MikeyIdea

On 6/9/2021 at 10:10 AM, Seismic said:

I just quoted the actual law to you and you still post nonsense. Please provide evidence of your claim that 'many people have gone to jail for using licensed gun in self defence".

You didn't quote a criminal law at all. You quoted what in criminal court is a piece of irrelevant toilet paper. Only criminal law is relevant in criminal court. Criminal courts simply don't work the way you think. 

As I said, I used to be an interpretor in Thai courts, all lawyers know that people have gone to jail for using a gun in self defence in Thailand. There is always a threshold for excessive use of force and that threshold is set low in Thailand, the same as in e.g., northern Europe.

4 hours ago, soi3eddie said:

My son was 15 and born, lives in UK and needed to renew his Thai passport. As father I needed to attend the RTE in Queensgate with his mother (my ex-wife) to renew his passport. This will be last time as apparently after 20yrs old they can do it themselves.

Just a comment

You didn't need to attent because you were the father but because you had legitimized your child. You had either legally married the mother of asked to be legitimized as the father or the child.  

Just now, MikeyIdea said:

 

wong post

The law in most Asian countries is that only the mother gets custody automatically at birth - the father needs to prove his commitment as a father by marrying the mother (or being married to the mother) or requesting to be recognised as a legal father. This process is there to protect the child.    

11 hours ago, Benmart said:

The second paragraph is full of assumptions and it is an impossibility to  speak about worldwide laws concerning the use of deadly force with firearms with any degree of credibility.

 

as gor the USA, each US State has its own laws regarding that subject and personal experience has taught me that I know even less than I thought I did.

Glad to hear about different state laws in the US. Thanks. I know mainly European and Thai law, I obviously don't have a separate law degree from each country in Europe so it's mainly from lawyers talking to each other about their experience in court.

9 hours ago, Seismic said:

 

Licenses for the possession and using of guns and ammunition are issued to individuals only for the following purposes: self-defense, protection of property, sports or hunting. So as owning a gun for self defence is perfectly legal in Thailand, can you please point out the specific criminal code and subsection that makes it a criminal offence to use a gun for the purpose in which the license was obtained?

A private person can get a license to own a gun in Thailand, but they are not allowed to use it for self defence or protection of property. Regardless of reason, that is is a criminal offence in Thailand, as it is in most of Europe. This is decided in criminal court, not by what's on a piece of paper. An e.g. policeman is not a private person, that's different of course.

How do I know? I used to be a Thai - English interpretor in Thai courts in the past. Mainly juvenile cases but I have also been in the criminal court on Ratchadaphisek Rd in Bangkok. Lawyers talk to each other. Many people have gone to jail for using his licenced gun in self defence in Thailand. Well known among lawyers.

This is a no brainer in so many countries. Most of Europe is the same. 

3 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

In Thai, English or Chinese?

English

46 minutes ago, colinneil said:

Gawd you got some imagination.

You just like the rest of us do not know if they shouted police or not, so stop trying to defend them.

Clearly the Chinese man was not an innocent person, but the police acted like gangsters, not like they should have done.

Then what can you expect from the police farce here.

Here's a tip for you. Watch the video the Chinese posted online. It sounds silly when you post without having read several sources first.

Secondly: It is a criminal offence to shoot someone to protect yourself in many countries in the world, including Thailand. It's a criminal offence regardless of if you're being mugged, robbed, kidnapped. USA is as I understand it an exception. 

53 minutes ago, Chelseafan said:

 

How do you know they screamed that they are policeman from pictures ? ????

 

By watching the video that the Chinese themselves posted online, Police, Police, Police, Police, Police,  

I don't think it should be mandatory, I think it should be a choice. Vacconate or you are fired. That is a choice. 

None of the options match my opinion. Unable to participate in survey

My opinion is No, we shouldn't mandate BUT: Anyone working in an area where whey frequently are in contact with the public (healthcare, education, police, bus drivers, taxi drivers etc.)  should be forced to choose. Vaccinate or we will fire you (or take away taxi license etc.).

It is not right that someone with a "public" job should be allowed to risk others lives, there are other jobs. Eat it and change job to one where you don't risk others if you don't like vaccines.

