Bangkok Tollway Tragedy: What Went Wrong?

[rixalex]

The girl is guilty of...? What, exactly? I would like to have her evil crime listed, please. If y'all don't mind....

I view her crime no differently from someone who drinks and drives. They and she are aware that what they are doing is illegal, and they are aware that the law is there for a reason - ie it's unsafe to drive if you are either intoxicated or are not an adult. And yet she and the people who drink and drive, decide to ignore the law. The only somewhat mitigating circumstance that differentiates her from the drink driver is that the adult who supplied her with the vehicle must share the blame with her.

Edited January 6, 2011 by Maestro
Deleted off-topic question.

[tgeezer]

]

There is no such rule. There is a rule that addresses the issue of overtaking on single laned roads (ie: 2 lanes, where you have to cross to the incorrect side of the road) & this says you will use you horn, turn signals, hand signals.

The flashing of headlights isnt mentioned in the Land Traffic Act 1979. Perhaps, its missing from my copy? Perhaps its in the other act, "How to drive like a knob 101".

The book from which I take my rules is issued to prepare drivers for the driving licence exam, it claims to follow; ตามพระราชบัญญัติจราจรทางบก พ.ศ. ๒๕๒๒ which is The Road Traffic Act 2522

Unfortunately I don't have the advantage of the entire tome these are only excerpts with no reference numbers.

In a question and answer section the answer to; what must you do when intending to overtake it says:

ต้องไห้สัญญาณไพขอห้นารถอื่น the English translation of which appears in my post.

It is interesting that you don't agree with this procedure but you must concede that whatever we think of the law we should try to follow it.

Contempt for the law has been cited as one of the underlying problems in this country.

Edited January 5, 2011 by tgeezer

[TheyCallmeScooter]

I wasn't aware that any of what you describe had happened. IF it did happen I can tell you what I was taught when taking drivers education. I was told that if that kind of unsafe condition existed it is incumbent on the overtaking vehicle to slow down so as not to exascerbate what might be considered an already unsafe condition.

Precisely. I come upon erratically driven vehicles almost every day and unless there are three lanes to provide sufficient space between myself and said idiot, i hold back. In the case of a tight two lane highway with concrete to either side, it would be madness to wait for a gap and dash past, keeping fingers crossed that the idiot doesn't swerve into your path. For what? To get to your destination 5 minutes earlier? Is it worth it?

I couldn't agree more. But then again, I'm no longer 16 and unless you're very wise beyond your years, neither are you.

I was 16-17 once. And I did something equally as 'bad' as this girl did (actually, I was licensed..but she was probably more experienced, my license test was a joke). No one died in my incident. 10 died in hers. Is she a worse person than I was? I have no idea, and the fact that 10 died as a result of her childish inexperience and 0 died as a result of mine...certainly gives me no clue either way. We were both just stupid kids, utterly clueless about driving, allowed to control engineering marvels by (a society oblivious to the fact that children...be children). I was especially oblivious to anything driving-related, but I was allowed to buy a modified performance vehicle outright at 17 days after getting my license. I had no clue what was going on, I would aquaplane on occasion, oblivious to what was actually occurring with my tyres and the water and the tarmac. It was all a computer game / chore to me, taken very flippantly. Never once would I have even thought or considered the possibility it could all result in sheer horror and broken bodies and ruined lives and families etc. I was barely 17, who thinks about stuff like that in their first car at that age...

Until one day, when I momentarily dropped the ball whilst exhausted, and along with another 17 year old driver perhaps even less experienced than I was, together almost killed his entire family when he careened off-road after grossly over-reacting to my initial error. We never made contact. We probably didn't come within 150m of each other.

From the moment my head drooped in micro-sleep, and I fractionally drifted into the other lane momentarily, swerving back quickly, but he had registered it, and panicked...it was all out of my control, whether anyone lived or died. Everyone lived, thank f. But had the unthinkable happened, would that have made me somehow more 'evil'? Would I have deserved years in juvenile then prison for my 'crime'? (perhaps I shouldn't have been studying so hard, working two jobs, away from home..other than that, I'm kind of at a loss to what I could have reasonably been expected to avoid)

It was pure childish ignorance and inexperience. I shouldn't have been given a license. I should not have been allowed to buy a car. If people had died, I would never have forgiven the government for giving me a full license without even a full hour of driving instruction. And never forgiven myself, of course...but rather unfairly so, in hindsight.

