Swiped Motorbike While Getting Out Of Taxi

[Curt1591]

Not only is splitting traffic legal in Thailand, it is also legal in such places as the extremely over-regulated State of California, USA. The only stipulation, in California, is that one is not to exceed 5MPH over the speed of vehicles being overtaken.

Opening the door on any oncoming traffic puts one at fault. In minor collisions, most Thais will wheel and deal. If you get the police involved, you simply added another dealer.

[dttk0009]

Think yourself lucky you got off easy.

NEVER open a car door in traffic without looking first. You could have murdered someone.

Please remember this. It's one of the greatest hazards for cyclists and motorcyclists, because you're not the only ones to do it.

Cyclists and motorcyclists don't always have room to get out of the way of suddenly opening car doors in traffic. You got off cheaply, which is lucky and no offense intended, but that is a classic cause of accident. Much cheaper than a uni degree, so bargain-priced learning.

Nice defense of the motorcycle drivers that are completely illegally tearing by cars on the outside that are stopped in traffic. But this being Thailand you should be ready for it, I just hate to see people defending dangerous and illegal driving practices like its normal. I opened my door and took a motorcycle out, paid him 2000 for his scratches and paid 10k for the taxi after my assistant went with him to check the prices, I really messed up the door, it couldnt even close so 10k was reasonable.

It is legal to ride a motorbike in Thailand, you should know. Dangerous yes, but the most dangerous are the cars. Goodnight on that note.

Hahaha, no. Either you don't drive here or you haven't been here very long. Motorcycles are the most reckless and break the rules of the road most often. I saw a guy get hit by a car the other day because he tried to shoot across a road diagonally going against traffic to hit a u-turn spot. He went flying, and I felt no pity. He wasn't moving either. Every day there's one less driver like that around is a day that my life and the lives of those that I love are safer on the road.

[robblok]

Why would you stop on a motorcycle, that is the whole point you can go on when cars stop. That is also the whole point car drivers dont like you because you can go while they have to wait. If there is space you can go. I do it all the time but not as crazy as some Thais, i make sure i dont go too much faster as the cars that stand still.

The Thai traffic law states you can do it, even in the west you can do it without problems. Its the car drivers who are at fault to open doors without watching. You cant get out of a car without watching its plain stupid. But then again many farangs are not that bright.

Ummmm

I do not believe that traffic laws state that you are allowed to pass between stopped vehicles. Traffic laws state that you may pass in an open lane. Traffic laws in Thailand state that a motorcycle should remain in the left lane. Motorcycles may NOT pass between a car and the curb.

I move up between stopped cars and even during slow traffic times (slow but moving) will pass between cars by riding the lane markers. It isn't right but I do it. If I get clocked by a door whilst passing between a car and the curb it is MY fault as the motorcycle rider. If I get clocked by a door passing between 2 cars if is the car's fault.

Could you tell me where it says that you can get out of a car in the middle of the road without looking ? If its anyone's fault its the cars fault because he can look before he does something. A motorcycle driver has no way of knowing when a door will open. (but if the motorcycle goes too fast then i can agree he is to blame). But seems reasonable to look before you open some car doors.

Even the police here (not the most tustworthy people i agree) will blame the car in the stories told here, it does seem they have some common sense some posters miss.

You are right about the left lane, but i dont even bother to keep on that lane because its down right dangerous to stay there with all the minivan's, buses, taxis cutting you off all the time. Its better to pay the fine to the cops when they check you then to end up as roadkill.

I would say however that motorcycles can be to blame too if they go much too fast through the not moving / slow moving traffic. I have seen motorcycle go real real fast past all the cars, in that case.. blame the motorcycle. But if a motorcycle goes like 10-15 km faster then the other traffic i would not blame them.

Things are not always black or white there is a shade of gray too.

Section 43 letter H states:

No driver shall drive the vehicle

without thinking about the safety or suffering of other persons

Granted its a catch all part of the regulation but if you look at common sense you know you have to look before exiting a car. So you can fault car drivers here and so what the cops do is legal.

[wintermute]

Why would you stop on a motorcycle, that is the whole point you can go on when cars stop. That is also the whole point car drivers dont like you because you can go while they have to wait. If there is space you can go. I do it all the time but not as crazy as some Thais, i make sure i dont go too much faster as the cars that stand still.

The Thai traffic law states you can do it, even in the west you can do it without problems. Its the car drivers who are at fault to open doors without watching. You cant get out of a car without watching its plain stupid. But then again many farangs are not that bright.

