20 hours ago, lordgrinz said:

Do they usually act out like that in front of 9 year old girls? My daughter asked me how I stay so calm....LOL Many years of dealing with idiots back home in the USA, the more animated they are, the more they make me laugh.

 

Sorry to say it Lordgrinz...    But you triggered the whole situation by driving aggressively in the first place.

 

The Mazda stopped for pedestrians at the crossing but was clearly position to enter across into the right hand lane.

You pulled up next to him and blocked him - You drove without any consideration to what others may be doing.

 

The guy was also clearly a unhinged ayhole, but really... was there any need for you to pull up so close to him when he was clearly going to be moving into the right hand lane ?

 

 

That could easily have been an 'even more unhinged character' with a weapon.. Don't drive like that, especially with family in the car...  Chill, and just allow others to drive the way they do - you are not going to re-educate the whole of Bangkok by getting angry.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Release the KRAKEN!!!

3 minutes ago, JakeC said:

@fredwiggy I think it is only you who cannot see the narcisstic bent in all of your comments. i rest my case. Perhaps it's more pathetic than narcissistic. But empathetic it is not.

No, actually it's you that's either the narcissist you appear to be, or aren't up to speed on what makes a narcissist. You've been here long enough, using many aliases, to know what I do here, how I treat and think about my children and women, and how I treat locals. If your memory is that bad that you can't remember all of this, that's on you. You resting your case means nothing. You aren't Johnnie Cochran. One thing you definitely are is always wrong, but that again is on you.

7 hours ago, JakeC said:

@fredwiggy Your post says a lot about you. Plus...you are wrong. The car on the left is already on the turn and simply waiting for the pedestrians to cross. @lordgrinz is on the other side of the intersection with a clear view of what is happening. 

There was not enough space for @lordgrinz to pass safely, regardless of whether he had right of way or not. The right thing to do was to allow the red car to complete the turn. Pushing through regardless was bad form. The fact that you cannot see that speaks volumes... in telling us why you are unhappy in Thailand

 

Then you ramble on about courtesy...

 

@lordgrinz should have showed that in the first place, rather than to bear down on the red car and to have used his horn. The red car was far ahead and first in line to make his move. The OP should have been courteous and given him space to pull away. Then there would likely have been a thank you hand wave. That's why someone of us thrive in Thailand, where some of you are full of complaints and grievances. 

 

 

100% this.....      While Lordgrinz often raises valid points about the generally poor standard of driving in Thailand and clearly has an axe to grind, this particular instance feels more like forcing a problem out of what was, in truth, an ordinary traffic situation.

 

If Lordgrinz cannot recognise his own role in contributing to the outcome here - and if others fail to see it too - then perhaps a little self-reflection is needed before casting blame on the driving habits of others.

 

Yes, there may be an underlying issue of flawed road design, with the crossing positioned too close to the junction. But even so, the cam-car (Lordgrinz) had ample time, space, and visibility to assess what was happening ahead, and yet chose to respond in an unnecessarily assertive manner.

2 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

100% this.....      While Lordgrinz often raises valid points about the generally poor standard of driving in Thailand and clearly has an axe to grind, this particular instance feels more like forcing a problem out of what was, in truth, an ordinary traffic situation.

 

If Lordgrinz cannot recognise his own role in contributing to the outcome here - and if others fail to see it too - then perhaps a little self-reflection is needed before casting blame on the driving habits of others.

 

Yes, there may be an underlying issue of flawed road design, with the crossing positioned too close to the junction. But even so, the cam-car (Lordgrinz) had ample time, space, and visibility to assess what was happening ahead, and yet chose to respond in an unnecessarily assertive manner.

Couldn't agree more, sir. 👌🏻💪🏻

3 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

then perhaps a little self-reflection is needed before casting blame on the driving habits of others.

 

Perhaps you need to reflect a little on the fact that there were two lanes and the real culprit and creator of this situation just decided to switch lanes WITHOUT indicating. He clearly WAS to blame.

 

What a load of tripe on this thread. Unbelievable.

26 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

Using it as a way to admonish other drivers is.

Yes, agree. 

 

There's a difference between a polite toot and an aggressive blast. 

 

2 minutes ago, SAFETY FIRST said:

Yes, agree. 

 

There's a difference between a polite toot and an aggressive blast. 

 

Could it possibly be that the OP chose to remove the audio, so that we can better believe his claims of 'a wee toot or two'?
We will never know.... or care.

1 minute ago, SAFETY FIRST said:

Yes, agree. 

 

There's a difference between a polite toot and an aggressive blast. 

 

 

I'm getting road rage reading this thread and I'm not even driving.

@fredwiggy So let us look at the facts. You claim that I am always wrong. But yet, most of the people on this thread agree with my stance. So, in effect, you are asserting that most of the people here are wrong and perhaps three people, including yourself and @lordgrinz are right.  That's seems somewhat arrogant in itself. Empath?