This girl will blame herself, for the rest of her life. For an accident that was obviously not intended, probably wasn't caused by reckless driving so much as moronic childish driving, perhaps it was the product of grossly misplaced priorities and silly teenager stresses. But guess what, that's what happens when you're 16 and driving in chaotic traffic conditions. She's freaking out about returning the car 5 min late. Society has failed her, by failing to adequately ensure children understand the horrific nature of real-life driving at high speeds. It's not a computer game, but with power steering, it can sure feel like it (especially at night).

She's a dumb child, I was a dumb child, everyone here was a dumb child once...they'd just prefer to ignore the memories of their foolish childhoods. We weren't unlucky enough to be involved in a 10-death accident. This girl was. And with her last name? Gasp. Make an example out of her! To all the other 16 year olds stressed about boys, or friends, or homework or dinner or their favourite soap. They're not the type to be thinking "gosh, I really should slow down, I don't want to be another Xxx Xxxx....this is not how 16 year olds think, people!

The results were horrific, but not nearly as horrific as the lynching mob who refuse to address their explicit or tacit support for a far more serious (ahem) criminal; some fairly respectable human rights organisations have gathered evidence which clearly suggests he might well be responsible for a substantially larger amount of deaths, in a manner far less 'accidental' than a highway accident. But how can they be expected to care about extra-judicial killings, when they're on the Warpath for Justice? Why is this Scooter idiot continually bringing up Thaksin...this has nothing to do with him, justice is only demanded for those who commit offences of immaturity on the OTHER side. Why bring logic into our tightly wound hatred? It's so hard to hate..when you do something silly like that. It makes no sense...

Quiet Scooter! Someone hush that clown! This girl must be PUNISHED SEVERELY, the families of the KILLED deserve to see the KILLER of their children PROSECUTED rather than be allowed to escape responsibility as per the norm for those with money / power (like Thaksin)....but anyway, this girl NEEDS TO PAY. For being a silly child, who was unfortunately involved in a high-speed accident on the motorway which was likely the product of mutual blame...as these things tend to be. O JUSTICE, WHERE ART THOU?

Why take a productive approach to the aftermath of the tragedy? When an totally negative, unproductive, hateful approach will serve our interests so much better? Which interests, exactly? Oh...they have money. We want (more of) it than they are already freely giving to us. Greedy tyrants. Make their children pay for...being children and making childish mistakes. Just ignore that Scooter idiot every time he refers to that super awkward contradiction nobody actually ever talks about. The one where up to 1 million teenage girls are thrown into hell, unfathomable family expectations drilled into them from a young age. Until they're pulled out of school and packed off to the big smoke with some mascara, a wing and a prayer...a prayer that they each learn their trade quickly for 14 year olds...so that they might start remitting sooner rather than later.

What does that have to do with this rich aristocratic killer? Nothing...but then, what does your sudden selective yearning for justice have to do with her, either? Look around, a little closer to home. imo.

But what do I know....

[MikeyIdea]

]

There is no such rule. There is a rule that addresses the issue of overtaking on single laned roads (ie: 2 lanes, where you have to cross to the incorrect side of the road) & this says you will use you horn, turn signals, hand signals.

The flashing of headlights isnt mentioned in the Land Traffic Act 1979. Perhaps, its missing from my copy? Perhaps its in the other act, "How to drive like a knob 101".

The book from which I take my rules is issued to prepare drivers for the driving licence exam, it claims to follow; ตามพระราชบัญญัติจราจรทางบก พ.ศ. ๒๕๒๒ which is The land Traffic Act 2522

Unfortunately I don't have the advantage of the entire tome these are only excerpts with no reference numbers.

In a question and answer section the answer to; what must you do when intending to overtake it says:

ต้องไห้สัญญาณไพขอห้นารถอื่น the English translation of which appears in my post.

It is interesting that you don't agree with this procedure but you must concede that whatever we think of the law we should try to follow it.

