American on Dirt Bike Kills Thai Woman Crossing Road in Chiang Mai

[GammaGlobulin]

1 hour ago, TedG said:

Huh?  The CF300L is a quiet bike.  

 

Tell me about the other reasons.  I’m looking forward to debunking you. 

This bike is WAY too loud!

 

 

 

At higher RPM, this noisy bike will hit over 100 decibels.

Similar to a jet aircraft.

 

These should not be allowed on the road, for this reason....

 

 

LOUD!!!!!!

 

The Honda CB450 is a very quiet machine.

 

Unfortunately, some young wingnuts are not satisfied....and will do just anything to make it LOUDER.  Crazy!!!!

 

Anyway....

The CFR300 is way too loud for road use.

 

 

 

[fredwiggy]

8 minutes ago, GammaGlobulin said:

This bike is WAY too loud!

 

 

 

At higher RPM, this nosy bike will hit over 100 decibels.

Similar to a jet aircraft.

 

These should not be allowed on the road, for this reason....

 

 

LOUD!!!!!!

 

The Honda CB450 is a very quiet machine.

 

Unfortunately, some young wingnuts are not satisfied....and will do just anything to make it LOUDER.  Crazy!!!!

 

Anyway....

The CFR300 is way too loud for road use.

 

 

 

I don't think you get out much, as all your posting, trying to make the bike look like it's not roadworthy or too loud, has been disproved a few times already, and if you do get outside more, you would surely see locals driving very loud bikes of all types, daily, on any road you can find. I live 300 meters from the main road, and i still hear bikes going down the road from here, loud. Waiting for a pickup on that main road, at least 3 went by yesterday, very loud bikes with modified exhaust just for that reason. I've been hearing and seeing these bikes all the time I've lived here. It's what teens do, as well as older boys. Whatever the legal limit is, I never see anything done about it, as these bikes pass police all day long and they do nothing.

[richard_smith237]

45 minutes ago, GammaGlobulin said:

Anyway....

The CFR300 is way too loud for road use.

 

All information you are providing is flawed unless used in a direct like for like comparison with other motorcycles. 

 

The List below was randomly generated with a chat GPT prompt to list normal and max noise range of a random selection of motorcycles including the CRF300 and CB450.

 

Ironically, the motorcycle you quote (CB450)is the loudest on that list !!!..., highlighting you know nothing of this subject.

 

Your comments also have very little relevance - there is no reason for this motorcycle ridden by the American not to be on the road - Its not unroadworthy, its no noisier than any other motorcycle.

 

Your musings are unknowledgeable and bias - you have now gone down the rabbit-hole of doubling down yet are repeatedly proven not to know the subject matter.

 

 

Note - information from other sources may vary but the list is a good general reference (sources listed right hand column). 

 

[GammaGlobulin]

1 minute ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

The List was randomly generated with a chat GPT prompt to list normal and max noise range of a random selection of motorcycles including the CRF and CB450.

 

Ironically, the motorcycle (CB450) you quote is the loudest in this random list below, highlighting you know nothing of this subject.

 

Your comments also mean absolutely nothing - there is no reason for this motorcycle ridden by the American not to be on the road - Its not unroadworthy, its no noisier than any other motorcycle.

 

Your musings are unknowledgeable and bias - you have now gone down the rabbit-hole of doubling down yet are repeatedly proven not to know the subject matter.

 

 

 

Note - information from other sources may vary but the list is a good general reference (sources listed right hand column). 

 

 

Very nice chart.

I would have posted it myself.

 

All these values are too LOUD.

 

These could easily be halved, if only we had the proper laws that were designed to protect our sanity.

 

 

[richard_smith237]

8 minutes ago, GammaGlobulin said:

 

Very nice chart.

I would have posted it myself.

 

All these values are too LOUD.

 

These could easily be halved, if only we had the proper laws that were designed to protect our sanity.

 

 

 

 

Maybe we should be riding around on horses... 

... What next, would you complain a horse neighs to loudly ?? (85 and 90 dB) 

 

[bristolgeoff]

What can u say go to jail do not pass go and pay alot of money.He is in big trouble now

[GammaGlobulin]

9 minutes ago, bristolgeoff said:

What can u say go to jail do not pass go and pay alot of money.He is in big trouble now

 

How can we say, for sure, if this actually might be true?

Why do you say that he might?

Have you read any further info that might inform us that this is the case?

I, for one, am quite interested in this Topic.

 

It's not that I wish anyone to be in trouble.

It's only that I also care about real justice.

 

And, everybody can benefit by seeing justice done in this case.

 

So, really....is he in big trouble now?

 

 

[freedomnow]

4 hours ago, GammaGlobulin said:

 

I never write posts which sound inhuman, either, although I am sure that you already know.