Ummmm

I do not believe that traffic laws state that you are allowed to pass between stopped vehicles. Traffic laws state that you may pass in an open lane. Traffic laws in Thailand state that a motorcycle should remain in the left lane. Motorcycles may NOT pass between a car and the curb.

I move up between stopped cars and even during slow traffic times (slow but moving) will pass between cars by riding the lane markers. It isn't right but I do it. If I get clocked by a door whilst passing between a car and the curb it is MY fault as the motorcycle rider. If I get clocked by a door passing between 2 cars if is the car's fault.

Sometimes fault is determined by size of vehicle as well. A pedestrian jaywalking and getting hit by a truck isn't liable but the truck driver is. Same goes with a motorcycle..it's substantially smaller than a vehicle and it is a weaker position to begin with so they would not be held responsible for certain situations.

A person opening up a door and clothes-lining a motorcyclist is at fault no matter how you try and spin it.

[TheLaughingMan]

Why would you stop on a motorcycle, that is the whole point you can go on when cars stop. That is also the whole point car drivers dont like you because you can go while they have to wait. If there is space you can go. I do it all the time but not as crazy as some Thais, i make sure i dont go too much faster as the cars that stand still.

The Thai traffic law states you can do it, even in the west you can do it without problems. Its the car drivers who are at fault to open doors without watching. You cant get out of a car without watching its plain stupid. But then again many farangs are not that bright.

Ummmm

I do not believe that traffic laws state that you are allowed to pass between stopped vehicles. Traffic laws state that you may pass in an open lane. Traffic laws in Thailand state that a motorcycle should remain in the left lane. Motorcycles may NOT pass between a car and the curb.

I move up between stopped cars and even during slow traffic times (slow but moving) will pass between cars by riding the lane markers. It isn't right but I do it. If I get clocked by a door whilst passing between a car and the curb it is MY fault as the motorcycle rider. If I get clocked by a door passing between 2 cars if is the car's fault.

Sometimes fault is determined by size of vehicle as well. A pedestrian jaywalking and getting hit by a truck isn't liable but the truck driver is. Same goes with a motorcycle..it's substantially smaller than a vehicle and it is a weaker position to begin with so they would not be held responsible for certain situations.

A person opening up a door and clothes-lining a motorcyclist is at fault no matter how you try and spin it.

Another ridiculous quote from you. Traffic is stopped completely, my taxi is right next to the curb where customers of course are going to exit the vehicle. It is completely illegal to pass next to the curb when traffic is stopped and yet a motorcycle comes flying along beside me at very high speed in the tiny space available and gets clipped as my door opens. I am not breaking the law in any way, the motorcycle is breaking all the laws. How is it my fault no matter how you spin it?

Edited February 11, 2010 by TheLaughingMan

[wintermute]

Why would you stop on a motorcycle, that is the whole point you can go on when cars stop. That is also the whole point car drivers dont like you because you can go while they have to wait. If there is space you can go. I do it all the time but not as crazy as some Thais, i make sure i dont go too much faster as the cars that stand still.

The Thai traffic law states you can do it, even in the west you can do it without problems. Its the car drivers who are at fault to open doors without watching. You cant get out of a car without watching its plain stupid. But then again many farangs are not that bright.

Ummmm

I do not believe that traffic laws state that you are allowed to pass between stopped vehicles. Traffic laws state that you may pass in an open lane. Traffic laws in Thailand state that a motorcycle should remain in the left lane. Motorcycles may NOT pass between a car and the curb.

I move up between stopped cars and even during slow traffic times (slow but moving) will pass between cars by riding the lane markers. It isn't right but I do it. If I get clocked by a door whilst passing between a car and the curb it is MY fault as the motorcycle rider. If I get clocked by a door passing between 2 cars if is the car's fault.

Sometimes fault is determined by size of vehicle as well. A pedestrian jaywalking and getting hit by a truck isn't liable but the truck driver is. Same goes with a motorcycle..it's substantially smaller than a vehicle and it is a weaker position to begin with so they would not be held responsible for certain situations.

A person opening up a door and clothes-lining a motorcyclist is at fault no matter how you try and spin it.

Another ridiculous quote from you. Traffic is stopped completely, my taxi is right next to the curb where customers of course are going to exit the vehicle. It is completely illegal to pass next to the curb when traffic is stopped and yet a motorcycle comes flying along beside me at very high speed in the tiny space available and gets clipped as my door opens. I am not breaking the law in any way, the motorcycle is breaking all the laws. How is it my fault no matter how you spin it?

Maybe you should have used the eyeballs in your head and god given common sense to judge the appropriateness of swinging the door open like a wreckless fool? This isn't the western world if you were even slightly observant you'd notice that certain traffic "laws" that you keep mentally masturbating over are more like rough guidelines in Thailand. This means you have to expect motorcycles passing by at any time and should have used your better judgement.

