Video: Teen motorcyclists injured as pick-up does U-turn from left lane in Trat

[NotYourBusiness]

On 2/22/2019 at 8:00 AM, brokenbone said:

the bike was already in 2nd lane when the truck driver decided to cut him off, the bike had the right of way,

and it is the duty of the truck to wait until the other lanes he intend to cut off is free of traffic.

 

by the time the truck had successfully cut off the second lane, it was too late for anything, the bike tried to turn into the third lane as a last desperate resort, but alas, it was far and away too late

 

do you even grasp the concept of right of way ?

Sorry, no. While it may be true that the bike had the right of way, having the right of way does not relieve the bike of his duty to drive with due care and attention. The burden is upon the driver with the obligation to yield (the truck) to establish that the driver with the right of way (the bike) had a sufficient opportunity to avoid the collision. And he would have if he was driving with care and attention. The truck moved less than one meter after the impact (in other words, the truck was nearly stopped). A court would find that the bike had a sufficient opportunity to avoid the collision. The reason the bike could not avoid the collision is excessive speed and driving without care and with no attention. An analysis of the video would probably show that the bike was exceeding the speed limit, not paying attention, no attempt to brake at all, no license, and the bike is solely responsible for the damages. Yes the sudden move by the truck was ill advised, foolish, incompetent, all those things. Still, there is no double yellow (legal to make a u-turn), the bike hit the truck at a very high speed, not the other way around. Just my opinion, and I could be wrong. Let the flames begin ????

[RocketDog]

On 2/20/2019 at 3:50 PM, fruitman said:

I'm always suprised why other drivers don't horn to idiots who even can't make a corner/U-turn. For them it's normal to brake for it...

Same goes for parking, it takes ages because they never learned how to park. But it seems that nobody cares...they all have plenty of time and like to sit in the cool car.

It's sad to say but the reason is the thing Thai people are taught from birth: non-confrontation and 'up to him/her'. 

I honked at a pickup doing something stupid and my Thai GF told me later not to do it. Unfortunately her reasoning was sound: the driver will lose face and then seek vengeance on me in whatever way possible. 

 

Sad to say I have to agree with her and now don't honk. I do wag my head but that's it. It's called the law of the jungle : learn the law or you don't survive.

 

Trying to educate an entire population on proper road etiquette is dangerous and a waste of time. 

[gmac]

On 2/23/2019 at 8:17 PM, NotYourBusiness said:

Sorry, no. While it may be true that the bike had the right of way, having the right of way does not relieve the bike of his duty to drive with due care and attention. The burden is upon the driver with the obligation to yield (the truck) to establish that the driver with the right of way (the bike) had a sufficient opportunity to avoid the collision. And he would have if he was driving with care and attention. The truck moved less than one meter after the impact (in other words, the truck was nearly stopped). A court would find that the bike had a sufficient opportunity to avoid the collision. The reason the bike could not avoid the collision is excessive speed and driving without care and with no attention. An analysis of the video would probably show that the bike was exceeding the speed limit, not paying attention, no attempt to brake at all, no license, and the bike is solely responsible for the damages. Yes the sudden move by the truck was ill advised, foolish, incompetent, all those things. Still, there is no double yellow (legal to make a u-turn), the bike hit the truck at a very high speed, not the other way around. Just my opinion, and I could be wrong. Let the flames begin ????

I believe the law in Thailand prohibits u-turns if oncoming traffic is less than 200 metres distant, presumably a similar distance should allowed behind when performing this absurdly dangerous manoeuvre at a snail's pace on a single carriageway road.