MikeyIdea

31 minutes ago, Strange said:

 

Like, all of a sudden in the US guns just multiplied or something? They have always been there. 

 

That's why most kids in the western world played cowboys and indians with play guns when they were young. Yes of course they have always been there

30 minutes ago, Strange said:

see that you were trying to childishly corner 212Roger in semantics and pulling what he said out of context.

I am not pulling what he said out of context. He did answer yes to when I stated my opinion. I don't think that  212Roger is childish for doing that, I think that he meant yes when he said yes to my opinion that guns don't reduce burglaries

1 hour ago, MikeyIdea said:

I am glad that you agree that guns don't matter to reduce burglaries

My answer above was to a statement to 212Roger where he agreed with me that guns don't matter to reduce burglaries. Or 212Roger had a reading comprehension problem or tried to be witty but failed to because he himself supported my opinion by comparing cities where the more violent one has nearly double the unemployment rate. I on the other hand did not try to be witty, nearly double the unemployment rate talks for itself

1 hour ago, Strange said:

They DO matter and they DO reduce burglaries. What are you missing here?

You are missing that I never replied to you. Please continue to have your opinion

1 hour ago, MikeyIdea said:

The only thing left is to clear then is if more guns increase violence and the severity of violence. What is your opinion there?

1 hour ago, Strange said:

Whats your point?

I don't have a hidden agenda. I think that more guns increase violence and especially the severity of the violence. I asked 212Roger what he thinks. You can answer too if you want.

I understand your belief to be that more guns neither increase violence nor the severity of the violence but I'd be glad if you could give me your opinion yourself

54 minutes ago, Strange said:

 

So you don't care about whats going on in the USA you just want to push your simple minded judgement onto others. 

 

Got it. 

No, I actually meant exactly what I wrote

I know that many Americans are quite unaware of how the rest of the world sees them and I just wanted to convey that message

I don't have another underlying agenda

9 hours ago, 212Roger said:

I agree, "guns don't matter."  So, why mess/infringe with the Second Amendment.  The more guns law abiding citizens have the better to defend themselves against the criminals who will always have guns, legally or illegally.  Don't forget that the main reason our Founding Fathers gave us the Second Amendment; it was for the people to protect themselves against their own government!       

I am glad that you agree that guns don't matter to reduce burglaries

The only thing left is to clear then is if more guns increase violence and the severity of violence. What is your opinion there?  

3 hours ago, bwpage3 said:

 

Any sensible father would already be on the plane out of there

 

Sorry but I don't agree at all. I'd rather say: A father should really try to give his child chances to see his own mother -> choose a safe place then 

The OP is doing an admirable job. There are still safe ways to let the child see his mother in Thailand, a police station is a good place - (talk to roi ween, explain the situation, show evidence, ask if can borrow their room and pay a bit for the help), the embassy another. If Thailand becomes an issue, then Singapore should be good

If it really goes to far, then OK of course, go to court and present evidence

No, the rule is that all parties including the child must agree to legitimise at the amphur

It used to be the same amphur where the child was born when I did it 8 years ago but I don't know nowadays, sorry.

If you ask, then please let us know 

On ‎11‎/‎3‎/‎2016 at 0:05 AM, Strange said:

 

And clearly you blame guns for this.

Hi Strange, 

Actually I don't. I have worked for the same American multi-national in Bangkok for the last 19 years and I have had a lot of American friends over the years. Most of them are great.

It's just that I know that many Americans are quite unaware of how the rest of the world sees them and I just wanted to convey that message

That is all

On ‎11‎/‎2‎/‎2016 at 10:59 PM, 212Roger said:

The demographics of Chicago and Houston are virtually identical.  Same size population, same percentage of Blacks and Hispanics.  One main difference is the following:  No restrictive gun laws in Houston, while in Chicago guns are unlawful to possess.  Ergo, the city of Houston has very little gun crimes and we all know the outrageous gun crimes committed in the city of Chicago.  Draw your own conclusions... 

On ‎11‎/‎2‎/‎2016 at 11:50 PM, Strange said:

 

Unlike your homeland, our cities are massive (unlike your villages) and have cheap, low income housing all the way up to richie-rich places, all under the same city name. 