If you want an over-regulated nanny state then the airport is open anytime for you to go back to where you are from. I'm sure in England or wherever they have CCTV plastered in every square meter so that your righteous indignation over every violation will surely be answered in the correct court of law.

Edited February 11, 2010 by wintermute

[ballpoint]

You are right about the left lane...

Not quite. That would mean that every motorcycle would be forced to continually go in an anticlockwise direction around the block the dealer it was purchased from was located. Unless you took it somewhere else on the back of a truck. It is an oft spouted "law" that is much misunderstood. The law states that all traffic should be in the left hand lane, unless overtaking slower vehicles, or turning right, or proceeding in a straight line at an intersection with a left hand turning lane. Obviously, in a city, this is impractical, and there is nothing in the law to stop a motorcycle from moving to the centre, or right hand lane, in order to go past a parked vehicle, turn right, do a U-turn or move to the correct lane at an intersection. There is also nothing in the law to prevent filtering through traffic. I'd love to see how upset the holier than thou car drivers would get if every single motorcycle in Bangkok lined up in single file at traffic lights. They wouldn't be able to pass them, by their own definition, that would be lane splitting and illegal. They'd be stuck at the back of a line of motorbikes. I also wonder how many of these same people have driven cars past slower motorcycles without totally moving into another lane to do so? Again, by their own definition, that would be illegal.

Opening a car door without looking and killing a cyclist/motorcyclist would not be considered murder in most countries, it would be considered manslaughter though.

[robblok]

Another ridiculous quote from you. Traffic is stopped completely, my taxi is right next to the curb where customers of course are going to exit the vehicle. It is completely illegal to pass next to the curb when traffic is stopped and yet a motorcycle comes flying along beside me at very high speed in the tiny space available and gets clipped as my door opens. I am not breaking the law in any way, the motorcycle is breaking all the laws. How is it my fault no matter how you spin it?

Ok this remark wasn't aimed at me but this is what i mean with shades of gray. In this case i would fault the motorbike.

If the car was in 2nd lane of a traffic jam and a motorcycle passes it going 10-15 kmh and the car suddenly opens a door id fault the car.

same situation if the bike goes 50 zig zagging through cars standing still id fault the bike.

[robblok]

You are right about the left lane...

Not quite. That would mean that every motorcycle would be forced to continually go in an anticlockwise direction around the block the dealer it was purchased from was located. Unless you took it somewhere else on the back of a truck. It is an oft spouted "law" that is much misunderstood. The law states that all traffic should be in the left hand lane, unless overtaking slower vehicles, or turning right, or proceeding in a straight line at an intersection with a left hand turning lane. Obviously, in a city, this is impractical, and there is nothing in the law to stop a motorcycle from moving to the centre, or right hand lane, in order to go past a parked vehicle, turn right, do a U-turn or move to the correct lane at an intersection. There is also nothing in the law to prevent filtering through traffic. I'd love to see how upset the holier than thou car drivers would get if every single motorcycle in Bangkok lined up in single file at traffic lights. They wouldn't be able to pass them, by their own definition, that would be lane splitting and illegal. They'd be stuck at the back of a line of motorbikes. I also wonder how many of these same people have driven cars past slower motorcycles without totally moving into another lane to do so? Again, by their own definition, that would be illegal.

Opening a car door without looking and killing a cyclist/motorcyclist would not be considered murder in most countries, it would be considered manslaughter though.

Your right about that, but i think what he means was you cant be in second lane if you go straight and there are cars moving in first lane to go straight. I really avoid the first lane at all cost because you get cut there constantly.

Of course you can change lanes legally to take turns and u turns and so on but, on a straight road its different. At least that is what the cops tell me when they pull me from the road and i have to pay the 200bt.

[Nio]

Here is a twist

I was pulling out of Holiday Inn Silom, the back entrance, in my truck and a guy from India ran into the back of me

I stopped and as he was picking himself and his motorbike up, noticing his knee was quite banged up

Hit hit the left corner of my back bumper

He said something like Sorry Mister, no damage, there is no damage

I said let me call the police to be sure you don't try to blame me

He said Mr. I have no license and here illegally do not call the police, almost begging

So I let him go and went on my way

[dave111223]

Surely it depends on what side of the car you are getting out on? Is it not illegal to pass a car on the left side, especially if they are in the left most lane?

