No new laws on motorbikes i.e. 3 or more, baby's with no protection and modified bikes when the most percentage of accidents are bikes 

13 hours ago, AsianAtHeart said:

I'm for freedom of choice.  Seatbelts do more good than harm, but sometimes they can kill or injure.  To my mind, driving situations differ in the relative risks of wearing them or not wearing them.  In town, at low speeds, I'd feel safer without one.  On the highway, at high speeds, it's likely safer to wear it.  Passing through mountainous or watery terrains, I'd prefer to go without.  I've seen situations where people's lives were saved because they were NOT wearing a seatbelt, such as when a whole van with 16 people plunged off a logging bridge (not a high-quality bridge, and low to the water) into a river--all 15 of those wearing seatbelts perished, the one passenger without a belt managed to escape.  I do believe that these situations tend to occur less often than the other way around, but I think people should have freedom to choose for themselves.

 

So I'm happy if the traffic laws on seatbelts are not fastidiously enforced.

Un believable thinking and logic, but I guess they are among us. Oh and the world is not flat mate.

13 hours ago, IvorBiggun2 said:

Can you imagine trying to pull that one in a developed country? There is always a choice.

You mean walk?

2 hours ago, Stargeezr said:

Hey all you posters, do not forget that it is Thailand that you are talking about, and a lot of Thai

people do not have the money that you all have, or you would not be staying in Thailand year round.

  Baby steps are better than no steps at all.  Just saying the obvious. I chatted with some expats who

were grousing about the Thais and their problems, as it turned out these expats were making almost 100 thousand

US dollar a year in retirement. I reminded them just how well off they were, and they got upset with me

showing them, their ignorance.

Maybe if they had more law enforcement and less laws the roads might be safer?

2 hours ago, ChrisY1 said:

There would be civil war if the government banned people in the pick-up bin!

Same applies to a motorcycle sidecars. Hang on they are banned.   

 

 

8 minutes ago, vandeventer said:

Maybe if they had more law enforcement and less laws the roads might be safer?

First they'll need to reform policing and pay police officers proper salaries.  It might happen some day, but by the time it does, everyone will hopefully be using autonomous vehicles. Maybe 2050?

Edited September 6, 20223 yr by brewsterbudgen

1 minute ago, brewsterbudgen said:

First they'll need to reform policing and pay police officers proper salaries.  It might happen some day, but by the time it does, everyone will hopefully be using autonomous vehicles. Maybe 2050?

More like "In the year 2525 if man man is still alive" as the song goes

You better tell the taxi drivers to dig them out.

18 minutes ago, brewsterbudgen said:

First they'll need to reform policing and pay police officers proper salaries. 

They do get good wages if they work. A policeman gets 95% of the fines he issues on top of his basic pay. The remaining 5% the government has. The 95% is pooled with all officer operating in rear, off operation, duties back at the station. The opportunity is there if they get off their asses to rake the dosh in but ............ I put it down to laziness.  

 

Edited September 6, 20223 yr by IvorBiggun2

16 hours ago, worgeordie said:

What about the bed of a pickup full of workers , is that still allowed,

no mention of it,

regards worgeordie

They aren't in the vehicle.  They are on it.  Same for motorbikes.  

Subtle different.

Of course that doesn't explain people riding buses.

1 hour ago, kennw said:

Un believable thinking and logic, but I guess they are among us. Oh and the world is not flat mate.

I don't speak without personal experience.  I've been in rollover highway accidents, both with and without a seatbelt.  I'm still here to tell the stories.  Firsthand experience is a great teacher.  As I said, in most cases, the seatbelt will be helpful.  But there are some cases where it can actually be the cause of a fatality.

 

As a child, I witnessed the burned-out wreck of a car at the foot of a 480-foot cliff.  The woman driving the vehicle had lost her way in blizzard-like conditions, and, not seeing the road and fearing she had gotten off the road, she reversed her car and backed up, looking for the road again.  With all of the whiteness of the snow, in the gathering darkness, she did not realize where she was when suddenly she found herself tumbling over the edge of the cliff.  A rocky abutment caught the car near the top of her descent and flipped it, throwing her out.  She was fortunate to not have been wearing her seatbelt.  Had she been strapped in, she would have tumbled all the way down, and been killed--probably upon impact, but if not, in the fire which ensued.

 

Seatbelts can save lives, and often do.  They can also kill.  The media rarely tells this other side of the story, choosing to reinforce the times when seatbelts should have been worn, and ignoring these times when they were detrimental.  The media tells a lopsided story, and many people never hear about these cases where seatbelts would have been harmful. 

 

As pertains to Thailand, it will be interesting to see if the seatbelt laws have any impact whatsoever on road fatalities.  My guess is it will be far, far less beneficial than anticipated--if at all.  Will they make motorcyclists wear them?  (This would not help at all, obviously.)  And most of the fatalities in Thailand are of those on two wheels.

Edited September 6, 20223 yr by AsianAtHeart

3 hours ago, jacko45k said:

Yet to see a seat belt in a song taew. 

Soon there will be a new law, requiring passengers in the back of pick up trucks and song taew's to be wearing helmets. 

Wake me up if anyone spots a report of the law being applied and someone being arrested.

4 minutes ago, Bangkok Barry said:

Wake me up if anyone spots a report of the law being applied and someone being arrested.

Does it have to be just a ticket or being placed in cuffs, or do you want a video of them screaming, cussing, and being dragged into the police car....

