Tourist Police taking the fun out of Koh Phangan

[Dinobot]

I think OP is finally starting to get the hint.

[Tropicalevo]

The bit that most people forget is that there are thousands of laws.

 

Each of us decides which laws we break and which laws we follow.

 

So - it is OK to break the drinking, drugs, smoking, labour, paying for sex laws? When then does it become OK to break the killing, underage sex, rape, robbery, GBH laws? Who decides? After reading recent posts, I certainly do not trust most of the posters on TV to tell me which laws to follow!

[BritManToo]

9 minutes ago, Tropicalevo said:

The bit that most people forget is that there are thousands of laws.

 

Each of us decides which laws we break and which laws we follow.

 

So - it is OK to break the drinking, drugs, smoking, labour, paying for sex laws? When then does it become OK to break the killing, underage sex, rape, robbery, GBH laws? Who decides? After reading recent posts, I certainly do not trust most of the posters on TV to tell me which laws to follow!

I decide,

It's not OK to harm other people.

What I do to me is nobodies business but mine. 

[brain150]

Why would any Government ever have the "right" to tell the people when or how much Alcohol they can buy or drink ? When did the people ever give this right to the Government ?

 

As no individual can have this right where does the Government get this right from ???

 

 

... and none of this is LAW ! It is statutes, regulations, Acts or orders - a very different thing all together !!!

[myshem]

16 hours ago, BritManToo said:

I decide,

It's not OK to harm other people.

What I do to me is nobodies business but mine. 

 

Exactly ! this is the only way to think.

 

 

[Kieran00001]

2 hours ago, brain150 said:

Why would any Government ever have the "right" to tell the people when or how much Alcohol they can buy or drink ? When did the people ever give this right to the Government ?

 

As no individual can have this right where does the Government get this right from ???

 

 

... and none of this is LAW ! It is statutes, regulations, Acts or orders - a very different thing all together !!!

 

Actually not very different things at all !!! 

 

The only difference is that law applies to all people all the time whereas other legislation only applies to some people or some of the time.

[Kieran00001]

2 hours ago, brain150 said:

Why would any Government ever have the "right" to tell the people when or how much Alcohol they can buy or drink ? When did the people ever give this right to the Government ?

 

As no individual can have this right where does the Government get this right from ???

 

 

... and none of this is LAW ! It is statutes, regulations, Acts or orders - a very different thing all together !!!

 

No individual has the right, but the people gave that right to the government, we call that democracy.  The people fought for democracy and the people won, then the people elected a government, and the people gave their government the power to produce legislation.

[Dinobot]

Why would any Government ever have the "right" to tell the people when or how much Alcohol they can buy or drink ? When did the people ever give this right to the Government ?
 
As no individual can have this right where does the Government get this right from ???
 
 
... and none of this is LAW ! It is statutes, regulations, Acts or orders - a very different thing all together !!!

Alcohol consumption related laws are quite common, in most if not all countries, in some form or another.

[tlandtday]

On 2/18/2019 at 1:15 PM, robblok said:

Sorry to rain on your parade, but the no alcohol rule is NOT just for non tourist shops. If you go to BKK most of the restaurants won't serve you alcohol during the times you mention. Its a country wide thing and you were just lucky it was not applied before. 

 

I agree that the rules are stupid however they were always there just not enforced before. Smoking is no longer allowed so you have to adapt and tell people they can't smoke at certain places. 

 

Its just how it is, just adhere to the rules and you will be fine. 

It's probably not as simple as that sounds much like the local police may need a pay raise.

[Spidey]

On ‎2‎/‎18‎/‎2019 at 7:27 AM, Neeranam said:

I think you mean England, who can't handle their drink.

Correct me if I'm wrong but it's Wales that had the most draconian alcohol laws. No alcohol at all on Sundays. Also, went to Glasgow a couple of years back. Went to Wetherspoons for my usual full monty and a pint of Stella for breakfast, as I usually did when on holiday in the UK. "Sorry sir, no alcohol before 11", Glasgow rules, apparently.

[Spidey]

On ‎2‎/‎19‎/‎2019 at 10:55 PM, Bundooman said:

Ahh.... Buckfast Abbey wine - wonderful stuff! Never seen a Jock drinking it though.....

Then you've never been to Glasgow and travelled on the Metro.

[Neeranam]

5 hours ago, Spidey said:

Correct me if I'm wrong but it's Wales that had the most draconian alcohol laws. No alcohol at all on Sundays. Also, went to Glasgow a couple of years back. Went to Wetherspoons for my usual full monty and a pint of Stella for breakfast, as I usually did when on holiday in the UK. "Sorry sir, no alcohol before 11", Glasgow rules, apparently.

Really, I haven't drank there for years. When I last drank in the UK we could from 24 hours a day in Edinburgh and 20 hours a day in Aberdeen, 1994.