I was near paragon the other day and a taxi was pulled over to the left next to a railing, and a motorbike taxi tried to gun it full speed between the 50cm of space inbetween the taxi and the railing...the passenger opened the door and the motorbike slammed into it. Whole thing was a big mess with the door jammed into the railing etc.. etc..

Driver was not seriously injured...

But <deleted> are you thinking, driving your motorbike into a situation like that...ok the passenger didn't look but as a foreign tourist would you really expect a motorbike to be passing you full speed on the left in a 50cm gap between the taxi and the curb...

On the other hand if you are opening your door on the right that's 100% your own fault.

[GarryP]

If the taxi pulls up towards the curb but still quite a good distance therefrom, I always look behind before opening the door. However, if the taxi is very close to the curb I never bother checking. If some dipsh*t believes he can squeeze through that gap, tough luck, because he shouldn't be there in the first place.

Edited February 11, 2010 by GarryP

[way2muchcoffee]

Hmm. On several main streets near where I live in BKK (Sathorn/Narthiwas) there is a motorcycle lane on the far left. It is designed for motorcycles and bicycles to pass cars on the left. This is the leftmost lane (but only about 1 m wide) so naturally cars and taxis continually drive in it and cut off the motorcyles. I drive in BKK, but I also take a motorcycle taxis daily. Most of the accidents I see are the fault of the car drivers and their disregard for the motorcycles.

Edited February 11, 2010 by way2muchcoffee

[Pez]

Ummmm as I understand things the driver is responsible. But hel_l this is Thailand just try it next time you swipe an illegal near side passing by a motor bike.

[Brigante7]

Think yourself lucky you got off easy.

NEVER open a car door in traffic without looking first. You could have murdered someone.

Please remember this. It's one of the greatest hazards for cyclists and motorcyclists, because you're not the only ones to do it.

Cyclists and motorcyclists don't always have room to get out of the way of suddenly opening car doors in traffic. You got off cheaply, which is lucky and no offense intended, but that is a classic cause of accident. Much cheaper than a uni degree, so bargain-priced learning.

I'm sorry but you've lost me, for arguments sake lets say there are 3 lanes on the road and each lane is at a standstill with traffic, shouldn't all traffic be stationery, or is it because cyclists and motorcyclists are so bloody impatient that they risk their lives doing something they are not supposed to do and when something happens to them they moan their <deleted> off. The passenger getting out of the taxi should have told him to get lost and that it was his own fault for driving between waiting traffic.

Brigante7.

And yes I do ride a motorbike before all the flamers start and no I don't put my life at risk, I wait until the traffic starts moving again before I do.

Why would you stop on a motorcycle, that is the whole point you can go on when cars stop. That is also the whole point car drivers dont like you because you can go while they have to wait. If there is space you can go. I do it all the time but not as crazy as some Thais, i make sure i dont go too much faster as the cars that stand still.

The Thai traffic law states you can do it, even in the west you can do it without problems. Its the car drivers who are at fault to open doors without watching. You cant get out of a car without watching its plain stupid. But then again many farangs are not that bright.

It's plain stupid to weave in and out of moving or stationery traffic but people still do it, but then again many people are not that bright.

Brigante7.

[scorecard]

The most dangerous thing I do in Thailand is ride my motorcycle every day. I know it and accept the inherent risks and consequences.

I was still hoping to see seanmoran justify how opening a car door without looking = murder. ((Granted --- opening a car door IF you look and see a motorcycle coming MIGHT be murder )

The underlying anchors of the law include:

- A common duty of care (required of all people).

- Shared responsibility.

Surely it's only logical and ethical that you should check if there's any form of danger before you do anything, and surely a civil society would expect just that attitude and the accompanying behaviors, from everybody.

[tonywebster]

The most dangerous thing I do in Thailand is ride my motorcycle every day. I know it and accept the inherent risks and consequences.

I was still hoping to see seanmoran justify how opening a car door without looking = murder. ((Granted --- opening a car door IF you look and see a motorcycle coming MIGHT be murder )

The underlying anchors of the law include:

- A common duty of care (required of all people).

- Shared responsibility.

Surely it's only logical and ethical that you should check if there's any form of danger before you do anything, and surely a civil society would expect just that attitude and the accompanying behaviors, from everybody.

so surely the motorbike rider should check if there is any possibility of danger by riding between the car and the kerb.

In the UK we have something called the 'reasonable man' test, I suppose here the equivalent of a reasonable man would be very different.

[dave111223]

so surely the motorbike rider should check if there is any possibility of danger by riding between the car and the kerb.

In the UK we have something called the 'reasonable man' test, I suppose here the equivalent of a reasonable man would be very different.

Instead of the 'reasonable man' test they have the 'dumb and dumber' test...and 'dumber' gets paid.