So which is it? Am I always wrong or is it that you perceive that you are always right?

 

 

 

3 hours ago, fredwiggy said:

but that he had the right of way and the red car was turning into the pedestrians instead of allowing them to finish crossing before moving. if he did that, this would not have happened.

 

 

Fred, I honestly don’t see how you can interpret this so differently.

 

The red Mazda was simply turning left, and then moving across into the right-hand lane and paused for pedestrians – the driver was most certainly not 'driving into' the pedestrians' and clearly stopped to give way allowing them to cross, as he should. The driver of that car did nothing wrong at the outset. Granted, the road layout isn’t ideal, but the Mazda’s intentions were perfectly clear.

 

There was absolutely no need for the approaching driver (cam-car / Lordgrinz) to behave as he did. From road positioning alone, it was obvious the Mazda intended to move into the right-hand lane, and it requires only the barest perception to recognise that.

 

All Lordgrinz needed to do was ease back slightly and allow the Mazda to pull ahead once the crossing was clear.

 

Yes, the Mazda driver’s reaction afterwards was thuggery – but it was Lordgrinz’s aggressive driving, horn-blasting, and provocation that set the whole thing off in the first place.

34 minutes ago, JakeC said:

Now you know. I am not attached to a username.

Yes you are Richard smith 

3 minutes ago, JakeC said:

But yet, most of the people on this thread agree with my stance

 

No we don't. We strongly disagree with you. We also strongly disagree with Richard. 

 

1 minute ago, richard_smith237 said:

The red Mazda was simply turning left, and then moving across into the right-hand lane

 

He did not indicate. End of story. He was the one to blame. In Thailand too you have to indicate when you change lane. He did not.

 

It's clear who is to blame. You're completely wrong.

@novacova Have you been drinking...again?

Just now, JakeC said:

@fredwiggy So let us look at the facts. You claim that I am always wrong. But yet, most of the people on this thread agree with my stance. So, in effect, you are asserting that most of the people here are wrong and perhaps three people, including yourself and @lordgrinz are right.  That's seems somewhat arrogant in itself. Empath?

So which is it? Am I always wrong or is it that you perceive that you are always right?

 

 

 

You're always wrong arguing with me. i didn't say your opinion on this particular matter was wrong. What I did say is that you seemed to put most if not all of the blame on the OP. Again, I agreed he could have let the man go, but he didn't have to, maintaining his straight course. The other driver made , again, a minor situation into a larger one, and was threatening, which is never right in any event. None of us here knows more than what we can see on the video, which doesn't take into account the audio part of the horn. An empath can be arrogant, just as most other people are at times. Look up the definition, and look back at all I've ever written. If I remember, it was one of your alter egos that said I never help anyone here, which is a lie, so again, you either have a poor memory, or are just arrogant yourself, thinking you're right after proven wrong. This isn't a case about being wrong or right, as anyone can see the other driver is who caused the real  trouble, no matter who may have instigated it

10 minutes ago, 2long said:

Could it possibly be that the OP chose to remove the audio, so that we can better believe his claims of 'a wee toot or two'?
We will never know.... or care.

I'm thinking the same thing 👍

8 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

13 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

then perhaps a little self-reflection is needed before casting blame on the driving habits of others.

 

Perhaps you need to reflect a little on the fact that there were two lanes and the real culprit and creator of this situation just decided to switch lanes WITHOUT indicating. He clearly WAS to blame.

 

What a load of tripe on this thread. Unbelievable.

 

Given the depth of your moral bankruptcy and the sheer absurdity of your opinions in almost every thread you contribute to, your view here carries no weight whatsoever.

Whos is we @Cameroni? There are more than ten people who agree with my stance. There are perhaps four of you weirdoes....and you are weirdoes, with social skill issues.

1 minute ago, fredwiggy said:

The other driver made , again, a minor situation into a larger one,

 

He created the situation in the first place by changing lanes and not indicating. As the law requires. He is fully to blame.

1 minute ago, JakeC said:

Whos is we @Cameroni? There are more than ten people who agree with my stance. There are perhaps four of you weirdoes....and you are weirdoes, with social skill issues

Would @lordgrinz start a poll for members to vote on who's wrong/right?

There needs to be at least 4 answer options

4 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

Fred, I honestly don’t see how you can interpret this so differently.

 

The red Mazda was simply turning left, and then moving across into the right-hand lane and paused for pedestrians – the driver was most certainly not 'driving into' the pedestrians' and clearly stopped to give way allowing them to cross, as he should. The driver of that car did nothing wrong at the outset. Granted, the road layout isn’t ideal, but the Mazda’s intentions were perfectly clear.

 

There was absolutely no need for the approaching driver (cam-car / Lordgrinz) to behave as he did. From road positioning alone, it was obvious the Mazda intended to move into the right-hand lane, and it requires only the barest perception to recognise that.

