15-year-old motorcyclist collides with dog and dies

[bert bloggs]

Even when they are wearing a helmet,half dont bother to fix the straps to hold it on,crazy

[toofarnorth]

Don't think I have ever seen a topic with so much bickering , must be all the rain.

[richard_smith237]

3 hours ago, Grumpy one said:

4 hours ago, proton said:

I wonder if the dog was being fed by the do gooders or spayed by the vermin foundation? Soi dogs are all pests, spayed or not.

Such a sad  man you are

But he’s not wrong... 

 

Wait until a stray dog / soi dog darts out infront of your motorcycle or that of someone you care about causing you/them injury or worse....

 

There should be no stray dogs roaming the streets - thats a no-brainer for anyone with a brain.

 

Stray / soi dogs are a problem....   As, of course, are underage kids on motorcycles without helmets. 

 

[Gecko123]

10 minutes ago, toofarnorth said:

Don't think I have ever seen a topic with so much bickering , must be all the rain.

...or the financial markets

[MrJ2U]

Slow down.

 

The kids in our village, and probably every village drive way to fast.

 

Next time it'll be a chicken or toddler.

 

One cousin has a permanent limp because of an accident involving a pothole.

 

If he'd been driving slower he'd probably only have a bruised ego. 

[richard_smith237]

50 minutes ago, Thingamabob said:

4 hours ago, proton said:

I wonder if the dog was being fed by the do gooders or spayed by the vermin foundation? Soi dogs are all pests, spayed or not.

Here we go again. Must have been the dog's fault, of course. 

Of course, it wasn’t the dogs fault - your comment is ridiculous ‘causal fallacy’... but you know that already. 

 

It is the fault of the authorities for not doing anything about stray dogs. 

 

It also the fault of those who provide a food source and encourage more dogs and vermin into the area, they’ll procreate increasing the numbers of future generations......    as mentioned, none of this is the fault of the dogs.

 

It is the fault of myopic idiots who think they are animal lovers but fail to recognise bigger picture consequences of the actions they mistakenly believe are caring. 

 

 

Edited October 1, 2022 by richard_smith237

[Gecko123]

Just now, MrJ2U said:

Slow down.

 

The kids in our village, and probably every village drive way to fast.

 

Next time it'll be a chicken or toddler.

 

One cousin has a permanent limp because of an accident involving a pothole.

 

If he'd been driving slower he'd probably only have a bruised ego. 

Early morning. No one's on the road. Been cooped up inside for days on end with all the rain. Weather's refreshingly cool. Figured the ground was too muddy for dogs to be out and about. Time to open up the throttle and let the wind rip through your hair. Tough break.

[Gecko123]

5 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Of course, it wasn’t the dogs fault - your comment is ridiculous ‘causal fallacy’... but you know that already. 

 

It is the fault of the authorities for not doing anything about stray dogs. 

 

It also the fault of those who provide a food source and encourage more dogs and vermin into the area, they’ll procreate increasing the numbers of future generations......    as mentioned, none of this is the fault of the dogs.

 

It is the fault of myopic idiots who think they are animal lovers but fail to recognise bigger picture consequences of the actions they mistakenly believe are caring. 

 

 

The dogs aren't strays. 99.5% have an owner. Problem is not everyone can afford a fence.

[billd766]

3 hours ago, Grumpy one said:

Such a sad  man you are

You are the sad one. A 15 year old is dead because of a soi dog.

 

Proton is absolutely correct in his post.

 

There are literally millions of soi dogs running free in Thailand. They are a pest, a health hazard and a general hazard and need exterminating and NOT spaying, snipping or feeding.

[billd766]

2 hours ago, steven100 said:

RIP poor boy ..

who ever you were

you will be remembered.

And sadly missed by your family and friends.

[billd766]

1 hour ago, Thingamabob said:

Here we go again. Must have been the dog's fault, of course. 

Of course it was the dogs fault or that of the owner, who of course would never admit to it.

 

1 hour ago, Thingamabob said:

You need help.