[Spidey]

1 hour ago, Neeranam said:

Really, I haven't drank there for years. When I last drank in the UK we could from 24 hours a day in Edinburgh and 20 hours a day in Aberdeen, 1994.

Went to Edinburgh the same week,no problem there. Purely Glasgow licencing laws. I can't imagine why. 555

[Tropicalevo]

On 2/20/2019 at 9:08 PM, BritManToo said:

I decide,

It's not OK to harm other people.

What I do to me is nobodies business but mine. 

I like your answer, but what about the grey areas. eg drunk driving. You might only harm yourself but then again, you might harm others. Most of us (including myself) are guilty of this one here on the islands thanks to the lack of affordable alternatives.

[yogavnture]

i dont think u understand so i will explain. backpackers on a budget dont bring cash into the system.  wealthy tourists on holiday do bring in money.  thais dont want cheap backpackers that just go to 7 11 and buy booze and sit on beach. getting drunk. they want higher end tourists.  havent you heard.?  their is talk them removing the full moon party from kpy and moving it to somewheres like pattaya or phuket...........from what i can gather the thai auth. is trying to turn kpy into an eco tourism destination before its too late and it turns into a samui nightmare.  just look at ko tao. the govt is putting money into that island, infrastruture and their is urban planning going on their.  these three islands are big money to the thais  samui too far gone, but ko tao can still be saved. and kpy as well.  get rid of the cheap backpackers is what they want to do. well heeled tourists want nothing to do with cheap backpackers.  understand now?

[mikebike]

3 minutes ago, yogavnture said:

well heeled tourists want nothing to do with cheap backpackers.  understand now?

No, I do not. Are you saying rich people need not concern themselves with regular people? Or that rich people’s rights are somehow more worthy?

[yogavnture]

5 minutes ago, yogavnture said:

i dont think u understand so i will explain. backpackers on a budget dont bring cash into the system.  wealthy tourists on holiday do bring in money.  thais dont want cheap backpackers that just go to 7 11 and buy booze and sit on beach. getting drunk. they want higher end tourists.  havent you heard.?  their is talk them removing the full moon party from kpy and moving it to somewheres like pattaya or phuket...........from what i can gather the thai auth. is trying to turn kpy into an eco tourism destination before its too late and it turns into a samui nightmare.  just look at ko tao. the govt is putting money into that island, infrastruture and their is urban planning going on their.  these three islands are big money to the thais  samui too far gone, but ko tao can still be saved. and kpy as well.  get rid of the cheap backpackers is what they want to do. well heeled tourists want nothing to do with cheap backpackers.  understand now?

once the thais get rid of the backpacker scene on kpy . then they will open an airport thier .

[yogavnture]

Just now, mikebike said:

No, I do not. Are you saying rich people need not concern themselves with regular people? Or that rich people’s rights are somehow more worthy?

its what is. its reality.  the thais prefer rich tourists at higher end resorts spending money for a 10 day holiday. they dont like drunken cheap tourists in a 200 baht hut.  sorry. thats the reality. and yes , rich tourists that are well dressed dont want to see drunken stupor full moon people.  its all about money.

[mikebike]

8 minutes ago, yogavnture said:

its what is. its reality.  the thais prefer rich tourists at higher end resorts spending money for a 10 day holiday. they dont like drunken cheap tourists in a 200 baht hut.  sorry. thats the reality. and yes , rich tourists that are well dressed dont want to see drunken stupor full moon people.  its all about money.

You have an interesting, and decidedly opinionated, concept “reality”. 

 

Thailand’s aquiecence to Chinese tourist groups would tend to disprove your theory.

Edited February 25, 2019 by mikebike

[Kieran00001]

22 minutes ago, yogavnture said:

i dont think u understand so i will explain. backpackers on a budget dont bring cash into the system.  wealthy tourists on holiday do bring in money.  thais dont want cheap backpackers that just go to 7 11 and buy booze and sit on beach. getting drunk. they want higher end tourists.  havent you heard.?  their is talk them removing the full moon party from kpy and moving it to somewheres like pattaya or phuket...........from what i can gather the thai auth. is trying to turn kpy into an eco tourism destination before its too late and it turns into a samui nightmare.  just look at ko tao. the govt is putting money into that island, infrastruture and their is urban planning going on their.  these three islands are big money to the thais  samui too far gone, but ko tao can still be saved. and kpy as well.  get rid of the cheap backpackers is what they want to do. well heeled tourists want nothing to do with cheap backpackers.  understand now?

 

The evidence shows that backpackers contribution to the economy aids local people more than high end tourists.  While backpackers stay in small hotels and eat in small restaurants or eat street food, which tend to be locally owned small businesses which see the money stay in the immediate locality, high end tourists stay in larger hotels, eat in in-house or well renowned restaurants, which tend to be larger businesses which are often owned by people in other parts of the country or by international chains and thus see the money leave the area.