You must check with the airline of your choice. Different companies have slightly different rules.

I booked a Thai airways direct flight bkk london for my daughter for June last year because they confirmed that a 15 year did not have to be registered as an unaccompanied minor. I didn't want unaccompanied minor because you must specify who will fetch her at the destination before flight and I didn't have anyone who could do that, she's used to flying and doesn't need any help either. Not registered as unaccompanied minor and she can walk straight off the plane. An adult must send the child off at the departure check-in desk regardless of unaccompanied minor status. The flight got cancelled because of covid-19 so she never got to go but this is what I found when I checked last year.

She flew from Sweden to Thailand alone in June last year with SAS and then KLM (the KLM was a repatriation flight, the SAS flight was not). She was 15 then, no unaccompanied minor, no one cared, so many kids flying alone in Europe.

Both the mother and you should go to amphur and get a "allowed to travel official printout", not sure what the official name is. All legal guardians must allow child to leave country. He may not get through Thai immigration without that

1 hour ago, Ventenio said:

 

20-years in Thailand.  Fluent.

Married, 5 Thai kids.   4 million spent on children

100 million wais

nowhere else to go

built a house.   4 million

3 cars

etc....

 

NO MASK........and......it's........all...........gone.......     hahahahahhahahh

 

this sums up the importance of the falang......less than sick soi dog

Yes and it is correct, isn't it? I wouldn't value someone who risks other peoples lives higher than a soi dog anywhere. You mention money so do you think money matters? 

2 hours ago, ourmanflint said:

Does a provincial governor even have the power to expel foreigners?

Via criminal law yes

18 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Another one! These are just the ones that we know about because of their high profile status. The prison system must be rife with the virus. No mention by officials on this, similar to when we were no longer given an official reports after the migrants were locked in the factories and left to develop herd immunity in samut sakhon

Prioritization I suppose. There are not enough resources to test all who need testing and the ones in jail are already contained. They can move and treat the ones who need treatment but to be honest, there's no real benefit for society in moving asymptomatic cases to field hospitals and having to guard them there.

Harsh reality?

Which flooding problems? It's heaven compared to what it used to be and IMO, quite good to be in the tropics. 

1 hour ago, FarFlungFalang said:

So are you basically blaming selfish people for the spread of this pandemic.So if people are spreading this virus they are selfish people?Is it not that the virus is very transmissible and it's almost impossible to stop, it's because people are selfish and don't want to wear masks even though they wear them anyway to obey the law.There have been several reports of many healthcare workers getting infected by selfish people wearing masks and adhering to restrictions.Is there a difference between spreading the virus wearing a mask and spreading the virus not wearing a mask? 
I think it's a bit selfish to blame certain people for this pandemic.

Health care workers who cannot do their job without coming close to infected people is obvoiusly not an argument that can be used when discussing the population as a whole. Wearing a mask is only one of the measures recommended. 

If all people always followed all advice, the health care system wouldn't be overwhelmed? Yes, sure, no one is saying that it's not a one stop solution to everything though.

1 hour ago, FarFlungFalang said:

Sorry what type of arguments allow some people to kill others?Do you mean that people die during a lockdown because of the lockdown?I'm not not sure I follow your argument.Those that want to lockdown can lockdown and you'll be safe those that don't want to do lock downs will take the risk of living normally in a risky dangerous  world.Your choice.

There are so many examples all over the world of what happens with the health care system if some people do what they want in a pandemic. It is not possible to not see that those selfish people overwhelm the health care system. My daughter had this understanding of action - consequence when she was 10 years old. It's not rocket science.

7 hours ago, FarFlungFalang said:

Lockdowns jeopardise the health of others so I guess by your reckoning we should treat people who support lockdowns as social pariahs along with those that enforce them.

A spoilt child could have the same type of argument. I feel mentally stressed because my mummy doesn't allow me to eat ice cream to dinner every day.

Those types of arguments doesn't allow some people to kill other people. Eat it! 

10 minutes ago, Rhacsyn said:

On this forum?

Yes, some have disappeared ???? No idea why