You need to face reality.

[billd766]

21 minutes ago, Gecko123 said:

The dogs aren't strays. 99.5% have an owner. Problem is not everyone can afford a fence.

Then don't get or feed a dog.

[richard_smith237]

24 minutes ago, Gecko123 said:

The dogs aren't strays. 99.5% have an owner. Problem is not everyone can afford a fence.

WRONG... they are strays...   Just because someone feels sorry for them and puts food out for them does not make them a house pet. 

 

A dog with a collar, which has an owner who is 100% responsible for that dog's behaviour and actions is not a stray. 

 

A dog walking freely around the town and city streets, on the beaches etc with others in packs are ’strays’...  they only return to a certain area because they know someone will put out food - they then become territorial of that area. 

 

 

----------

 

BUT... IF You are saying they aren’t strays... WHO is responsible for said dog when it bites someone or causes a motorcycle accident ????? - Of course, no one...  because no one will own up to owning the dog... they’ll argue they just put some scraps of food out because they feel sorry for it.... 

 

They’re strays !

 

 

Edited October 1, 2022 by richard_smith237

[richard_smith237]

36 minutes ago, MrJ2U said:

Slow down.

 

The kids in our village, and probably every village drive way to fast.

 

Next time it'll be a chicken or toddler.

 

One cousin has a permanent limp because of an accident involving a pothole.

 

If he'd been driving slower he'd probably only have a bruised ego. 

Of course... Speed is a major issue and I agree... cars and motorcyclist often travel the residential streets at unsafe speeds. 

 

But so are soi dogs running out in the streets and that shouldn’t happen - the strays shouldn’t be there, they are a pest. 

 

If its someones pet dog, the owner is responsible. 

If its a child running out into the street, the parent (primary caregiver) is responsible for not supervision their child properly. 

 

 

[Gecko123]

58 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

WRONG... they are strays...   Just because someone feels sorry for them and puts food out for them does not make them a house pet. 

 

A dog with a collar, which has an owner who is 100% responsible for that dog's behaviour and actions is not a stray. 

 

A dog walking freely around the town and city streets, on the beaches etc with others in packs are ’strays’...  they only return to a certain area because they know someone will put out food - they then become territorial of that area. 

 

 

----------

 

BUT... IF You are saying they aren’t strays... WHO is responsible for said dog when it bites someone or causes a motorcycle accident ????? - Of course, no one...  because no one will own up to owning the dog... they’ll argue they just put some scraps of food out because they feel sorry for it.... 

 

They’re strays !

 

 

I did not mean to suggest that there are no stray dogs in Thailand. All I was saying is that if you drive or walk through a typical Thai village and see 10-15 dogs lounging around, somebody has an ownership relationship with each and every one of those dogs, meaning that somebody is feeding them on a regular basis and they have a "home base" they "belong" to. The relationship between the dog and whoever is looking after it might be very tenuous and often consists of little more than daily feeding, but there's still a sense of ownership of the dog. If you want to label that a "stray" dog, OK.

 

They're not dogs living out in the open, solely surviving by hunting and scavenging in the wild, with little regular contact with humans. In a village, a truly stray dog without any owner would be run out of town, so to speak, by the other dogs, and would most likely end up on the periphery of a village. These truly stray or what are sometimes referred to as "wild" dogs have no regular bond with any body or any home, and are mostly found out in remote peripheral areas. These are the dogs that you sometimes hear about good Samaritans taking pity on and leaving food for. That's what I would consider a truly stray dog, but if you want to label the village dogs described in the first paragraph as strays as well, OK, but I don't think most Thais would label those village dogs as strays.

 

Very few village dogs have collars. That's a Western hallmark of "ownership" that doesn't really apply here. As far as an owner taking responsibility if the dog is involved in an accident being a test of whether a dog is a stray or not, I don't know for sure about this, but I think the attitude is that the operator of the vehicle is responsible for avoiding hitting it and if he doesn't, well, it's not the owner's responsibility.

