NE massacre: Shooter was a former Bangkok cop who possessed drugs three years before

[Neeranam]

17 minutes ago, Aussie999 said:

I don't care, who you worked for, what concerns me is you label everyone as Thai bashers, when you, yourself, do NOT understand the article.

I do understand the  article and only label certain people as Thai bashers. 

I think it relevant who I worked for as I got an insight into how the RTP operate. This tragedy should not be labelled as Thailand's fault or the Police force's fault as it isn't. Some people just can't help themselves when it comes to bashing Thailand. It's also rather ironic as most of the bashers are from the USA, where mental illness, drug use are abundant, and of course school killings almost every month. This type of killing has happened ONCE in Thailand EVER, yet the bashers claim this is due to the country's failings, which is to be blunt, utter BS.

[simple1]

3 hours ago, Peterw42 said:

Since when do drug users get the guns taken away ? That doesn't happen anywhere in the world.

Maybe you overlooked the mass murderer was a user of YaBa. So far as I know illegal drug users are not permitted to own firearms. Unsure if a weapon would be removed when charged prior to conviction, but would assume so, but obviously not in this case.

[rbkk]

I'm a bit confused with the timeline of court appearances. Reports yesterday said he had appeared in court earlier in the morning; Thursday. Today's reports are saying he was due in court today; Friday. Are both correct? Why was he not detained by the court yesterday?

[MikeyIdea]

3 hours ago, seajae said:

so the police allowed a known drug user to own an keep a gun, shows just how pathetic the thai police really are to do nothing about this demented scum. Once again we see the thai police not going out of their way and ignoring the fact this person was dangerous, they need to be held partially responsible for this happening, if they had done their job he would not have had the gun and would have been removed from the police years ago. When are we going to s a thai police force that actually does what they are paid to and not just try to enrich themselves while ignoring the law and their responsibilities

Eeeh, the gun he used was his own legally registered gun. The police service weapon had been returned. It is not a criminal offence to own a legally registered weapon so they have no power to just take his private gun away from him. They should have notified the licensing authorities though, they didn't. I doubt they would have acted either so Thailand has a long way to go 

[Boomer6969]

3 hours ago, Peterw42 said:

That doesn't happen anywhere in the world.

Nonsense. Where I come from it is very difficult to justify a gun license, and you must renew it yearly. At which stage one must show a clean criminal record. To any sensible person this makes person sense. And in my opinion doesn't go far enough, there should be no private possession of firearms at all, which would make enforcement easier as any possession would become a crime.

[ThailandRyan]

1 hour ago, Neeranam said:

He was fired. 

 

More Thai bashing. Police in many countries have drug/alcohol issues. 

He was not fired until recently yet had the arrest on 2019. No Thai bashing, just stating facts.  Read the entire article.

[Peterw42]

2 hours ago, Mr Meeseeks said:

Nonsense, he was well known to be dangerous before this incident. 

What does that even mean ???

Did he have a history of violence, threatening violence? Did he assault people ?

If I stood next to him in 7/11 would I have been in danger ?

He had a history of drug use and possession. haven't seen any "known to be dangerous" reports.

Prior to the incident, he was no different to tens of thousands of Thais, that have been caught with yaba

Edited October 7, 2022 by Peterw42

[zyphodb]

55 minutes ago, MikeyIdea said:

Eeeh, the gun he used was his own legally registered gun. The police service weapon had been returned. It is not a criminal offence to own a legally registered weapon so they have no power to just take his private gun away from him. They should have notified the licensing authorities though, they didn't. I doubt they would have acted either so Thailand has a long way to go 

What are you talking about?

 Thai Police don't have access to "Service" weapons, they have to buy their own, which of course, they're not going to hand in unless a court order bans them from possessing guns...

 

[anchadian]

(1/2) Deputy spokesman of Bangkok Metropolitan Police Bureau Pol Maj Gen Nititorn Jintakanond said Fri officers will go through urine tests for drugs more frequently after Nong Bua Lamphu mass shooting whose assailant, Panya Kamrab, was an ex-cop

(2/2) Nititorn said from now on those involved with drugs will not be allowed to possess firearms after they leave the police force.

 

https://twitter.com/KhaosodEnglish/status/1578284557128044546

 

[ChrisY1]

4 hours ago, scubascuba3 said:

Drug users are allowed guns here?

It would seem so...yes!

[MikeyIdea]

27 minutes ago, zyphodb said:

What are you talking about?

 Thai Police don't have access to "Service" weapons, they have to buy their own, which of course, they're not going to hand in unless a court order bans them from possessing guns...

 

Sorry if I was wrong. I never knew that my ex wife's sisters husband had to pay for his gun. I never even thought of asking. 
 

