Buriram: So unnecessary as Year 10 student dies on his way to school

[dfdgfdfdgs]

1 minute ago, Jip99 said:

Driving with caution (including slowing down) to meet road conditions is never an offence. 

 

It doesn't matter if it is an offence or not when the car behind hits you and sends your face skidding across the tarmac.  Tell your face it is not an offence and see if it stops hurting.

[NoshowJones]

3 hours ago, Jip99 said:

 

 

Come on Possum, I know you have studied it ! 

 

ThaiDriving.pdf

Sorry to disappoint you Jip, but I have never even seen one.

[puchooay]

28 minutes ago, Russell17au said:

If you have got a licence then how did you get it or are you just trying to be a smart ass and flame this thread?. Anyone who has a licence knows that the white stop line and the stop sign means that ALL vehicles stop and give way. There is no such thing in this case as a left turn lane. So the bike coming out of the soi broke the law so you better sit down and do some study so that you will know the law when you go for you licence. By your definition the bike rider was not traveling on the legal road, he was traveling on the shoulder of the road. Your other points have nothing to do with the cause of the accident. Was anyone speeding? YES, the bike rider who came out of the soi because if you open your eyes and look at the video you will see that the only thing that stopped him from going in front of the truck was by him hitting the student, if he had of come out of the soi slowly then he could have stayed on the left edge of the road and not hit the student. I suggest that you learn to drive and go and get a licence and then you might know what people are talking about

Yes. I do have a licence. Had one for 15 years. Last time I renewed I had to watch the video. In the video it clearly stated that the left side is a cycle/motorcycle lane, not the hard shoulder. It also showed that left turns without stopping were legal in some cases. They did point out that one should look first, this being the mistake that the red bike made. It was not a violation of the law. 

 

My other points are perfectly valid. If any of the parties are unlicenced or are operating unregisterd vehicles then, if they were law abiding, they should not have been there and the accident would not have happened. 

 

I'm not saying that the red bike was not at fault. If you ho back to my original post you will see that but ad I stated my knowledge of tha junction leads me to believe that it was not the red bike's actions alone. This is not the first accident I have experience of at this junction. That is why I proceed with caution when I am in that vicinity. I just hope that the many people who saw this accident and the aftermath will do the same in the future. 

[puchooay]

37 minutes ago, dfdgfdfdgs said:

 

No it doesn't.  It has nothing to do with how I drive.  The poster did not say slow down a little, they said they would not want to be on the inside of a songtaew when it was near a junction.  They said they would use their mirrors and take action by slowing down if they felt that that was going to happen.  If the songtaew approaches at speed and you are already very close to the junction, that implies potentially slowing down a lot.  If you disagree that slowing down for no reason (you can debate if there is a reason or not but most drivers would not see a reason) is not likely to cause an accident, then I wonder why there are so many crashes at roundabouts all over the world when the car in front stops instead of proceeding onto the roundabout as the driver behind is expecting.  Or even crashes at red lights when the car in front stops at an amber light and the driver behind is expecting it to continue and cannot brake in time.  If you disagree that the poster's actions are more likely to cause an accident that prevent it, then we'll just have to leave it at that, since neither of us has any data to back up our hypotheses (I assume).

I also said I know the junction well. That is why I make sure I am aware of what is around me long before the junction. 

 

Most junctions too really. When I took my driving lessons many years ago I was taught to use rear view mirror every 10 seconds or so. Something I still do now. 

[kwak250]

The motorcyclist who pulled straight out and crashed into the schoolboy actually said on tv that the schoolboy hit his handlebars.

As if he had a choice?

Idiots everyday pull out into fast moving traffic without stopping i am surprised the government even bother to paint white stop lines at junctions .

 

[Russell17au]

18 minutes ago, puchooay said:

Yes. I do have a licence. Had one for 15 years. Last time I renewed I had to watch the video. In the video it clearly stated that the left side is a cycle/motorcycle lane, not the hard shoulder. It also showed that left turns without stopping were legal in some cases. They did point out that one should look first, this being the mistake that the red bike made. It was not a violation of the law. 

 

My other points are perfectly valid. If any of the parties are unlicenced or are operating unregisterd vehicles then, if they were law abiding, they should not have been there and the accident would not have happened. 

 

I'm not saying that the red bike was not at fault. If you ho back to my original post you will see that but ad I stated my knowledge of tha junction leads me to believe that it was not the red bike's actions alone. This is not the first accident I have experience of at this junction. That is why I proceed with caution when I am in that vicinity. I just hope that the many people who saw this accident and the aftermath will do the same in the future. 

I also have a licence and I have had mine since 1962. One of the factors that you a failing to accept and you claim to know the intersection is that there is a stop sign located there and the law states that you must stop at a stop sign. There are some locations where you can legally turn left with safety at anytime. But there is a stop sign and Mr blue helmet failed to stop and proceed with safety.

