travel dates at that time. Even though I don’t find these travel dates in my stamps, do I need to inform immigration about the travel dates of this trip? Or can I just use the stamps and that’s it?

It’s a crime in both countries.

A German prosecutor will have to produce evidence it in front of a German court, not us. We are just other foreigners on an internet discussion board so we can only comment on the information that’s available to us, and according to that information the girl is an underage prostitute.

Wouldn’t change anything.

Absolute nonsense.

Not in case of prostitution.

You’re totally allowed to see a 17yo as whatever you want, same as a rapist is allowed to feel entitled to rape people. It doesn’t change the fact that the law sees it differently.

Sex with a minor.

That could very well be, yes. And if you thought that a crime suddenly becomes legal simply because many before you committed the same crime, I’m afraid you’re wrong, otherwise you may just walk into the next bank and rob it.

The law disagrees.

You think wrong. Procuring sex with a 17yo is illegal in Germany. Even if it happened abroad.

Well, you know people get raped, murdered and assaulted even without that. Should that ever happen to any of your loved ones, and someone would make them responsible for it, your reaction would be a different one.

And I still highly doubt that you would declare any of your loved ones responsible for their own rape or murder should they ever become a victim of it, or that you would accept someone trying to make them responsible for it.

I believe my reply contained a quote of you where you wrote that the murder is on the victim.

I don’t know. Doesn’t change what I wrote. Going with someone doesn’t change your sexual orientation; your sexual orientation isn’t “made”.

Let me give you the benefit of the doubt and take your question seriously: people aren’t “made” gay or hetero. They are gay or hetero.

How can you prove something “wrong” by talking about something completely different? What I wrote is correct; what you quoted doesn’t change that.

I wasn’t applying UK or US laws. If “redundancy payment” means severance pay (the amount of money an employer is obliged to pay the employee upon laying him off) then that’s exactly how the system works in Thailand (the only difference being that the scheme also applies for reaching retirement age). Like I said, it’s a very simple scheme; a simple table of two columns and six rows or so. Can easily find it in Google image search “Thai severance pay”.

Right, the article doesn’t make sense.

You can’t get someone help who has been murdered. Maybe this Italian man’s loved ones would have liked to help him had they known about his situation, whatever his situation was. But they were robbed of this opportunity so maybe you can see why murdering someone is not okay and a victim doesn’t deserve to be blamed for getting murdered, even if the particular person isn’t your loved one.

Not sure why you’re asking me what I was “suggesting” — you can simply read what I wrote; you even quoted it yourself: “Should you or your loved ones ever become victim of a crime, you wouldn’t be talking like this; justifying, belittling and mocking it. You would be the first to demand justice. And I’m wondering what must be wrong with you for not granting another human being the same decency.” So this is what I was “suggesting”.

That’s not what the article says. It says they were sent on leave with 75% pay. Redundancy payment would depend on the employee’s years of service and his last salary. The scheme is very simple and can quickly be googled.

Should you or your loved ones ever become victim of a crime, you wouldn’t be talking like this; justifying, belittling and mocking it. You would be the first to demand justice. And I’m wondering what must be wrong with you for not granting another human being the same decency.