12 minutes ago, Xonax said:

Soon there will be a new law, requiring passengers in the back of pick up trucks and song taew's to be wearing helmets. 

What kind, the Nazi style helmets I see some motorcyclist wearing or the plastic bow helmet.

17 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

A new traffic law that requires all passengers in vehicles, including backseat passengers, to wear seat belts throughout the journey is put into effect today, September 5th. This also includes the requirement of a kids car seat for children under six years old.

Good luck with that... hope they have more luck than wearing helmets.

Even if there is the will to enforce the seat belt law, I wonder how they will see those wearing them or not. 

It seems to me that most cars have tinted windows, that means technically all vehicles will need to be stopped. 

This will create a queue that will enable those behind to belt up and avoid an offense already committed before stopping. 

3 month grace period

 

Just found a link leading to a Thai language source (somewhat credible) which says that for 3 months the new fines will not be enforced. Fines remain unchanged for public to "get informed".

 

Just now, KhunBENQ said:

3 month grace period

 

Just found a link leading to a Thai language source (somewhat credible) which says that for 3 months the new fines will not be enforced. Fines remain unchanged for public to "get informed".

 

Why wasn't that three months used prior to enforcement. Another three months of unnecessary deaths. 

 

As you were everybody! 

10 minutes ago, ThailandRyan said:

What kind, the Nazi style helmets I see some motorcyclist wearing or the plastic bow helmet.

Saw one guy wearing a 1950's UK fireman's helmet once.  

13 hours ago, JackGats said:

What about first a law requiring vehicles to have usable seat-belts ?

Already exists. Obviously, unusable seat belts are not, by definition, seat belts as required by law. 

Edited September 6, 20223 yr by Liverpool Lou

30 minutes ago, ChrisKC said:

Why wasn't that three months used prior to enforcement.

You expect common sense in Thailand

3 hours ago, Stargeezr said:

  Baby steps are better than no steps at all. 

Seriously...it's 2022 and Thailand has had 30 +years of highway infrastructure development and huge leaps in motor vehicle ownership. "Baby steps" with regards to road safety just doesn't cut it proportionately I'm afraid.

35 minutes ago, ThailandRyan said:

What kind, the Nazi style helmets I see some motorcyclist wearing or the plastic bow helmet.

Check out this beauty.

 

 

15 hours ago, AsianAtHeart said:

In town, at low speeds, I'd feel safer without one. 

Test your theory: run as fast as you can (which will still be much slower than around town)face first into a brick wall ,note the impact.. in fact it’s worse than that in a car because just as you’re pivoting into the steering wheel the airbag explodes into your face potentially breaking your neck. 
The myth about crashing into a river and escaping drowning is just that (a myth) in virtually all cases. Research indicates that the injuries/being incapacitated inside the car as you’re thrown by about not wearing a seat belt is far more common than a seat belt being released by the occupant and being in a better state to then egress the vehicle .

18 hours ago, transam said:

Can you imagine all those people carrying pick-ups having seat belts in the rear tray........????...................????

The headline says "all passengers in vehicles", not "all passengers on vehicles". The guy who pushed the new law through parliament is selling trucks in his spare time. TIT.

27 minutes ago, mancub said:

Seriously...it's 2022 and Thailand has had 30 +years of highway infrastructure development and huge leaps in motor vehicle ownership. "Baby steps" with regards to road safety just doesn't cut it proportionately I'm afraid.

Correct,  now with Covid being not the main topic each day the focus on the real epidemic in Thailand is front and center again!

Baby steps are right once a year they get on their bandwagon this year finally W. H. O. are demanding more for the money that is given 10 million each year to improve than putting up some road signs. This year they are using NEW to replace the OLD but what is new is actually the same. 

It will never change in my lifetime as Rooster noted This week in his article Thai leaders don't want foreigners help just theIr money. 

Not matter what suggestion what law the people in charge now come from the same system how do you make new changes if you know nothing but old.  They raise the fine but the people who administrated and enforced RTP decided to rewrite it to suit them that is in Bangkok so with 72 provinces they also do the same in one month they will be back to the same same as Thai saying. 

Enable to fix or reduce the problem one must know what it is have alternatives my conclusion there isn't one Thai in Thailand if there is they are too afraid to speak out. 

This problem falls into just one chapter of a larger Book problem This is Thailand! 

How about taxi's that do not have working seat belts in them? Are they banned from working?

5 hours ago, ChrisKC said:

This new ruling will mean throngs of traffic police everywhere we go enforcing it all - maybe. 

 

But out and about yesterday, on the first day, I didn't see anything that looked like a policeman. 

I did, he was in  POLICE sign written( in their lovely maroon  colour) Toyota Hi Ace doing 120kph about 8 feet from my rear bumper as I was  about to tun right at a  U  turn.........its  stuff  like that which makes you realise the force is  just a Farce, they are as dangerous and stupid as the rest of them on the road...........cept they have a shiny uniform and are good at holding their hands out for tips, this one was the best cupid stunt Ive seen so far althogh the two in a highway patrol car who drove round a steel 4ft square  cage in the middle of a 3  lane road and didnt stop to remove it come a close  second.

Edited September 6, 20223 yr by Rampant Rabbit

But seatbelts are not required in buses because buses defy the law of physics, right?  No - what it show is this is not about "safety" but it is about revenue collection.