Your next point is a load of crap and you know it because none of your paragraph caused the accident. It is the same as the crap when a farang is involved in an accident, it is always the farangs fault because if the farang was not in the country then the accident would not have happened.

The only thing that is known about the student is that he did not wear a helmet but that did not cause the accident. The accident was caused by Mr blue helmet by failing to stop at the stop sign and entering the priority road unsafely which caused the accident. The weight of the baht bus has nothing to do with the cause of the accident, once Mr blue helmet hit the student there was nothing that the baht bus driver could do to avoid the accident. The baht bus drivers mistake was to not stop at the scene of the accident.

It does not matter what way you want to look at this, the cause of the accident is Mr blue helmet not stopping at the stop sign and entering the priority road unsafely.

They are the facts and that is why Mr blue helmet has been charged.

If you have a good look at the video you will notice that the student was riding in the right hand side of the bike lane which did give Mr blue helmet room to enter that lane if he had not been going so fast. After the accident there was a woman on a bike came out of the soi and she was able to stay in the left hand side of the bike left because she entered the priority road at a much slower speed than Mr blue helmet.

[puchooay]

10 minutes ago, Russell17au said:

I also have a licence and I have had mine since 1962. One of the factors that you a failing to accept and you claim to know the intersection is that there is a stop sign located there and the law states that you must stop at a stop sign. There are some locations where you can legally turn left with safety at anytime. But there is a stop sign and Mr blue helmet failed to stop and proceed with safety.

Your next point is a load of crap and you know it because none of your paragraph caused the accident. It is the same as the crap when a farang is involved in an accident, it is always the farangs fault because if the farang was not in the country then the accident would not have happened.

The only thing that is known about the student is that he did not wear a helmet but that did not cause the accident. The accident was caused by Mr blue helmet by failing to stop at the stop sign and entering the priority road unsafely which caused the accident. The weight of the baht bus has nothing to do with the cause of the accident, once Mr blue helmet hit the student there was nothing that the baht bus driver could do to avoid the accident. The baht bus drivers mistake was to not stop at the scene of the accident.

It does not matter what way you want to look at this, the cause of the accident is Mr blue helmet not stopping at the stop sign and entering the priority road unsafely.

They are the facts and that is why Mr blue helmet has been charged.

If you have a good look at the video you will notice that the student was riding in the right hand side of the bike lane which did give Mr blue helmet room to enter that lane if he had not been going so fast. After the accident there was a woman on a bike came out of the soi and she was able to stay in the left hand side of the bike left because she entered the priority road at a much slower speed than Mr blue helmet.

Yes. There is a stop sign. There is however a clear lane to turn left. I do know this intersection and you don't. 

 

Your comment about "always the farangs fault" is a funny old chestnut too. Simply not true. 

 

Funny how people have to bring out words like "ass" and "crap" when they are........?? 

[Russell17au]

3 minutes ago, puchooay said:

Yes. There is a stop sign. There is however a clear lane to turn left. I do know this intersection and you don't. 

 

Funny how people have to bring out words like "ass" and "crap" when they are........?? 

You know the intersection? then you would also know that it is classified as a single lane road and a stop sign positioned on a single lane road means all lanes must stop. It is quite clear that you do not know your road rules.

As for me being an "ass" and "crap" I will accept those derogatory terms of indearment from a person that does not know the road rules.

Good night

[puchooay]

3 minutes ago, Russell17au said:

You know the intersection? then you would also know that it is classified as a single lane road and a stop sign positioned on a single lane road means all lanes must stop. It is quite clear that you do not know your road rules.

As for me being an "ass" and "crap" I will accept those derogatory terms of indearment from a person that does not know the road rules.

Good night

Funny. "Single lane so all lanes must stop". Fell off my chair. 

 

I didn't use the two words you quoted. You did. 

 

 

[Jip99]

21 minutes ago, Russell17au said:

I also have a licence and I have had mine since 1962. One of the factors that you a failing to accept and you claim to know the intersection is that there is a stop sign located there and the law states that you must stop at a stop sign. There are some locations where you can legally turn left with safety at anytime. But there is a stop sign and Mr blue helmet failed to stop and proceed with safety.

Your next point is a load of crap and you know it because none of your paragraph caused the accident. It is the same as the crap when a farang is involved in an accident, it is always the farangs fault because if the farang was not in the country then the accident would not have happened.

The only thing that is known about the student is that he did not wear a helmet but that did not cause the accident. The accident was caused by Mr blue helmet by failing to stop at the stop sign and entering the priority road unsafely which caused the accident. The weight of the baht bus has nothing to do with the cause of the accident, once Mr blue helmet hit the student there was nothing that the baht bus driver could do to avoid the accident. The baht bus drivers mistake was to not stop at the scene of the accident.