 

If you're saying that all dogs should have collars with name tags and vaccination tags, kept within a fenced yard, only be let out on a leash, and dog liability insurance should be mandatory, well, good luck with that. We both know that's not gonna happen any time soon.

 

Edited October 1, 2022 by Gecko123

[proton]

5 hours ago, Grumpy one said:

Such a sad  man you are

I and my mood have nothing to do with the facts, are you making excuses for vermin on the road causing death? all this early, speeding, no helmet speculation ignores the fact that without the dog the boy would still be here.

[proton]

43 minutes ago, Gecko123 said:

I did not mean to suggest that there are no stray dogs in Thailand. All I was saying is that if you drive or walk through a typical Thai village and see 10-15 dogs lounging around, somebody has an ownership relationship with each and every one of those dogs, meaning that somebody is feeding them on a regular basis and they have a "home base" they "belong" to. The relationship between the dog and whoever is looking after it might be very tenuous and often consists of little more than daily feeding, but there's still a sense of ownership of the dog. If you want to label that a "stray" dog, OK.

 

They're not dogs living out in the open, solely surviving by hunting and scavenging in the wild, with little regular contact with humans. In a village, a truly stray dog without any owner would be run out of town, so to speak, by the other dogs, and would most likely end up on the periphery of a village. These truly stray or what are sometimes referred to as "wild" dogs have no regular bond with any body or any home, and are mostly found out in remote peripheral areas. These are the dogs that you sometimes hear about good Samaritans taking pity on and leaving food for. That's what I would consider a truly stray dog, but if you want to label the village dogs described in the first paragraph as strays as well, OK, but I don't think most Thais would label those village dogs as strays.

 

Very few village dogs have collars. That's a Western hallmark of "ownership" that doesn't really apply here. As far as an owner taking responsibility if the dog is involved in an accident being a test of whether a dog is a stray or not, I don't know for sure about this, but I think the attitude is that the operator of the vehicle is responsible for avoiding hitting it and if he doesn't, well, it's not the owner's responsibility.

 

If you're saying that all dogs should have collars with name tags and vaccination tags, kept within a fenced yard, only be let out on a leash, and dog liability insurance should be mandatory, well, good luck with that. We both know that's not gonna happen any time soon.

 

Nonsense, the millions of soi dogs do not have ownership, feeding the scabby pests a bag of old rice a day does not make people owners. Unfortunately the irresponsible and selfish put collars on strays so that they will be not rounded up and carted off. Mass culling will always be the answer, not doggie do gooders, hand wringing or Buddhist apologists. Of course one of the main reasons for this vermin dog protection cannot even be mentioned.

Edited October 1, 2022 by proton

[proton]

2 hours ago, bert bloggs said:

Even when they are wearing a helmet,half dont bother to fix the straps to hold it on,crazy

They believe in this karma nonsense- will die when your time. So being drunk, speeding, no helmet, no license and looking at the phone has nothing to do with it????

Edited October 1, 2022 by proton

[PJ71]

4 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

But he’s not wrong...

But he's driving a bike illegally

 

But he's not wearing a helmet

 

But he does not have a license

 

But but but.....

[PJ71]

4 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

A dog with a collar, which has an owner who is 100% responsible for that dog's behaviour and actions is not a stray. 

But some of these dogs do exactly what you mention in your next paragraph, which category do they belong in?

[PJ71]

3 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

the strays shouldn’t be there, they are a pest. 

Some might suggest that so are a lot of children, particularly in Thai villages where we're all aware supervision is lacking.

[PJ71]

2 hours ago, proton said:

Nonsense, the millions of soi dogs do not have ownership, feeding the scabby pests a bag of old rice a day does not make people owners. Unfortunately the irresponsible and selfish put collars on strays so that they will be not rounded up and carted off. Mass culling will always be the answer, not doggie do gooders, hand wringing or Buddhist apologists. Of course one of the main reasons for this vermin dog protection cannot even be mentioned.

based on these subtle comments, i'm guessing you're not a doggie lover - lol.