 

OK, bizarre would also work.

[roo860]

3 hours ago, GammaGlobulin said:

This bike is WAY too loud!

 

 

 

At higher RPM, this noisy bike will hit over 100 decibels.

Similar to a jet aircraft.

 

These should not be allowed on the road, for this reason....

 

 

LOUD!!!!!!

 

The Honda CB450 is a very quiet machine.

 

Unfortunately, some young wingnuts are not satisfied....and will do just anything to make it LOUDER.  Crazy!!!!

 

Anyway....

The CFR300 is way too loud for road use.

 

 

 

Bo!lox 

[TedG]

11 hours ago, GammaGlobulin said:

This bike is WAY too loud!

 

 

 

At higher RPM, this noisy bike will hit over 100 decibels.

Similar to a jet aircraft.

 

These should not be allowed on the road, for this reason....

 

 

LOUD!!!!!!

 

The Honda CB450 is a very quiet machine.

 

Unfortunately, some young wingnuts are not satisfied....and will do just anything to make it LOUDER.  Crazy!!!!

 

Anyway....

The CFR300 is way too loud for road use.

 

 

 

Did you happen to watch the video?  The muffler was an after market slip on.   It was 79 to 80 DB at 4000 RPM.  Then the baffle was removed an it was tested again.  It was 99DB without the baffle.   

[kiwikeith]

On 1/3/2025 at 8:22 AM, Rampant Rabbit said:

Hope he had a  helmet cam I see  some awful behaviour from Thais on the roads  with regards to not only their own but others  safety including pedestrians. Save me your victim blaming krap thanks

Quite right the victim may have tried to run across the roads b4 the bike's reached her or she might have been sick and not seen them, more to come from this story 

[GammaGlobulin]

4 hours ago, TedG said:

Did you happen to watch the video?  The muffler was an after market slip on.   It was 79 to 80 DB at 4000 RPM.  Then the baffle was removed an it was tested again.  It was 99DB without the baffle.   

 

What baffles me most is why anyone would want to ride any kind of vehicle which produces sound pressures exceeding 50 dB, two meters from the machine.

 

After all, motorcycles are not aircraft, are they...unless.....at times...when....

The machine goes airborne.

 

Even my Benz doesn't emit that much noise....

 

 

New acoustic emission regulations for all Thailand motorcycles is coming....one hopes.

 

I would set the maximum allowable emissions at 50 dB at 100 KPH.

Even that is too high.

 

China has banned the internal combustion engine use on two-wheeled vehicles.

And, Thailand needs to do the same.

 

Electric motorcycles are cleaner, cheaper, safer, and do less harm to the environment.

And, electric is quiet.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Captain Flack]

A pointless nonsense troll off topic troll post has been removed

[GammaGlobulin]

4 hours ago, kiwikeith said:

Quite right the victim may have tried to run across the roads b4 the bike's reached her or she might have been sick and not seen them, more to come from this story 

 

OK.

Here is my hypothesis, right or wrong, and still to be validated:

 

a. Old lady walks slowly crossing the street.

b. At the time she begins her crossing, there are no bikes to be seen, or they seem to be far off.

c. Old lady reaches almost midway in crossing the road.

d. Motorcycles seem to appear out of nowhere, due to very high rate of speed.

e. Old lady freezes in her tracks due to TWO bikes riding side by side, leaving her confused about whether to proceed forward to cross the road, or to reverse her course and try to reach the safety of the side of the road from where she came.

f.  Too late, the motorcycle rider finally sees the old lady, after glancing up from what might have distracted him.

 

The end to this story is the only thing we know for sure.

 

I think this is what might have transpired.

But, we need video to know for sure.

 

 

[richard_smith237]

1 minute ago, GammaGlobulin said:

 

OK.

Here is my hypothesis, right or wrong, and still to be validated:

 

a. Old lady walks slowly crossing the street.

b. At the time she begins her crossing, there are no bikes to be seen, or they seem to be far off.

c. Old lady reaches almost midway in crossing the road.

d. Motorcycles seem to appear out of nowhere, due to very high rate of speed.

e. Old lady freezes in her tracks due to TWO bikes riding side by side, leaving her confused about whether to proceed forward to cross the road, or to reverse her course and try to reach the safety of the side of the road from where she came.

f.  Too late, the motorcycle rider finally sees the old lady, after glancing up from what might have distracted him.

 

The end to this story is the only thing we know for sure.

 

I think this is what might have transpired.

But, we need video to know for sure.

 

What about the other hypotheses..... including.. 