It does not matter what way you want to look at this, the cause of the accident is Mr blue helmet not stopping at the stop sign and entering the priority road unsafely.

They are the facts and that is why Mr blue helmet has been charged.

If you have a good look at the video you will notice that the student was riding in the right hand side of the bike lane which did give Mr blue helmet room to enter that lane if he had not been going so fast. After the accident there was a woman on a bike came out of the soi and she was able to stay in the left hand side of the bike left because she entered the priority road at a much slower speed than Mr blue helmet.

 

 

The stop sign is largely irrelevant.

 

Had Mr blue helmet ‘stopped’ (for how long..a millisecond, 5 minutes?) it is what he does/did next that matters.

 

By not looking to his right and not ‘giving way’ to traffic on the main highway he is guilty of at least ‘causing death by dangerous driving’.....that would be the case irrespective of any road signs.

[dannyh2000uk]

Having been hospitalised in Thailand myself  after a moron pulled out years back, this video makes me so angry and sad on so many levels.

What a waste of a young life, in what was a clear day , with very few  discernible obstacles.

 

I still think about all those school kids perched on the top of busses flying along.

How <deleted> moronic, and surely a future video of this site.

 

R.I.P 

 

 

 

 

 

[Pierre57]

16 hours ago, Wiggy said:

Side soi boy will do the same again tomorrow and hope there's nothing coming.

He done the same the day before  ... there was nothing there  ... why should there be this day  ...! .....
these "drivers" are unbelievable 
RIP young man

[Flemo]

My wife and i got t-boned in Lopburi last October. The other driver had no licence and ran a stop sign. She has not been charged with anything as i understand. My wife is getting ready for a third round of neck surgery. Be careful of the sois. They can be deadly.

[gunderhill]

10 hours ago, dfdgfdfdgs said:

 

Well yes but owning a gun is not necessary to go about your everyday life, unless you are a particular kind of farmer, or maybe an executioner.  Driving kind of is necessary, for most people.  Everything in Thailand has little to no regulation, so you can't really single out driving as an anomaly.

Try mentioning the "unmentionable" in a bad  light  and you'll soon find out what they can enforce, and enforce  and indoctrinate from birth with great zeal and  100%  success.

[kiwikeith]

17 hours ago, Jip99 said:

Have to feel sorry for the song thaew driver - although no excuse for not stopping.

 

Not to mention the kid was driving underage, with no license this is irresponsible.

I have seen kids riding to school on bikes and the have to run beside the bike then jump on as to short yet to start of standing start.

Then you see three youngsters on a bike with a ten or nine yr old driving..

No excuse for the person who pulled out and the guy who did not stop, but this would not happen to a ten yr old if they were not allowed to ride bikes by their parents , and the police tighten up on this and bring in some school busses.

[Get Real]

6 hours ago, JSixpack said:

 

But it never, ever gets boring to schoolmarm about Thai driving and call Thai drivers morons and brainless, now does it? 

Actually yes, it does. Let´s call it a necessary evil until it fades away into a memory of the past.

[Happyman58]

7 hours ago, Russell17au said:

That is correct. It was a single violation of the traffic laws that caused this accident. The rider that failed to stop at the stop sign and give way to all the traffic on the priority road was the cause of this accident. Leading up to the accident the student and the baht bus driver were doing the right thing, but it was after the accident that things went wrong as well with the baht bus driver leaving the scene of the accident.

Rus stop signs mean nothing  to Thai drivers as does Red light lights. They are both red and i am sure when Thai drivers when they see them  they dont stop but think Oh wow they are pretty and red is my fav colour and just keep driving

[oldlakey]

3 hours ago, kiwikeith said:

 

Not to mention the kid was driving underage, with no license this is irresponsible.

I have seen kids riding to school on bikes and the have to run beside the bike then jump on as to short yet to start of standing start.

Then you see three youngsters on a bike with a ten or nine yr old driving..

No excuse for the person who pulled out and the guy who did not stop, but this would not happen to a ten yr old if they were not allowed to ride bikes by their parents , and the police tighten up on this and bring in some school busses.

The student was not 10 years old in this case mate, plus license or not who knows

In full agreement with the rest of your post but that just makes us a couple of dreamers

These kinds of fatal incidents will never end its too late to change the attitude of all concerned

If 25,000 plus deaths and many thousands of injuries wont do it nothing will

Backward and third world springs to mind

 

[jacko45k]

Another idiot who enters a main highway without looking!

And a child allowed to ride a motorcycle.

 

[metisdead]

An inflammatory post has been removed. 

[Phil Here]

Sorry for the lad that lost his life, but he shouldn't have on the bike in the 1st place. Did the other rider and driver have a licence? Although it wasn't the drivers fault, but then he should've stopped. Maybe he didn't stop because he doesn't have a licence. Laws here are made and never enforced correctly.