Contempt for the law has been cited as one of the underlying problems in this country.

I understand that what you write is not for the scenario where roads have several lanes in the same direction. This is applicable for when you cross lanes etc. There is no safety benefit when both drivers already are in their dedicated lanes, actually the opposite

[TheyCallmeScooter]

I'm not sure what she is guilty of as I don't possess al the facts relevant to the investigation. I only watched the video of the crash and I could determine very little from that as to which driver was in which lane. The only thing I could see was the girl's car travelling at a high rate of speed compared to other drivers on the tollway.

Sorry. I'm tired and confused. You cannot tell which car is in which lane. But you can identify the girl's car and gauge relative speeds to other cars on the motorway?

How did you manage to do all of this, without figuring out which car is on which side of each other?

You seem to have quite a lot more details though and I'd be interested to know where you got them, or is it all just supposition?

Supposition? What are you talking about? No, I have not fabricated Tweets and misrepresented freeze-frame photographs and gratuitously spread outright lies and mistruths and noise knowing it was all false...to further my vile demands that a child be made to pay...for being a child.

Is that what you meant? No, I most certainly would never do something like that. That would be the height of double standard-subscribing hypocrisy. If someone pointed out a glaring contradiction in my vehemently stated positions, I would never simply ignore the awkward point hoping to continue to be allowed to scream for 'justice'...selectively.

Only a certain type of person does that. I am not that type of person. Are you? What are your thoughts on Thaksin, in one sentence (for the purposes of comparing your HUNGER for JUSTICE)?

Edited January 6, 2011 by Maestro
Deleted the part of the post that was in reply to a deleted post.

[lannarebirth]

I wasn't aware that any of what you describe had happened. IF it did happen I can tell you what I was taught when taking drivers education. I was told that if that kind of unsafe condition existed it is incumbent on the overtaking vehicle to slow down so as not to exascerbate what might be considered an already unsafe condition.

Precisely. I come upon erratically driven vehicles almost every day and unless there are three lanes to provide sufficient space between myself and said idiot, i hold back. In the case of a tight two lane highway with concrete to either side, it would be madness to wait for a gap and dash past, keeping fingers crossed that the idiot doesn't swerve into your path. For what? To get to your destination 5 minutes earlier? Is it worth it?

I couldn't agree more. But then again, I'm no longer 16 and unless you're very wise beyond your years, neither are you.

I was 16-17 once. And I did something equally as 'bad' as this girl did (actually, I was licensed..but she was probably more experienced, my license test was a joke). No one died in my incident. 10 died in hers. Is she a worse person than I was? I have no idea, and the fact that 10 died as a result of her childish inexperience and 0 died as a result of mine...certainly gives me no clue either way. We were both just stupid kids, utterly clueless about driving, allowed to control engineering marvels by (a society oblivious to the fact that children...be children). I was especially oblivious to anything driving-related, but I was allowed to buy a modified performance vehicle outright at 17 days after getting my license. I had no clue what was going on, I would aquaplane on occasion, oblivious to what was actually occurring with my tyres and the water and the tarmac. It was all a computer game / chore to me, taken very flippantly. Never once would I have even thought or considered the possibility it could all result in sheer horror and broken bodies and ruined lives and families etc. I was barely 17, who thinks about stuff like that in their first car at that age...

Until one day, when I momentarily dropped the ball whilst exhausted, and along with another 17 year old driver perhaps even less experienced than I was, together almost killed his entire family when he careened off-road after grossly over-reacting to my initial error. We never made contact. We probably didn't come within 150m of each other.

From the moment my head drooped in micro-sleep, and I fractionally drifted into the other lane momentarily, swerving back quickly, but he had registered it, and panicked...it was all out of my control, whether anyone lived or died. Everyone lived, thank f. But had the unthinkable happened, would that have made me somehow more 'evil'? Would I have deserved years in juvenile then prison for my 'crime'? (perhaps I shouldn't have been studying so hard, working two jobs, away from home..other than that, I'm kind of at a loss to what I could have reasonably been expected to avoid)

It was pure childish ignorance and inexperience. I shouldn't have been given a license. I should not have been allowed to buy a car. If people had died, I would never have forgiven the government for giving me a full license without even a full hour of driving instruction. And never forgiven myself, of course...but rather unfairly so, in hindsight.