 

The statistics you are talking about are illuminating the perpetrators of the crimes and their socio-economic standing. 

 

Have a look at the city of Chicago. One of the most violent cities, with some of the most strict gun legislation out there. 

 

Go look through youtube about it. Its a rabbit hole. 

Actually, you are both supporting my statement that guns don't matter by suggesting to compare Houston and Chicago

http://www.bestplaces.net/economy/city/texas/houston: 

The unemployment rate in Houston, Texas, is 4.70%, with job growth of 2.96%

http://www.bestplaces.net/economy/city/illinois/chicago

The unemployment rate in Chicago, Illinois, is 8.40%, with job growth of 0.85%

Thank You

3 hours ago, Gary A said:

Cities with strict gun control laws are the prime targets for home invasions. Even lunatic dopers have a fear of being shot

Cities with strict gun control have less burglaries?

The information I have is that burglary is linked to unemployment, poverty, misery and the likes. I'd like to read statistics proving that relaxed gun control = more guns in cities is reducing burglaries in those cities where we also cannot see the other links I mentioned. I'm open and want to know, please show me

I have never even come across an article suggesting that and backing it up with statistics

19 hours ago, Strange said:

Its not "Americana" or "Culture" or "Novelty" its a right of the people just like free speech to defend them selves. 

Interesting discussion strange and zd1, very interesting and well written

Strange, I have one comment to your choice of words above. It is not criticism but I'd just like to share the thoughts of many people in other countries that traditionally have been known to be "passive" non-violent. Sweden, Norway, Denmark are good examples

We (= not only me but a common perception in Scandinavian countries) have clearly seen that America has much much more gun related violence than most other western countries for a long time. I am Swedish and old enough to have seen the trend for the last 40 years by the way but the common perception goes further back than that

We have been sitting there looking at the violence in the US and thought: Oh, America is a developed country but it has so much gun violence. Then we thought: The American solution to the violence, get more guns to protect yourself..., that is only escalating the violence . And then we thought: I really hope it doesn't spread to the rest of the developed world. But it did of course

It's like America lead a trend having an obvious and expected result and the world was stupid enough to follow.

19 hours ago, Strange said:

its a right of the people just like free speech to defend them selves. 

Many people actually think: If America hadn't escalated the gun related violence, then we wouldn't have had as much of it here today. And many also think: What is happening today in so many countries is actually happening because of a deliberate decision (in America)

I found Dr. Nalinee   "นลินี เชื้อวณิชชากร"   at Phyathai 1 Hospital Saturdays 9 to 16 now, That's on Si Ayutthaya Rd, central Bangkok

http://www.phyathai.com/doctorcenterdetail/12/10102370/PYT1/th. Phone number: Dr. Nalinee is at the Child Development Clinic

I feel I can give a good reference. "นลินี เชื้อวณิชชากร" Dr. Nalinee Cherwanitsakorn

Dr. Nalinee is an experienced child psychiatrist specialising in Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, she was at the Bangkok Child Development Centre 6-7 years ago when I met her. I can only find her at Phyathai 1 Hospital Saturdays 9 to 16 now, That's on Si Ayutthaya Rd, central Bangkok. We only spoke Thai but I think she speaks good English

http://www.phyathai.com/doctorcenterdetail/12/10102370/PYT1/th. You would call 1772 and ask for Dr. Nalinee at the Child Development Clinic

I can highly recommend her

Good Luck

Michael & Idea

16 hours ago, jvs said:

I guess i am lucky to stumble onto this thread,going there this weekend .Have been a few times before and

never found nice roads to travel on.

I have an old toyota tiger,4x4 not modified and will be going alone,maybe the roads are all mud now?

Not really looking to get stuck,just want to play in the mud a little bit.

Auntie Glen also has an old Toyota Tiger 4*4 :)   It will get to her little paradise no problem.  I'd like to take the road by the Burmese border 14.645163, 98.392302, not done it yet. After having Auntie Glen's cakes, that would be super

The roads that goes into nowhere at the south west of the dam are a great fun adventure for mud but I bet they are a no-no right now, need to wait a few weeks. Google earth, pass the south tip of the dam and then up North on the west side of the dam.