 

All Lordgrinz needed to do was ease back slightly and allow the Mazda to pull ahead once the crossing was clear.

 

Yes, the Mazda driver’s reaction afterwards was thuggery – but it was Lordgrinz’s aggressive driving, horn-blasting, and provocation that set the whole thing off in the first place.

I meant that since the red car driver had to stop for the pedestrians, and he shouldn't have gone that far, waiting for them to finish crossing, that the OP could continue straight. We didn't hear any blasting, so all we can go by is what he said. Blasting is always wrong unless a person's making a life threatening move in front of you. The red car driver should have moved into the far left lane and stayed there, not tried to cut in front of the OP. It just made things worse. 

1 minute ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

Given the depth of your moral bankruptcy and the sheer absurdity of your opinions in almost every thread you contribute to, your view here carries no weight whatsoever.

 

You're afraid to argue the point with me, because you know you're completely in the wrong. Your opinion carries not weight here whatsoever and is totally obstuse and wrong in law. And morally reprehensible and psychologically deeply concerning.

6 minutes ago, JakeC said:

@novacova Have you been drinking...again?

No ricky, never touch the stuff. Now go back to your alternate until your bruised ego can’t take it anymore.

If someone asks "What Is Aseannow like?" you can tell them this thread typifies the entire place. We have:
 

• A guy posting a video clearly looking for validation in an echo chamber ("oooh, you were hard done by, we all agree you must go to the police immediately")
• many people disagreeing and the OP getting belligerent as he isn't getting the validation he hoped for
• tons of pointless bickering way beyond the point where it even means anything
• the usual pedantry by our usual pedant
• some classic internet hard man comments
• someone bringing up a gripe from another thread (about pizzas, wtf?)
• circular logic - nothing achieved
• people giving out absolutely terrible - and potentially dangerous - advice

All that's missing is someone whinging about a thumbs down emoji.

 

I think someone should make a poll and let that be the end of it.

@fredwiggy I disagree with your backpedalling and your warped synopsis. You wrote that I was always wrong

Verbatim: "One thing you definitely are is always wrong".

That changed into "i didn't say your opinion on this particular matter was wrong." 😊

You have no integrity at all. Nothing you write nor say can be trusted. Fake.

11 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Yes, the Mazda driver’s reaction afterwards was thuggery – but it was Lordgrinz’s aggressive driving, horn-blasting, and provocation that set the whole thing off in the first place.

i see it differently. the mazda driver should have stayed in the left lane instead of carelessly start cutting into lordgrinz's lane. if the mazda driver had remained in his lane as he should have, nothing would have happened. it is clearly the mazda driver who created this dangerous situation. in this case, it is understandable to use the horn, also to help prevent an accident ...

 

4 minutes ago, JakeC said:

Whos is we @Cameroni? There are more than ten people who agree with my stance. There are perhaps four of you weirdoes....and you are weirdoes, with social skill issues.

 

We, the powerful silent and sensible majority. As opposed to the isolated posters posting illegal and nonsensical garbage like you and Richard.

1 minute ago, motdaeng said:

i see it differently. the mazda driver should have stayed in the left lane instead of carelessly cutting into lordgrinz's lane. if the mazda driver had remained in his lane as he should have, nothing would have happened. it is clearly the mazda driver who created this dangerous situation. in this case, it is understandable to use the horn, also to help prevent an accident ...

 

This man gets it! Plus he didn't indicate!

@novacova You are losing it.

 

@josephbloggs I think you are taking the whole thing a bit too seriously. The thread is going exactly the way it should go. Different perspectives on the same evidence. Interesting, don't you think? Really brings out the weirdoes.

Just now, fredwiggy said:

I meant that since the red car driver had to stop for the pedestrians, and he shouldn't have gone that far, waiting for them to finish crossing, that the OP could continue straight. We didn't hear any blasting, so all we can go by is what he said. Blasting is always wrong unless a person's making a life threatening move in front of you. The red car driver should have moved into the far left lane and stayed there, not tried to cut in front of the OP. It just made things worse. 

 

As SAFEYFIRST wrote - the Op removed the sound...   People tend not to react to a 'polite toot'...   So I wonder if the sound was removed as the horn was 'blasted' rather than an innocent little 'toot'... 

 

The red car was already making his move directly into the right hand lane as part of his turn, but needed to stop for the pedestrians.... That is very clear by the road positioning. 

 

The red car was not indicating - but that does not give the cam-car (Lordgrinz) free reign to drive up that close to him in a somewhat assertive and aggressive manner and use his horn when the intentions of the red Mazda driver to drive into the right hand-lane are so clear. 

 

All lordgrinz needed to do was apply a moment of patience - thats it.

 

The lack of indication is somewhat moot as the road positioning makes it obvious what the Mazda drivers intentions are.

 

----------

 

The Mazda driver may not have been driving 'perfectly'...   but that does not give justification to 'create' an escalate situation out of a minor issue.