[SeanMoran]

[

The most dangerous thing I do in Thailand is ride my motorcycle every day. I know it and accept the inherent risks and consequences.

I was still hoping to see seanmoran justify how opening a car door without looking = murder. ((Granted --- opening a car door IF you look and see a motorcycle coming MIGHT be murder )

How can anyone prove that they DIDN'T look at what was right there before their eyes, and what sort of a legal defense does ignorance constitute? Maybe manslaughter would have been a better word for me to use, but it didn't really fit with the simple implications of the comment a the time.

so surely the motorbike rider should check if there is any possibility of danger by riding between the car and the kerb.

In the UK we have something called the 'reasonable man' test, I suppose here the equivalent of a reasonable man would be very different.

It's a good idea for cyclists and motorcyclists to try to allow at least 750mm of space around stationary vehicles in case of an unexpected door swinging open, but in heavy traffic, that's not usually possible. That's when it's wise to slow down to jogging pace and ride carefully, but it's still possible that if someone hurriedly opens a car door a few metres in front of a slow-moving motorbike, the rider is going to take half a second to react and a fair few metres past that obstacle to brake to a stop. I'd expect in most cases at reasonably safe speeds, the result would be the car door gets twisted around like a reverse suicide door and there's minor damage to the front of the motorbike, which would hopefully remain upright, but there's a good chance of the rider and bike coming to grief, especially if they happen to hit the sharp edge of the suddenly opened door.

The reasonable solution is just to make an habit of opening car doors ever so slightly, like an inch or two, and just wait a couple of seconds before getting out. This is so clear an indication to any oncoming traffic that you're about to get out of the car. It gives them a chance to adjust their course or hit the brakes before the door opens. Otherwise if someone opens a stationary car door suddenly in heavy traffic and it gets whacked by a passing vehicle, it's not much different from throwing a computer out the window of a high-rise apartment and then explaining to the cops that you didn't see anyone walking along the footpath down below, so it's not your fault that they got clocked by the laptop falling from the sky.

[jdinasia]

Sometimes fault is determined by size of vehicle as well. A pedestrian jaywalking and getting hit by a truck isn't liable but the truck driver is. Same goes with a motorcycle..it's substantially smaller than a vehicle and it is a weaker position to begin with so they would not be held responsible for certain situations.

A person opening up a door and clothes-lining a motorcyclist is at fault no matter how you try and spin it.

Sorry ---- but your post is inaccurate.

Hit a jaywalker that was visible and you are at fault. Hit one that walks out between parked cars and you are not.

Exiting a vehicle from the curb and a motorcycle hits you .. again not your fault.

sean--- you don't have to prove someone DIDN'T look .. you have to prove they did. In no common situation could it be construed as murder. Remember weaving in and out of stopped traffic IS against the law. Also remember that passing on the curb side of a stopped car is not only against the law it is also stupid.

[tonywebster]

[

The most dangerous thing I do in Thailand is ride my motorcycle every day. I know it and accept the inherent risks and consequences.

I was still hoping to see seanmoran justify how opening a car door without looking = murder. ((Granted --- opening a car door IF you look and see a motorcycle coming MIGHT be murder )

How can anyone prove that they DIDN'T look at what was right there before their eyes, and what sort of a legal defense does ignorance constitute? Maybe manslaughter would have been a better word for me to use, but it didn't really fit with the simple implications of the comment a the time.

so surely the motorbike rider should check if there is any possibility of danger by riding between the car and the kerb.

In the UK we have something called the 'reasonable man' test, I suppose here the equivalent of a reasonable man would be very different.

It's a good idea for cyclists and motorcyclists to try to allow at least 750mm of space around stationary vehicles in case of an unexpected door swinging open, but in heavy traffic, that's not usually possible. That's when it's wise to slow down to jogging pace and ride carefully, but it's still possible that if someone hurriedly opens a car door a few metres in front of a slow-moving motorbike, the rider is going to take half a second to react and a fair few metres past that obstacle to brake to a stop. I'd expect in most cases at reasonably safe speeds, the result would be the car door gets twisted around like a reverse suicide door and there's minor damage to the front of the motorbike, which would hopefully remain upright, but there's a good chance of the rider and bike coming to grief, especially if they happen to hit the sharp edge of the suddenly opened door.