[richard_smith237]

15 minutes ago, PJ71 said:

4 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

But he’s not wrong...

But he's driving a bike illegally

 

But he's not wearing a helmet

 

But he does not have a license

 

But but but.....

Learn to read the quote to which the response is made... that should stop you from responding out of context.

 

In this case ‘he’s not wrong’...  backing up the comment made by proton that ‘soi dogs are all pests, spayed or not’...

 

4 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

8 hours ago, Grumpy one said:

9 hours ago, proton said:

I wonder if the dog was being fed by the do gooders or spayed by the vermin foundation? Soi dogs are all pests, spayed or not.

Such a sad  man you are

But he’s not wrong... 

 

[PJ71]

7 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Learn to read the quote to which the response is made... that should stop you from responding out of context.

 

In this case ‘he’s not wrong’...  backing up the comment made by proton that ‘soi dogs are all pests, spayed or not’...

 

So the 15 year old driving the bike is wrong in now way, shape or form?

[richard_smith237]

17 minutes ago, PJ71 said:

But he's driving a bike illegally

 

But he's not wearing a helmet

 

But he does not have a license

 

But but but.....

Ignoring the fact that you responded out of context, within the context of your response you are presenting a 'casual fallacy’ and have incorrectly concluded that a cause is related to an effect...

 

... in this case it is not, the legality of the motorcyclist has little do with a dog running out and getting hit by a passing motorcyclist.... 

... had the motorcyclist been legal, the result would still have been and accident caused by a dog running out, motorcyclists are knocked off by dogs all the time... its an issue and whether or not a motorcyclist has a licence is of little relevance. 

 

The only valid relevance in your comment is that of helmet wearing, in that the severity of injuries would be reduced had a helmet been worn. 

 

 

[richard_smith237]

Just now, PJ71 said:

9 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Learn to read the quote to which the response is made... that should stop you from responding out of context.

 

In this case ‘he’s not wrong’...  backing up the comment made by proton that ‘soi dogs are all pests, spayed or not’...

 

So the 15 year old driving the bike is wrong in now way, shape or form?

It could easily have been a 40 year old, fully licensed, fully legal.... 

It could have been a parent with a child on their motorcycles. 

 

The motorcyclist is complicit in his own demise as a result of his choice not to wear a helmet. 

 

However, the stray dog running out is the cause of the accident - stray dogs are the problem. 

[PJ71]

2 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Ignoring the fact that you responded out of context, within the context of your response you are presenting a 'casual fallacy’ and have incorrectly concluded that a cause is related to an effect...

 

... in this case it is not, the legality of the motorcyclist has little do with a dog running out and getting hit by a passing motorcyclist.... 

... had the motorcyclist been legal, the result would still have been and accident caused by a dog running out, motorcyclists are knocked off by dogs all the time... its an issue and whether or not a motorcyclist has a licence is of little relevance. 

 

The only valid relevance in your comment is that of helmet wearing, in that the severity of injuries would be reduced had a helmet been worn. 

 

 

why must all your posts be so long?

[richard_smith237]

23 minutes ago, PJ71 said:

based on these subtle comments, i'm guessing you're not a doggie lover - lol.

It could be argued that a true dog lover hates to see these animals suffer. 

A true dog lover hates to see future generations of animals suffering from disease and mange, fighting for territory and scraps on city streets.... 

 

I certainly don’t like to see animals suffer and there are far too many of them suffering in Thailand. 

Had something been done properly about this issue of stray dogs 20 years ago, 10 years ago then there wouldn’t be so many stray dogs on Thailand street today. 

[PJ71]

2 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

It could easily have been a 40 year old, fully licensed, fully legal.... 

But..... a person as you describe would have had more knowledge of road conditions than a 15 year old boy, right?

 

Maybe driving cautiously due to expecting a stray, right?

[richard_smith237]

2 minutes ago, PJ71 said:

why must all your posts be so long?

Do you struggle with reading or something ????