 

As for Phagnan specifically, I suspect the reasons for wanting to 'clean up' the island have nothing to do with turning it into an ecotourism destination, which it already is.  I suspect it has to do with the negative image the full moon party has for many, without which they could further develop the island turning it into the next Samui.

[huberthammer]

4 hours ago, yogavnture said:

its what is. its reality.  the thais prefer rich tourists at higher end resorts spending money for a 10 day holiday. they dont like drunken cheap tourists in a 200 baht hut.  sorry. thats the reality. and yes , rich tourists that are well dressed dont want to see drunken stupor full moon people.  its all about money.

and what has all this to do with this topic? If they really enforce afternoon drinking it will impact the guy who splashes a few thousand baht on a bottle of vino as much as the backpacker drinking cheap booze.

[khunPer]

5 hours ago, mikebike said:

No, I do not. Are you saying rich people need not concern themselves with regular people? Or that rich people’s rights are somehow more worthy?

You seem to understand Thailand and their VIP-benefits, i.e. "rich people’s rights are somehow more worthy"...????

[yogavnture]

6 hours ago, khunPer said:

You seem to understand Thailand and their VIP-benefits, i.e. "rich people’s rights are somehow more worthy"...????

money rules

[yogavnture]

10 hours ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

The evidence shows that backpackers contribution to the economy aids local people more than high end tourists.  While backpackers stay in small hotels and eat in small restaurants or eat street food, which tend to be locally owned small businesses which see the money stay in the immediate locality, high end tourists stay in larger hotels, eat in in-house or well renowned restaurants, which tend to be larger businesses which are often owned by people in other parts of the country or by international chains and thus see the money leave the area.

 

As for Phagnan specifically, I suspect the reasons for wanting to 'clean up' the island have nothing to do with turning it into an ecotourism destination, which it already is.  I suspect it has to do with the negative image the full moon party has for many, without which they could further develop the island turning it into the next Samui.

what evidence

[yogavnture]

Just now, yogavnture said:

what evidence

do the high end places have employees?

[yogavnture]

On 2/18/2019 at 2:04 PM, BritManToo said:

In Siam Reap the hotel I stayed at had a 24/7 pool bar serving beer for 50c a pint.

Half the tables had joints, grinders, and bags of weed on open display with everyone partaking.

 

Didn't see any police the entire time I was there.

They know how to make tourists welcome!

 

And yes I did have beer for breakfast, the next cheapest drink was a pot of tea for $1, which wasn't bad value as you could get 4 cups from it.

go to siam reap then,  cambodia is a poor country.  they know how to make drug tourists welcome.

[yogavnture]

10 hours ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

The evidence shows that backpackers contribution to the economy aids local people more than high end tourists.  While backpackers stay in small hotels and eat in small restaurants or eat street food, which tend to be locally owned small businesses which see the money stay in the immediate locality, high end tourists stay in larger hotels, eat in in-house or well renowned restaurants, which tend to be larger businesses which are often owned by people in other parts of the country or by international chains and thus see the money leave the area.

 

As for Phagnan specifically, I suspect the reasons for wanting to 'clean up' the island have nothing to do with turning it into an ecotourism destination, which it already is.  I suspect it has to do with the negative image the full moon party has for many, without which they could further develop the island turning it into the next Samui.

i agree with the neg image of full moon party i was at pier of ko tao and day after full moon the drunkards and drug addicts come over to ko tao still wasted and the first thing they go do is rent a moto bike putting others at risk in thier pink hats.  time to move the full moon party to pattaya where it belongs. ps.  those big resorts pay off the cops alot more than a mom and pop shop selling rice whiskey to a backpacker

[Kieran00001]

15 hours ago, yogavnture said:

what evidence

 

For instance, there was some done a while ago by Malaysia which has resulted in the government providing support for home-stays.

[Kieran00001]

15 hours ago, yogavnture said:

do the high end places have employees?

 

Yes, but I did not say that high end places do not support the local economy at all, just that backpackers support it more. Upmarket hotels tend to have seasonal staff, these are often immigrants or staff recruited in other parts of the country, and so the money leaves the area, while small places tend to have family working for them and so the money stays locally.

[Kieran00001]

15 hours ago, yogavnture said:

i agree with the neg image of full moon party i was at pier of ko tao and day after full moon the drunkards and drug addicts come over to ko tao still wasted and the first thing they go do is rent a moto bike putting others at risk in thier pink hats.  time to move the full moon party to pattaya where it belongs. ps.  those big resorts pay off the cops alot more than a mom and pop shop selling rice whiskey to a backpacker

 

Why would big resorts be paying off the cops?