The reasonable solution is just to make an habit of opening car doors ever so slightly, like an inch or two, and just wait a couple of seconds before getting out. This is so clear an indication to any oncoming traffic that you're about to get out of the car. It gives them a chance to adjust their course or hit the brakes before the door opens. Otherwise if someone opens a stationary car door suddenly in heavy traffic and it gets whacked by a passing vehicle, it's not much different from throwing a computer out the window of a high-rise apartment and then explaining to the cops that you didn't see anyone walking along the footpath down below, so it's not your fault that they got clocked by the laptop falling from the sky.

ah now you are talking about people being reckless but touching on the reasonable man test, A reasonable man would expect that there could be someone walking below in your example about throwing the laptop, however in the other situation would a reasonable man expect someone to be committing an offence by riding between a car and the kerb? Well of course if you live in Thailand you come to learn that people flout the law regularly, however if you are a tourist would it be unreasonable for you to expect that people would take more care of their own safety and not perform stupid manoeuvres. Common sense dictates that if you go speeding between the car and the kerb the law of averages will kick in and at some point you will come a cropper. the sensible thing would be for bike riders that insist on flouting the law would be for them to perform this manoeuvre very slowly and expect that some taxi passenger might be alighting onto the kerb and will open the door.

In this instance the bike rider is 100% to blame, and will always be to blame for this type of incident, however those of us that have been here longer know to not just open out doors as some dribbling fool will no doubt be trying to save himself 5 seconds and cutting between the car and the kerb.

[SeanMoran]

sean--- you don't have to prove someone DIDN'T look .. you have to prove they did. In no common situation could it be construed as murder. Remember weaving in and out of stopped traffic IS against the law. Also remember that passing on the curb side of a stopped car is not only against the law it is also stupid.

Think about what defense I might have if I drive through a red traffic light and get nabbed by the traffic cops, and my excuse is "I didn't see the light.". That would make them change their minds, wouldn't it?

Anyway, besides all the examples of dangerous behaviour by a few teenagers; a minority of motorcyclists; it's fairly normal to continue down the road to an intersection between stopped cars, including the left side of the left lane, which is the most usual on motorbikes in Thailand. Where this suddenly becomes hazardous is on the rare occasion that someone in a car opens a door unexpectedly, which is the cause of the accident. If the person in the car had simply clicked the door ajar and waited a couple of seconds before putting their feet on the road, others can see what's about to happen and avoid the collision. It doesn't take much figuring out to see that the hazard in these circumstances is the suddenly opening car door, and the perpetrator of the hazard is the occupant of the car. Stop that behavioural problem and there'll be no more swiping.

[camerata]

As it turns out is is illegal for a motorcycle to pass a car on the curb side for obvious reasons.

I suspect this is the law, but in practice no one cares about the law here. When I drove a taxi in the West, the law was the driver is responsible for anything his passengers do. It would be interesting to know if that's the case here. After all, before anyone gets out they have to pay, so the driver can at least take a look and warn the passenger (which many do). I see very few of the warning stickers on taxi doors and, as someone said, they are mostly in Thai.

[tonywebster]

sean--- you don't have to prove someone DIDN'T look .. you have to prove they did. In no common situation could it be construed as murder. Remember weaving in and out of stopped traffic IS against the law. Also remember that passing on the curb side of a stopped car is not only against the law it is also stupid.

Think about what defense I might have if I drive through a red traffic light and get nabbed by the traffic cops, and my excuse is "I didn't see the light.". That would make them change their minds, wouldn't it?

Anyway, besides all the examples of dangerous behaviour by a few teenagers; a minority of motorcyclists; it's fairly normal to continue down the road to an intersection between stopped cars, including the left side of the left lane, which is the most usual on motorbikes in Thailand. Where this suddenly becomes hazardous is on the rare occasion that someone in a car opens a door unexpectedly, which is the cause of the accident. If the person in the car had simply clicked the door ajar and waited a couple of seconds before putting their feet on the road, others can see what's about to happen and avoid the collision. It doesn't take much figuring out to see that the hazard in these circumstances is the suddenly opening car door, and the perpetrator of the hazard is the occupant of the car. Stop that behavioural problem and there'll be no more swiping.

Sean you are on a losing argument here mate, in no way you describe could it be described as murder, your example of going though a red light is not relevant, if you didn't see it you still commit the offence as there no need to show intention for this offence.

For murder you need to show intent, admittedly the intent can be complicated as shown on wiki:

• Intent to kill,
  
• Intent to inflict grievous bodily harm short of death,
  
• Reckless indifference to an unjustifiably high risk to human life (sometimes described as an "abandoned and malignant heart"), or
  
• Intent to commit a dangerous felony (the "felony-murder" doctrine).
  