[Aussie999]

1 hour ago, Neeranam said:

I do understand the  article and only label certain people as Thai bashers. 

I think it relevant who I worked for as I got an insight into how the RTP operate. This tragedy should not be labelled as Thailand's fault or the Police force's fault as it isn't. Some people just can't help themselves when it comes to bashing Thailand. It's also rather ironic as most of the bashers are from the USA, where mental illness, drug use are abundant, and of course school killings almost every month. This type of killing has happened ONCE in Thailand EVER, yet the bashers claim this is due to the country's failings, which is to be blunt, utter BS.

Your reply indicates you do NOT understand the article, it clearly stated he was prosecuted, in 2019 for possession, he remained in the RTP until Jan 2022, when he was suspended, Oct 2022 as per the article, he was STILL using drugs, obviously still had his guns... then proceeded to kill so many people, under a duty of care, his guns should have been confiscated in 2019, at which point he should have been removed form the RTP, NOT suspended 3 years later.
Yes mate, you are a farang basher, especially when others make factual negative comments regarding the RTP, who, by any standard, are a gang of corrupt inept crooks, hiding behind their badge/uniform.
It makes NO difference who you worked for, I just hope their corrupt attitude did not tarnish you. As for other countries, if makes NO difference as far as this article goes, you say that simply to sidestep the issue.

 

Edited October 7, 2022 by Aussie999

[KanchanaburiGuy]

1 hour ago, Boomer6969 said:

And in my opinion doesn't go far enough, there should be no private possession of firearms at all, [emphasis by KanchanaburiGuy]

Thank you. That's a refreshingly clear and direct statement of your perspective.

 

Predators of all sorts----both of the two-legged and four-legged varieties---- would like to thank you, as well.

 

I mean, can't you imagine ANY situatuons where a citizen having a gun would be a good thing? A farmer or rancher with a wolf, coyote, or big cat problem, perhaps? A person who depends on hunting for his family's food, maybe? (They still exist, you know!) 

 

I dunno, maybe I just have an overactive imagination. But I can imagine a bunch of REAL LIFE situations where having a gun just makes good, practical sense. Where having a gun is not a lifestyle choice, but an actual practical-situation necessity. 

 

Cant you?

 

 

Edited October 7, 2022 by KanchanaburiGuy

[Boomer6969]

5 minutes ago, KanchanaburiGuy said:

Thank you. That's a refreshingly clear and direct statement of your perspective.

 

Predators of all sorts----both of the two-legged and four-legged varieties---- would like to thank you, as well.

 

I mean, can't you imagine ANY situatuons where a citizen having a gun would be a good thing? A farmer or rancher with a wolf, coyote, or big cat problem, perhaps? A person who depends on hunting for his family's food, maybe? (They still exist, you know!) 

 

I dunno, maybe I just have an overactive imagination. But I can imagine a bunch of REAL LIFE situations where having a gun just makes good, practical sense. Where having a gun is not a lifestyle choice, but an actual practical-situation necessity. 

 

Cant you?

 

 

Do you realise that you come up with such drivel on a thread that is  a powerful illustration  of why firearms should be banned?  And yes you probably have an "overactive imagination", just to be polite as I could be inclined to mention a problematic "size".

[KanchanaburiGuy]

Just now, Boomer6969 said:

Do you realise that you come up with such drivel on a thread that is  a powerful illustration  of why firearms should be banned?  And yes you probably have an "overactive imagination", just to be polite as I could be inclined to mention a problematic "size".

In other words, I made valid points.......... points you cannot disagree with.............. but for pride's sake, apparently, you can't find it within yourself to back away and agree with my eminently reasonable position . By god, you've taken a position and you're gonna stand by it, come hell or high water! So......... to assuage your wounded pride........ you lash out, instead. Gottit. 

[KanchanaburiGuy]

36 minutes ago, Boomer6969 said:

Do you realise that you come up with such drivel on a thread that is  a ?  And yes you probably have an "overactive imagination", just to be polite as I could be inclined to mention a problematic "size".

By the way, if this thread is, as you say, a "powerful illustration of why firearms should be banned"............ is it also a "powerful illustration  of why knives  should be banned?"

 

As reported, a lot of the killing and injuring was done by knife, not by gun.

 

If this is a "powerful illustration of why firearms should be banned"......... why wouldn't it be......... an equally powerful illustration of why KNIVES should be banned?

 

Hmmm?

 

 

Edited October 7, 2022 by KanchanaburiGuy

[Tropposurfer]

The first moment an officer is suspected of any drug use (legal or otherwise), drug testing there and then. Mandatory qualified AOD rehab / treatment and random ongoing drug testing for all police from this day forward. There's a few concrete measures to start with.