 

a. Two motorcycles riding down the road within the speed limit. 

b. As they approach the lady is preoccupied and steps out into the road without looking.

c. American male ridding the CRF collides with the lady knocking her over. 

d. The impact is low speed (no damage to bike, bike isn't dropped).

e. Lady falls and bangs her head and dies.

f. American is distraught - and of course shows his compassion (this is not an admission of guild).

e. Polite arrive, follow SOP and automatically charge the American with 'reckless driving / riding  causing death' (this is not an indication of fault). 

 

 

Anything is possible, there is no solid information or footage... BUT, one thing is for certain... Bikes don't come out of nowhere - thats just an excuse made up by people who failed to look / failed to observe an approaching bike because they were complacent. 

[khunJam]

On 1/4/2025 at 1:57 PM, richard_smith237 said:

 

I'll humour you.... What actual evidence is there ??? go on, list any evidence.

 

 

This highlights a worrying lack of intelligence. 

The evidence is in the op, he killed a pedestrian and has been charged with wreckless driving and killing. Why some of you can’t get that through your dense skulls is beyond me. 

[richard_smith237]

1 minute ago, khunJam said:

The evidence is in the op, he killed a pedestrian and has been charged with wreckless driving and killing. Why some of you can’t get that through your dense skulls is beyond me. 

 

This is quite an amusing comment and highlights your complete ignorance of procedure here. 

 

Applying a charge of 'Reckless driving causing death' is SOP for any incident involving a death on the roads regardless of perceived fault. 

 

This has been explained repeatedly on this forum - one can only conclude that you are just not very bright if you are still failing to comprehend this most basic of facts. 

 

There is also no 'evidence' or no announcement that the American is at fault.

 

 

Given your posting history, why you can get that through your dense skull is becoming less of a surprise. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[richard_smith237]

9 minutes ago, khunJam said:

The evidence is in the op, he killed a pedestrian and has been charged with wreckless driving and killing.

 

I'll explain this in a very simple way for you... but I apologise in advance, I can't understand it for you... 

 

If you are driving your car and a motorcyclist rides into the back of you an dies, YOU will be charged with 'reckless driving causing death'....    

 

If you are driving your car down a main road and a pedestrian runs out into the road, giving you not chance to stop, YOU will be charged with 'reckless driving causing death'....    

 

If you are driving your car and a tree falls into onto your car and kills the passenger, YOU will be charged with 'reckless driving causing death'....    

 

 

IT is SOP that in any incident on Thailands roads where there is a fatality, the driver of any vehicle involved with automatically be charged with 'reckless driving causing death'.... Its just part of the procedure, without clear evidence, chargers are usually dropped quite quickly.

 

 

 

 

 

[khunJam]

4 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

This is quite an amusing comment and highlights your complete ignorance of procedure here. 

 

Applying a charge of 'Reckless driving causing death' is SOP for any incident involving a death on the roads regardless of perceived fault. 

 

This has been explained repeatedly on this forum - one can only conclude that you are just not very bright if you are still failing to comprehend this most basic of facts. 

 

There is also no 'evidence' or no announcement that the American is at fault.

 

 

Given your posting history, why you can get that through your dense skull is becoming less of a surprise. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There you go again with your insecurities and weirdness.

[khunJam]

1 minute ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

I'll explain this in a very simple way for you... but I apologise in advance, I can't understand it for you... 

 

If you are driving your car and a motorcyclist rides into the back of you an dies, YOU will be charged with 'reckless driving causing death'....    

 

If you are driving your car down a main road and a pedestrian runs out into the road, giving you not chance to stop, YOU will be charged with 'reckless driving causing death'....    

 

If you are driving your car and a tree falls into onto your car and kills the passenger, YOU will be charged with 'reckless driving causing death'....    

 

 

IT is SOP that in any incident on Thailands roads where there is a fatality, the driver of any vehicle involved with automatically be charged with 'reckless driving causing death'.... Its just part of the procedure, without clear evidence, chargers are usually dropped quite quickly.

 

 

 

 

 

Nothing new, you just keep splitting hairs to justify your nonsensical arguments.

[richard_smith237]

1 minute ago, khunJam said:

Nothing new, you just keep splitting hairs to justify your nonsensical arguments.

 

Are you stating that it is NOT SOP for Thai Police to apply a charge of 'Reckless driving causing death' for parties involved (driving or riding) in any incident involving a death on the roads regardless of perceived fault ????

 

 

[MalcolmB]

1 minute ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

I'll explain this in a very simple way for you... but I apologise in advance, I can't understand it for you... 

 

If you are driving your car and a motorcyclist rides into the back of you an dies, YOU will be charged with 'reckless driving causing death'....    

 

If you are driving your car down a main road and a pedestrian runs out into the road, giving you not chance to stop, YOU will be charged with 'reckless driving causing death'....    