28 minutes ago, joeyg said:

I'm speechless.  Really.  I just don't know how else to respond to a statement like this.  http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-34996604

 

School shootings: There were 64 school shootings in 2015, according to a dedicated campaign group set up in the wake of the Sandy Hook elementary school massacre in Connecticut in 2012. Those figures include occasions when a gun was fired but no-one was hurt.

 

Gun violence in the United States results in thousands of deaths and injuries annually.^[1] According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, in 2013, there were 73,505 nonfatal firearm injuries (23.23 per 100,000 U.S. citizens);^[2]11,208 homicides (3.5 per 100,000);^[3]

 

^{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States}

 

Don't we mean the same thing? Statistics is frightening in the US and it is exceptionally bad when it comes to school shootings. And it is bad in many European countries too nowadays

Quote

How the US compares: The number of gun murders per capita in the US in 2012 - the most recent year for comparable statistics - was nearly 30 times that in the UK, at 2.9 per 100,000 compared with just 0.1.

End Quote

Even passive Sweden is crazy nowadays. A little half a million city like Gothenburg has nearly a hundred murders a year now, it used to be 1-2 per year in the whole country 50 years ago

I have never ever in 25 years felt threatened in Thailand. I work for an American company and my American colleagues are adamant about that there are many areas where you must not be night time because it is too dangerous in America

Strangely enough, the big problem doesn't seem to be the gun as such, more attitude. Sweden has strict gun control and it is going crazy anyway. I still think strict and hard gun control is necessary

As to the pictured gun in this thread: It is not that difficult to get hold of illegal hand guns in Thailand if you know where to go but fully automatics is a big difference and penalties are severe. The police here are not just dumb lazy idiots who do nothing unless they get paid.

No way that is a real automatic 

11 minutes ago, joeyg said:

What!? 

Don't quite know what you mean. Unprovoked violence has been on the rise in western civilizations for a few decades now. I'm not saying that it won't come to Thailand too, it probably will but it is fortunately still very low here

I feel much safer here than I ever would in London, Paris or American cities. I can go with my 11 year old daughter in the Khlong Toey slum night time and still feel safe, no one would hurt us. And yes, I have done this

Main reason is attitude - steal, yes that happens of course, hurt and maim unnecessarily when it can be avoided, no. That is fortunately still a western thing

There is a point in doing nothing despite all the gun violence in the US.... Not a good one though

4 minutes ago, joeyg said:

However FYI Thailand has twice the gun violence deaths of the USA.  Just sayin' 

 

Big difference in where this happens. I talk about unprovoked school shootings. Keep on sayin'...

The good thing with Thai violence is that it is not unprovoked

6 hours ago, bfc1980 said:

Thai justice system isn't always fair

You have heard that from other Westerners who don't know anything about Thailand. Don't listen to people who aren't smart enough to keep quiet even though they don't know anything 

1) Thailand isn't different from Western countries, it's not a good idea to first break the law and then go to court 

2) This is civil law, why go to the police in the first place? They don't care unless it is criminal law... and they will laugh at her 

2) Civil law: The ex nanny will have to hire a lawyer and take this to court and she won't

3) Defamation is a joke, she will get nowhere

4) Who says that you can't fire her? How many years / months had she worked for you? What does her employment contract say?

5) Yes, the nanny needs a work permit 

Tell your wife to stop worry, just hold her head high and encourage the ex nanny to go to the police and if you / she ever see each other again

No worries :)

3 hours ago, DipStick said:

Very interesting post, however you seem to be overlooking a number of important facts

First of all, I think that the father is very safe in this case, so safe that he can be in Thailand with his son even. He has done all the right things

I didn't miss that the mother is Laos. I do write things like - as long as the father has evidence that the mother is Laos, and "Or has no birth certificate and no evidence that it is her child".

