Video: Mother and child in lucky escape under the wheels of a truck

 

video screenshot

 

A video posted on Facebook showed a mother with her child ride a motorcycle between two stationary trucks.

 

The driver of the second truck was unable to see her and ran over her and her child. 

 

Thai Rath reported that the driver of the black pick-up in the foreground sounded his horn alerting the truck driver. 

 

Thai Rath said that the footage was posted as a warning to motorcyclists.

 

Mother and child were fine - the little one just suffered a few cuts. 

 

The incident happened in Nakorn Pathom around 3.45 pm on Monday afternoon. 

 

-- © Copyright Thai Visa News 2018-10-12

 

 

This woman should be charged with reckless endangerment of her child doing something so stupid and thank her luck they weren't run over and killed , there's no way the driver could have seen them in front of his truck .

Theres a law that motorbikes should only use the inside lane but it never happens.

Sent from my SM-P901 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

31 minutes ago, keith101 said:

This woman should be charged with reckless endangerment of her child doing something so stupid and thank her luck they weren't run over and killed , there's no way the driver could have seen them in front of his truck .

I'm surprised he can see anything with all that crap stuck over his windscreen.

Will she learn............that is a rhetorical question that requires no reply......poor child will be traumatised for a long time.

Kudos to the Ford driver for alerting the lorry driver.

Another misleading headline.

 

The truck did not run over them. 

Another misleading headline.
 
The truck did not run over them. 

The truck certainly didn’t walk over them.


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

Just an ordinary day in Los!

5 hours ago, PETERTHEEATER said:

Another misleading headline.

 

The truck did not run over them. 

It said they had a lucky escape under the wheels of a truck. Why is that so misleading?

2 hours ago, Jane Dough said:

It said they had a lucky escape under the wheels of a truck. Why is that so misleading?

Because they were never under the "WHEELS" or anything else of the truck

Maybe you don't actually know what a wheel is

she's lucky, the drivers usually keep going and later claim 'I didn't realise I'd hit anything' ????

6 hours ago, HOAX said:

The truck certainly didn’t walk over them.


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

There was a low speed collision because of the gross stupidity of the mother, who then picked herself and her child up and retreated to the safety of the pavement

3 minutes ago, foxboy said:

she's lucky, the drivers usually keep going and later claim 'I didn't realise I'd hit anything' ????

The only reason she is lucky is because her stupidity did not end hers and / or her child's life

35 minutes ago, oldlakey said:

Because they were never under the "WHEELS" or anything else of the truck

Maybe you don't actually know what a wheel is

 

Typical TV semantics...  The Mother and Child did have a very lucky escape from being run over by a truck... instead of being petty and arguing only about how precise the headline is, can't you just accept that they were lucking from being run over? (it doesn't really matter how close to the wheels they came does it? the result would still have been catastrophic had the truck not stopped)

 

-------

 

As with the majority of incidents on Thailands roads - its takes two.... In this case, the Windshield of the lorry is full of 'stuff' potentially obstructing his view. 

The mother crossed between two huge vehicles without paying any real attention to how visible she was and placed herself in significant danger... 

 

Both mother and child are extremely lucky, this could so easily have result in a tragedy. 

 

1 minute ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

Typical TV semantics...  The Mother and Child did have a very lucky escape from being run over by a truck... instead of being petty and arguing about only about how precise the headline is, can't you just leave it at that?

 

-------

 

As with the majority of incidents on Thailands roads - its takes two.... In this case, the Windshield of the lorry is full of 'stuff' potentially obstructing his view. 

The mother crossed between two huge vehicles without paying any real attention to how visible she was and placed herself in significant danger... 

 

Both mother and child are extremely lucky, this could so easily have result in a tragedy. 

 

You can't legislate for stupidity my man

Have a nice day

8 minutes ago, oldlakey said:

The only reason she is lucky is because her stupidity did not end hers and / or her child's life

welcome to Thailand ????

3 minutes ago, oldlakey said:

Stupidity is not limited to Thailand, there now that should please "DICK"

I assume you are referring to richard_smith237, I hadn't actually read his post until now, but having read it I wholeheartedly agree with it. Despite who was at fault both mother and child were 'lucky'. This manoeuvre probably happens a million times a day in Thailand, and not always with a favourable outcome

1 minute ago, foxboy said:

I assume you are referring to richard_smith237, I hadn't actually read his post until now, but having read it I wholeheartedly agree with it. Despite who was at fault both mother and child were 'lucky'. This manoeuvre probably happens a million times a day in Thailand, and not always with a favourable outcome

I agree with the factual statements but then who would not

My barb was aimed at the idea he has that we can't speak as we want especially when something is nonsense 

1 minute ago, oldlakey said:

I agree with the factual statements but then who would not

My barb was aimed at the idea he has that we can't speak as we want especially when something is nonsense 

 

Your 'barb'.... you took offense???? offense at the suggestion that instead of seeing a bigger picture you concentrated on semantics of whether or not they were stuck under the wheels...  with no further intelligent response than 'DICK'... (thats some rather thin skin)..... lets face it, the response (DICK) lacks both originality and intelligence and help us [the reader] understand the character of a person who concentrates on pettiness...  Its clear for anyone what the headline meant, except for you... Of course, you can say what you want about the headline, you did, and in doing so presented certain degree of pettiness...

 

Moving on... The only way to avoid such incidents is of course through education... Its much the same as teaching people that the headlight on their motorcycle is primarily not for better road illumination but so they [the rider] may be more visible in the dark... I think this point is lost on many here where there exists a significant failure in the identification of risk people tend to place themselves in... In the case of this accident the motorcyclist placing themselve unnecessarily at significant risk in the line of fire between two trucks. 