Under state of mind (i), intent to kill, the deadly weapon rule applies. Thus, if the defendant intentionally uses a deadly weapon or instrument against the victim, such use authorizes a permissive inference of intent to kill. An example of a deadly weapon or instrument is a gun, a knife, or even a car when intentionally used to strike the victim.

Under state of mind (iii), an "abandoned and malignant heart", the killing must result from defendant's conduct involving a reckless indifference to human life and a conscious disregard of an unreasonable risk of death or serious bodily injury. An example of this is a 2007 law in California where an individual could be convicted of second-degree murder if he or she kills another person while operating a motor vehicle while being under the influence of alcohol, drugs, or controlled substances.

Under state of mind (iv), the felony-murder doctrine, the felony committed must be an inherently dangerous felony, such as burglary, arson, rape, robbery or kidnapping. Importantly, the underlying felony cannot be a lesser included offense such as assault, otherwise all criminal homicides would be murder as all are felonies.

I think you are trying to argue the point at iii but like I said the reasonable man test would come in, is it reasonable to expect a bike to be performing an illegal manoeuvre at such a speed that it is likely to kill him in a collision. Of course if you are driving you need show a higher duty of care, but for a passenger to open a door of a car whilst adjacent to the kerb there is no way a reasonable man would forsee a rider performing such an illegal and dangerous manoeuvre and the chance of ever being charged with murder for this is very very small. But as we know in Bangkok common sense and actual law matter not one jot and those of us that live here are aware that some retard will be hurtling down our nearside even when we are close to the kerb.

[SeanMoran]

I think you are trying to argue the point at iii but like I said the reasonable man test would come in, is it reasonable to expect a bike to be performing an illegal manoeuvre at such a speed that it is likely to kill him in a collision. Of course if you are driving you need show a higher duty of care, but for a passenger to open a door of a car whilst adjacent to the kerb there is no way a reasonable man would forsee a rider performing such an illegal and dangerous manoeuvre and the chance of ever being charged with murder for this is very very small. But as we know in Bangkok common sense and actual law matter not one jot and those of us that live here are aware that some retard will be hurtling down our nearside even when we are close to the kerb.

Okay fair enough then. You may do as you wish with your car doors in future, Tony. If you open up to an innocent motorcyclist then it is not your fault if they die.

[tonywebster]

I think you are trying to argue the point at iii but like I said the reasonable man test would come in, is it reasonable to expect a bike to be performing an illegal manoeuvre at such a speed that it is likely to kill him in a collision. Of course if you are driving you need show a higher duty of care, but for a passenger to open a door of a car whilst adjacent to the kerb there is no way a reasonable man would forsee a rider performing such an illegal and dangerous manoeuvre and the chance of ever being charged with murder for this is very very small. But as we know in Bangkok common sense and actual law matter not one jot and those of us that live here are aware that some retard will be hurtling down our nearside even when we are close to the kerb.

Okay fair enough then. You may do as you wish with your car doors in future, Tony. If you open up to an innocent motorcyclist then it is not your fault if they die.

wow get off that high horse cowboy, read what is written before you want to make sarcastic comments. Where do I say that I do this? I am simply pointing out that it is not murder. You are the one that made that post without probably knowing the law. My family are careful when they get out of my car, they are Thai and are experienced here, they know the riders are idiots so they take care. However if they did open the door and some idiot rider died as a result of the idiot rider performing an illegal and dangerous manoeuvre then so be it, one more missing link less likely to hurt one of my family with their dangerous riding.

A rider performing an illegal move can not be an innocent motorcyclist, why are you having trouble understanding this concept?

[way2muchcoffee]

I don't know for sure of the legality or illegality of passing on the left between car and curb or of threading cars up the middle. What I can say is that over 90% of motorcycles do it. Tuk tuks will try it. No police officer will ever ticket a motorcycle driver for it. It is simply the rules of the road - common law.

Motorcycles drive on the left at all times. Due to this basic circumstance it is the responsibility of the person in the taxi or personal vehicle to look before opening the door. If they don't look it is an antisocial act of pure recklessness and negligence. In such a case they will be held responsible for any damage they cause if the police are summoned.

Western notions of road rules, law, and common sense do not enter into this situation in any way.

Edited February 12, 2010 by way2muchcoffee

[SeanMoran]

wow get off that high horse cowboy, read what is written before you want to make sarcastic comments. Where do I say that I do this? I am simply pointing out that it is not murder. You are the one that made that post without probably knowing the law. My family are careful when they get out of my car, they are Thai and are experienced here, they know the riders are idiots so they take care. However if they did open the door and some idiot rider died as a result of the idiot rider performing an illegal and dangerous manoeuvre then so be it, one more missing link less likely to hurt one of my family with their dangerous riding.