The mother is a single mother doesn't matter in court

3 hours ago, DipStick said:

the father appears to be the sole provider for the child including getting him a legal British passport, U.K. Schooling  , registering his child with the British authorities and giving his British son a roof over his head and food in his belly

Yes and all that matters but only... if a father can prove that he has not abducted the child. Everything you write above is useless in a UK court if it can be proven that a father abducted the child to be able to do it. I don't want to use "the father" because it is not the case here

3 hours ago, DipStick said:

it's not known, but is it possible the Laotion woman- the mother was in Thailand illegally and if so has no recourse to the Thai system

Thai Juvenile court does not care one bit if she was in the country illegally those 6 years, they take a decision in the best interest of the child for the future (except child abduction of course). The mother is Laos so she isn't going to a Thai Juvenile court. Well, she can but she should get sole custody in a Laos court first and then go to Thai court. If the child after that is apprehended in Thailand, then a Thai court would most likely let the first court and the evidence provided there decide. That's why I suggest that the father takes this to court in England, Thai Juvenile would most likely follow that and order the child to the father

3 hours ago, DipStick said:

why is the mother blatantly promoting a foreign boyfriend in Laos, who professes to have influence over the British embassy in Bangkok (7) why did the mother accept expenses and an air ticket given to her by the father of their son to visit the son in Thailand and then not travel. 

Because she's a bad mother!  I am not writing this arguing that the mother is good at all

I am writing it to explain the law so that foreigners who think - "I have shared custody in my home country so if I get the child there, then I am safe" - don't do something as stupid as the Brit I told you about did

Everything I wrote in post 57 is the truth

Mikey

18 minutes ago, DipStick said:

Can you see any court of law anywhere in the world have sympathy for this woman, because I would be hard pushed to suggest one.... However, this is the perfect scenario to suggest that if you have sex in Asia put something over the end of it.

If you don't have evidence then it never happened

Knowing the truth, no. In court and a smart manipulating mother against a western father ignorant about the law, absolutely yes. As I said, it is easier than most people think for an Asian mother to get sole custody in a British or other North-European court

2 hours ago, Wazza1 said:

...she may have trouble making an application in England because of her financial position...

I want to move down the quote but I can't, it should be by Regarding cost

I'll tell you about a Thai case, should be 8-10 years ago or so now. A British father decided that he wanted to take his half Thai child to the UK without the mother and without her permission. The child was a British citizen with a British passport

The mother immediately sued for sole custody in Thailand, got it and sued in the UK. UK courts of course followed the Thai court order and ordered sole custody to the mother in the UK too and the child was back in Thailand in record time. Everything as expected and so far so good.

Now, who can do this?

If a poor woman walks in to a police station in Thailand with a birth certificate and says that her child has been abducted, then the police will be happy to write a missing persons report and tell her how to get to Juvenile court. Unless she looks like and behaves like a prostitute... Or has no birth certificate and no evidence that it is her child. The same thing will happen at Juvenile court. They will help her to write the paperwork and she'll be in court within 3 months (7 days if emergency hearing is granted). I even know of one case where the court officers at central juvenile court wrote the paperwork for free for a British man

There is plenty of free advise and help both in Thailand and in the UK. I often went to the district attorney's building by the central Juvenile Court in Bangkok in the past, they have an area on the second floor where they offer free legal advice. Always helpful and friendly.

What about England? A poor Thai mother with sole custody of an abducted child currently in England can get all the help she needs, just start with Care. It's all up to initiative 

Back to the Brit: The Thai mother easily got sole custody in the UK based on the Thai court order. That British father posted in Scott's custody thread 4 years ago moaning about that he had gone all the way to the Supreme Court of Thailand to get access to his child and the mother still refused and not even the Supreme court did anything to help him  He abducts a child and then moans over that he is not trusted... It's been another 4 years since he wrote that and he probably still doesn't have access

Regarding cost: 

A poor Thai woman can get sole custody in Thailand for no more than the bus tickets if she has initiative or has a smart friend. She can get help to get sole custody in England, it does not have to cost a lot at all

There is a lot of ill-informed comments with "common knowledge" from people who don't know much about how the law works (British, Thai, international)..., don't know how easy it actually is to use a court order from another country (read Thai) with the right content to get sole custody of a child in the UK 

The OP has been a good father, he has tried to give the mother access. Most mothers and fathers who don't even try this are of course bad parents (there are a few valid exceptions, abuse, addiction - + - ).