Just now, richard_smith237 said:

Get ready for?....  (thinly veiled threat?)....

 

You're still taking offense - don't be such a baby... 

 

 

No threat my man, thinly veiled or otherwise, it simply means you can expect an answer as you are now finding out

Now go back and read "ALL" of the thread and see if you can spot your mistake

In future don't be so quick to jump in feet first

16 minutes ago, oldlakey said:

No threat my man, thinly veiled or otherwise, it simply means you can expect an answer as you are now finding out

Now go back and read "ALL" of the thread and see if you can spot your mistake

In future don't be so quick to jump in feet first

I see... Correction then... 'Except for you and one other poster' its pretty obvious what the headline meant without the need to argue petty semantics of whether or not they escaped from under a wheel as opposed to having escaped the imminence of being crushed by a wheel... 

 

Having a petty argument about arguing about petty semantics is much more fun !... 

 

Just now, richard_smith237 said:

I see... Correction then... 'Except for you and one other poster' its pretty obvious what the headline meant without the need to argue petty semantics of whether or not they escaped from under a wheel as opposed to having escaped the imminence of being crushed by a wheel... 

 

Having a petty argument about arguing about petty semantics is much more fun !... 

 

I disagree somewhat my man

In cases such as this incident you really need to get your wording rather more accurate, and less sensational don't you think, if you want to be taken seriously anyway

 

5 minutes ago, oldlakey said:

I disagree somewhat my man

In cases such as this incident you really need to get your wording rather more accurate, and less sensational don't you think, if you want to be taken seriously anyway

 

You don't think they were ever at risk of being crushed by the wheels of the truck?

 

In which case 'a Mother and child were knocked off their bike' is as unsensational as it could get... however, had the truck not stopped they were facing the very real threat of being crushed if they didn't get out of the way quickly enough, particularly the mother whose legs it would appear are inline with the trucks wheels. 

 

You may not think so... but, escaping being crushed by the truck would be a fairly accurate description. 

Just now, richard_smith237 said:

You don't think they were ever at risk of being crushed by the wheels of the truck?

 

In which case 'a Mother and child were knocked off their bike' is as unsensational as it could get... however, had the truck not stopped they were facing the very real threat of being crushed if they didn't get out of the way quickly enough, particularly the mother whose legs it would appear are inline with the trucks wheels. 

 

You may not thing so... but escaping being crushed by the truck would be a fairly accurate description. 

IF, yes there is that "Blessed" word again "IF"

Actually there was never any chance of the mother and child being under the wheels of the truck, because the collision was so slow and the truck stopped almost immediately

These are the actual facts of what happened there is "NO IF" there my man

Please don't try and move the goalposts, yes I agree they escaped from being crushed by the truck, but they were still NOT under the trucks wheels

As I said lets cut the sensationalism 

1 minute ago, oldlakey said:

IF, yes there is that "Blessed" word again "IF"

Actually there was never any chance of the mother and child being under the wheels of the truck, because the collision was so slow and the truck stopped almost immediately

These are the actual facts of what happened there is "NO IF" there my man

Please don't try and move the goalposts, yes I agree they escaped from being crushed by the truck, but they were still NOT under the trucks wheels

As I said lets cut the sensationalism 

 

I don't think it sensationalist to suggest they escaped a life changing incident....  

 

The truck driver didn't see them. The article implied that the truck stopped in response to the black pickup sounding its horn. Had the truck not stopped there may not have been enough time to escape injury.

 

It is interesting how we see things so differently, which is one of the attractions of ThaiVisa.com.... in that the very same video, article, picture, event can be interpreted in so many different ways. It would appear that see this as a minor bump, nothing to be too concerned about or sensationalize, the mother and child were in no imminent danger of being run over by the truck. I, on the other hand thought they were extremely lucky not to have been run over. 

 

 

 

Looks to me like the kid jumps up quickly and starts to pull the mother away from danger.

 

Is it possible that the child is more intelligent than the mother?

3 minutes ago, chickenslegs said:

Looks to me like the kid jumps up quickly and starts to pull the mother away from danger.

 

Is it possible that the child is more intelligent than the mother?

They could hardly be less...

18 minutes ago, oldlakey said:

I see quite clearly what happened in the video Richard

The truck only moved forward 2 feet at the most after the collision

It's quite obvious what would have happened "IF" the truck had not stopped so quickly, and there would have been NO escape from under the trucks wheels

The truck did "STOP" though did it not Richard, so your speculation is just that speculation

It's so obvious it makes my testicles ache  

 

Your point being that the Mother and Child were not lucky and that they did not escape anything because the truck stopped in time ?????

why not find something more interesting to argue about rather than how each of you see the viedo differently. This is why eye witness accounts are wrong more than right.

5 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

Your point being that the Mother and Child were not lucky and that they did not escape anything because the truck stopped in time ?????

No Richard, they were extremely lucky "Because" the truck stopped in time, so escaping a "potentially life threatening situation"

Try a bit of logical thinking my man, instead of speculation all the time, I have made my position quite clear already in my earlier Posts

If the truck had not stopped so quickly then of course the title would have come to pass with quite possibly rather painful results for them both

One would hope "MOTHER" would learn from her performance but doubtful, as anybody who would put themselves and their child in such danger are IMHO a lost cause

Now the weekend is upon us once more so all that remains to be said from my point of view is have a nice safe one