 

If you are driving your car and a tree falls into onto your car and kills the passenger, YOU will be charged with 'reckless driving causing death'....    

 

 

IT is SOP that in any incident on Thailands roads where there is a fatality, the driver of any vehicle involved with automatically be charged with 'reckless driving causing death'.... Its just part of the procedure, without clear evidence, chargers are usually dropped quite quickly.

 

 

 

 

 

It seems like if a Thai is driving you will blame the Thai driver, even it is accepted by the victims and everyone at the scene that it was their fault for suddenly stopping on a narrow bridge to pick up a dropped water bottle.

 

However if it is a farang driver then it must be …

 

1 hour ago, richard_smith237 said:

As they approach the lady is preoccupied and steps out into the road without looking.

 

Despite the fact the American has accepted responsibility and made a long groveling apology for killing the woman. 
 

You are not alone on this forum for always taking the side of the farang, no matter what the actual facts are, but you are one of the loudest.

 

All very predictable 

[richard_smith237]

4 minutes ago, khunJam said:

There you go again with your insecurities and weirdness.

 

If you are riding a motorcycle or driving a car and someone steps out in front of you - would you accept fault with the same degree of certainty with that you levy at this American ????

 

 

I'm not saying the American is not at fault - I'm arguing against your obvious prejudice in drawing that conclusion without any proof.   You clearly don't even know what 'evidence' really means as there isn't any evidence (made public) which can indicate fault of either party at the moment. 

 

 

[MalcolmB]

7 minutes ago, khunJam said:

Nothing new, you just keep splitting hairs to justify your nonsensical arguments.

It is his personality.

 

Got a bee in his bonnet about Thai people. 

It might be time for him to pack his bags and find somewhere else to live?

[MalcolmB]

13 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

If you are driving your car and a motorcyclist rides into the back of you an dies, YOU will be charged with 'reckless driving causing death'..

That’s not true

[Hummin]

2 minutes ago, MalcolmB said:

That’s not true

 

 

Traffic coming from behind have in the most cases responsibility. 

 

 

[richard_smith237]

Just now, MalcolmB said:

It seems like if a Thai is driving you will blame the Thai driver, even it is accepted by the victims and everyone at the scene that it was their fault for suddenly stopping on a narrow bridge to pick up a dropped water bottle.

 

However if it is a farang driver then it must be …

 

No - thats not the case at all... thats just your Gasligting as usual...  You look for confirmation bias.

 

If the situation were reversed, my opinion would still be - there is no evidence or information which highlights fault. 

 

You are also attempting to muddied the waters by dumbing down and simplifying a different incident with your spin.

 

 

Just now, MalcolmB said:

Despite the fact the American has accepted responsibility and made a long groveling apology for killing the woman. 

 

Show proof that the American has accepted responsibility ??

 

Stating that he apologised is not accepting fault, its showing a very human reaction - compassion and sorrow. 

 

 

Just now, MalcolmB said:

You are not alone on this forum for always taking the side of the farang, no matter what the actual facts are, but you are one of the loudest.

 

This is also very wrong - by no means do I take the side of the 'farang' it only seems that way because your overt anti-foreigner stance always sides against the farang no matter what the situation.... 

 

I'm loud against you because of the ridiculous bigoted, bias and prejudice fallacies you keep posting while continuing to ignore facts instead relying on social media commentary as some form of proof. 

 

Just now, MalcolmB said:

All very predictable 

 

Its predicable that you will always side against a foreigner - its predicable that you will never take a balanced approach. 

Its predictable that your comments will appear so outlandish and ridiculous they look like trolling.

Its predicable that you will make things up, remove context and distort commentary.

 

 

 

[richard_smith237]

23 minutes ago, MalcolmB said:

It is his personality.

 

Got a bee in his bonnet about Thai people. 

It might be time for him to pack his bags and find somewhere else to live?

 

Pathetic Malcy...  I've nothing against Thai people or foreigners here... unlike you who persistently shows unmitigated bias against foreigners - so clouded are your optics that anyone who does not automatically side against the foreigner is somehow a Thai hater in your eyes....    

[richard_smith237]

23 minutes ago, MalcolmB said:

36 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

If you are driving your car and a motorcyclist rides into the back of you an dies, YOU will be charged with 'reckless driving causing death'..

That’s not true

 

In any incident where a death is concerned, regardless of fault.....    its always true.

 

 

 

[richard_smith237]

26 minutes ago, Hummin said:

30 minutes ago, MalcolmB said:

That’s not true

 

Traffic coming from behind have in the most cases responsibility. 

 

 

Agreed - but, until an investigation is carried out (even a rudimentary one), the driver of the other vehicle will still face charges of 'reckless driving resulting in / casing death' as a matter of Policing SOP - these charges would obviously be dropped very quicky.