[Keesters]

Thailand..hub of dangerous drivers.

[thailand49]

23 hours ago, Jip99 said:

Have to feel sorry for the song thaew driver - although no excuse for not stopping.

Are you kidding me!  If you were driving the vehicle!  consider the speed the vehicle was traveling and the distant the bike fell in front of him it is impossible for the vehicle to stop. Even if the driver slam on the brakes he still would have run over the boy!

How can you say " feel sorry " then " no excuse for not stopping "

[thailand49]

23 hours ago, Jip99 said:

 

Overtaking on the left is not illegal on that road.

 

Perhaps it should be .....

Sorry you are incorrect legally!  Even noted in the Thai Driver hand book directly taken from the West..

Check the video again...   See the Solid white Line on the left... that means that one isn't suppose to cross unless necessary or in a emergency.  This is the same for a solid yellow or a solid double yellow or solid double white.

Overtaking on the inside although illegal is done all the time to the point it is normal but it doesn't make it legal. I myself do it all the time but got to do it safely. Here it is consider like a separate lane for smaller vehicles.

 

[Blackheart1916]

16 hours ago, fasteddie said:

The school kid wasn't undertaking on the left, he was riding on the left as is the law here.

You are correct of course it is the law, but that doesn't make the boy any less dead.

[Moonlover]

19 hours ago, robsamui said:

Not to mention the fact that he was undoubtedly illegally riding a motorcycle - the law is that you need to be 18 to ride a bike of over 110 ccs . . .

He probably didn't have a licence to ride a motorbike . .. . none of them do . . .

He  wasn't wearing a helmet . . . 

 

My thoughts go out to his family for their loss. RIP indeed.

 

But in a nation where laws are not enforced by the police, and any child can ride around the streets on a motorbike, it is only a matter of time before any / all of these children are involved in one kind of serious accident or another.

 

Speculation! A year 10 student can be 15 years old and is entitled to have a licence.

 

Speculation again. He was riding a Honda Wave with sells with a 110cc engine, which is one of the reasons they are so popular with youngsters.

 

However, he was a young, inexperienced rider, who failed to anticipate the actions of the other motorcyclist. That, despite the fact that they nearly all do this. He also broke another golden rule. That of 'overtaking at or near a junction'.

 

If the roles had been reversed, it's just possible that it could have the school kid who came out of the side road without looking. As said, 'they all do it'.

 

This accident is a stark reminder to myself as to why I never, ever ride in the narrow side lane (I call it the suicide lane) and why I never overtake near junctions, including U turn breaks.

[jamesmith]

Why 10 years old kid can be allowed to ride a moto bike ???????? In the village I am living now, there are many kids from 12 to younger riding bike crazily, where are the parents and where is the police ??????? LAW ?????????

I asked one kid 15 years ago, how did he go to school, he told me he drove , he was only 14 years old. And one day I saw a lorry driver , he was about 15 ,16 years old. His father riding a motor bike behind him. The father told me he was training the kid to be lorry driver, the kids was driving a big lorry with soil  

[JSixpack]

4 hours ago, Get Real said:

Actually yes, it does. Let´s call it a necessary evil until it fades away into a memory of the past.

 

Oh. Well then why is your schoolmarming and name calling a "necessary evil" that you just can't stop yourself from doing even though it's boring? Perhaps if we call it a "necessary enjoyment" we can make more progress on ending that particular boredom?

 

[Get Real]

9 minutes ago, JSixpack said:

 

Oh. Well then why is your schoolmarming and name calling a "necessary evil" that you just can't stop yourself from doing even though it's boring? Perhaps if we call it a "necessary enjoyment" we can make more progress on ending that particular boredom?

 

As you clearly can see, social media like facebook, twitter, instagram and other different medias are today the combined tools for making a change or a differens in many cases.
What do you think happens to differens and possible changes if people just stop viocing thier opinion, just because it´s boring and people like you just want to see everything that you can call enjoyment?

Next time you can actually sit down and think before you let your fingers fly over the keybord in a way that puts you in a position you didn´t mean from start.

[Jip99]

39 minutes ago, thailand49 said:

Sorry you are incorrect legally!  Even noted in the Thai Driver hand book directly taken from the West..

Check the video again...   See the Solid white Line on the left... that means that one isn't suppose to cross unless necessary or in a emergency.  This is the same for a solid yellow or a solid double yellow or solid double white.

Overtaking on the inside although illegal is done all the time to the point it is normal but it doesn't make it legal. I myself do it all the time but got to do it safely. Here it is consider like a separate lane for smaller vehicles.

 

 

 

Read earlier posts and see section 45 of the Road Traffic Act 1979.

 

Not related to this incident but is is perfectly LEGAL to overtake on the left where there are 2 lanes, or more, going in the same direction (i.e. dual carriageway and above - we are not talking about spillover lanes).