A rider performing an illegal move can not be an innocent motorcyclist, why are you having trouble understanding this concept?

Indeed I agree with your legal and moral right to 'cull' (rather than murder or slaughter) those motorcyclists you deem as idiots with yours and your family's car doors even if you don't see them coming when you open the door. It's wonderful effort in furthering the move towards the utopic motorcycle-free society, where everyone has the right open their doors blindly at any time in any traffic.

This is rather a comical discussion at this point. Can you accept that you win this argument and let others get back ontopic now? I conceed defeat. You win.

[jdinasia]

sean--- you don't have to prove someone DIDN'T look .. you have to prove they did. In no common situation could it be construed as murder. Remember weaving in and out of stopped traffic IS against the law. Also remember that passing on the curb side of a stopped car is not only against the law it is also stupid.

Think about what defense I might have if I drive through a red traffic light and get nabbed by the traffic cops, and my excuse is "I didn't see the light.". That would make them change their minds, wouldn't it?

Anyway, besides all the examples of dangerous behaviour by a few teenagers; a minority of motorcyclists; it's fairly normal to continue down the road to an intersection between stopped cars, including the left side of the left lane, which is the most usual on motorbikes in Thailand. Where this suddenly becomes hazardous is on the rare occasion that someone in a car opens a door unexpectedly, which is the cause of the accident. If the person in the car had simply clicked the door ajar and waited a couple of seconds before putting their feet on the road, others can see what's about to happen and avoid the collision. It doesn't take much figuring out to see that the hazard in these circumstances is the suddenly opening car door, and the perpetrator of the hazard is the occupant of the car. Stop that behavioural problem and there'll be no more swiping.

Sean -- again you are missing the most important points of basic law. It IS illegal to lass between the curb and a stopped car. It is NOT illegal to exit a stopped car. If you wish to make a point on behavior then stopping the illegal act is what makes sense. "It is fairly normal to ...." is not a defense that is admissible in court when knowingly breaking the law. For example It is fairly normal to smoke pot in Denver if you are between the ages of 15 and 30. It doesn't make it legal. Regarding "it doesn't take much figuring out to see the hazard...", apparently it does! The hazard is not the opening of a car door on the curb-side of a car that is stopped. The hazard is the illegal passing on the inside by the motorcycle.

Legal action ---- opening car door when stopped at a curb

Illegal action ----- passing between the curb and a car stopped at the curb.

[SeanMoran]

Sean -- again you are missing the most important points of basic law. It IS illegal to lass between the curb and a stopped car. It is NOT illegal to exit a stopped car. If you wish to make a point on behavior then stopping the illegal act is what makes sense. "It is fairly normal to ...." is not a defense that is admissible in court when knowingly breaking the law. For example It is fairly normal to smoke pot in Denver if you are between the ages of 15 and 30. It doesn't make it legal. Regarding "it doesn't take much figuring out to see the hazard...", apparently it does! The hazard is not the opening of a car door on the curb-side of a car that is stopped. The hazard is the illegal passing on the inside by the motorcycle.

Legal action ---- opening car door when stopped at a curb

Illegal action ----- passing between the curb and a car stopped at the curb.

My friend, if the driver of a car pulls up to the kerb - let's say six inches or 15cm or less from the kerb - as opposed to just stopping behind the next vehicle in front in stationary traffic, then there is no motorcycle ever manufactured that can pass between that parked vehicle and the kerb in that six inches. Pulling up at a red light in the middle of the lane, with a metre or more room on the left, in stopped traffic is not the way to stop at the kerb so as to allow passengers to disembark.

It is a physical impossibility for motorcycles to pass a car legally parked at the kerbside.

---o0o---

today i was with 2 tourist friends, we were waiting in traffic and decided we wanted to get out and walk the rest of the way, we told the driver, paid and my friend proceed to open the door a crack when a motorbike was clipped just as he opened the door sending the driver and his passenger tumbling to ground, they were going around 30 km/hr, nobody was seriously injured,

PS: See how in this example, the taxi was not parked, but waiting in traffic. The correct procedure to park a motor vehicle is to firstly switch on the left-indicator light for at least 30 metres to warn other motorists of your intended change of motivation, check your mirrors carefully to make sure that the new trajectory is clear of other traffic, then gradually move to the side of the road or to a vacant parking space if in a built-up area.

Waiting at a red light in traffic is not parked. Do not open doors in these circumstances unless you look carefully to check for oncoming traffic. The fact that your vehicle has had to stop for lack of road ahead, is relative to your vehicle and nobody elses', Einstein.

Edited February 12, 2010 by SeanMoran