Good Daddy OP, don't change anything  Just one more thing: Take this to court in the UK, present evidence that you try to let the mother see her child, what she is threatening to do and get a court order. That will stop the mother if she ever tries the legal way in the future

Mikey

On ‎10‎/‎23‎/‎2016 at 9:07 AM, performance said:

If you came into Thailand on UK passports and only holidaying have return tickets !

There will not be any problem. She holds a UK passport. Enough said. Also if you encounter a racist IMO officer. Simply say how nice your vacation  was and it was good for my daughter to see her country and pay tribute to his majesty. NEXT

A lot of ill-informed advice on ThaiVisa on this subject

The Hague convention in regards to child abduction basically handles 2 things: 1) it determines in which country the court case of an internationally abducted child should take place and 2) it is a commitment to stem child trafficking

A few hints;

Surname doesn't matter...

Having a return ticket doesn't matter...

Passport that a child enters a country with doesn't matter...

In this case: It is just highly unlikely that immigration would act if the child speaks English, looks like a living question mark when someone speaks Thai to him, doesn't have a Thai name and is travelling on a British passport together with his British father and they have matching entry stamps.

It is a fact that the child is THAI and immigration has all the right to demand either evidence of sole custody or confirmation from the other parent that the child is allowed to leave the country if they find out. Is Surname evidence? No, Return ticket? No, Passport? No...

It is quite useless to question the right of immigration to hold a child pending satisfactory evidence. Of course they have this right and I am glad that they are following up more carefully nowadays.

Countries that are members of the Hague convention will determine habitual residence and it is often the country where the child has its home - unless the child was abducted there - . Where custody was cleared first in a court of law matters much so the OP should clearly seek sole custody in the UK

Mikey

First, let me say that I think you have done admirably giving the mother the opportunity to see her son and I think you as a good father should continue to do it.

On ‎10‎/‎21‎/‎2016 at 7:15 PM, Puyai said:

We are not married.

No papers processed.

Child was born in Thailand.

The mother has done nothing.

My son is not a Lao citizen.

Thanks for your reply.

You are safe in Thailand as long as you have a birth certificate translated to Thai that clearly shows the mother as Laos, and the child and father as British. 

If you have a British birth certificate, then get it translated to Thai and then certified at the Consular Affairs department on Cheang Wattana Rd.

Laos has not signed the Hague convention about international child abduction so the mother cannot get the child returned from the UK to Laos, correct, but she can of course still use her right to access to the child inside the UK. You and your son are British and I don't know the law in your country but you should know that most countries in the world do not accept the fathers name on the birth certificate as evidence and that gives the mother sole custody in the home country of the father too.  Regardless, get sole custody in the UK

First, let me say that I think you have done admirably giving the mother the opportunity to see her son and I think you should continue to do it.

On ‎10‎/‎21‎/‎2016 at 7:15 PM, Puyai said:

We are not married.

No papers processed.

Child was born in Thailand.

The mother has done nothing.

My son is not a Lao citizen.

Thanks for your reply.

You are safe in Thailand as long as you have a birth certificate translated to Thai that clearly shows the mother as Laos, the child and the father as British. If you have a British birth certificate, then get it translated to Thai and then certified at the Consular Affairs department on Cheang Wattana Rd. You are safe to continue to travel to Thailand with your son if you have that

Laos has not signed the Hague convention about international child abduction so the mother cannot get the child returned the UK to Laos, correct, but she can of course still use her right to access to the child inside the UK. You and your son are British and I don't know the law in your country but you should know that most countries in the world do not accept the fathers name on the birth certificate as evidence and that gives the mother sole custody in the home country of the father too.  Regardless, get sole custody in the UK

3 hours ago, rhythmworx said:

 

Familiarize yourself with the metasploit framework and many other tools used for penetration testing and you will see I speak truth.

 

Maybe people are watching you right now via your webcam or listening via microphone (if you have them).

 

XP isn't safe, take it or leave it, there was no patch for  #meterpreter  >   use exploit/windows/local/bypassuac

 

Just trying to be helpful

All multi national companies using older versions of browsers are aware of what you say, the simple work around is that no administrator account is allowed internet access

You are right, and there is a simple work around that private users never use