This girl will blame herself, for the rest of her life. For an accident that was obviously not intended, probably wasn't caused by reckless driving so much as moronic childish driving, perhaps it was the product of grossly misplaced priorities and silly teenager stresses. But guess what, that's what happens when you're 16 and driving in chaotic traffic conditions. She's freaking out about returning the car 5 min late. Society has failed her, by failing to adequately ensure children understand the horrific nature of real-life driving at high speeds. It's not a computer game, but with power steering, it can sure feel like it (especially at night).

She's a dumb child, I was a dumb child, everyone here was a dumb child once...they'd just prefer to ignore the memories of their foolish childhoods. We weren't unlucky enough to be involved in a 10-death accident. This girl was. And with her last name? Gasp. Make an example out of her! To all the other 16 year olds stressed about boys, or friends, or homework or dinner or their favourite soap. They're not the type to be thinking "gosh, I really should slow down, I don't want to be another Xxx Xxxx....this is not how 16 year olds think, people!

The results were horrific, but not nearly as horrific as the lynching mob who refuse to address their explicit or tacit support for a far more serious (ahem) criminal; some fairly respectable human rights organisations have gathered evidence which clearly suggests he might well be responsible for a substantially larger amount of deaths, in a manner far less 'accidental' than a highway accident. But how can they be expected to care about extra-judicial killings, when they're on the Warpath for Justice? Why is this Scooter idiot continually bringing up Thaksin...this has nothing to do with him, justice is only demanded for those who commit offences of immaturity on the OTHER side. Why bring logic into our tightly wound hatred? It's so hard to hate..when you do something silly like that. It makes no sense...

Quiet Scooter! Someone hush that clown! This girl must be PUNISHED SEVERELY, the families of the KILLED deserve to see the KILLER of their children PROSECUTED rather than be allowed to escape responsibility as per the norm for those with money / power (like Thaksin)....but anyway, this girl NEEDS TO PAY. For being a silly child, who was unfortunately involved in a high-speed accident on the motorway which was likely the product of mutual blame...as these things tend to be. O JUSTICE, WHERE ART THOU?

Why take a productive approach to the aftermath of the tragedy? When an totally negative, unproductive, hateful approach will serve our interests so much better? Which interests, exactly? Oh...they have money. We want (more of) it than they are already freely giving to us. Greedy tyrants. Make their children pay for...being children and making childish mistakes. Just ignore that Scooter idiot every time he refers to that super awkward contradiction nobody actually ever talks about. The one where up to 1 million teenage girls are thrown into hell, unfathomable family expectations drilled into them from a young age. Until they're pulled out of school and packed off to the big smoke with some mascara, a wing and a prayer...a prayer that they each learn their trade quickly for 14 year olds...so that they might start remitting sooner rather than later.

What does that have to do with this rich aristocratic killer? Nothing...but then, what does your sudden selective yearning for justice have to do with her, either? Look around, a little closer to home. imo.

But what do I know....

You tend to make a lot of assumptions scooter. Both about the circumstances leading up to this horrific collision and about what some of the posters here wish would happen to this girl. I don't know what this girl is guilty of nor what her punishment, if any should be. My interest in this case stems almost wholly from an equal application, equal protection of the law perspective.

[tgeezer]

Come on, that is not applicable for the scenario where roads have several lanes in the same direction and cars have their own dedicated lanes to do overtaking in

"same direction and cars have their own dedicated lanes to do overtaking " This was the situation of the accident, if you were able to make up your own law, what do you think the procedure should have been?

[MikeyIdea]

Come on, that is not applicable for the scenario where roads have several lanes in the same direction and cars have their own dedicated lanes to do overtaking in

"same direction and cars have their own dedicated lanes to do overtaking " This was the situation of the accident, if you were able to make up your own law, what do you think the procedure should have been?

There is no law saying that cars should flip their lights or whatever to ask way when a car driving in lane 3 is planning to overtake a car that is driving in lane 2. The law is not written for that scenario and is not applicable for that scenario.

Are you making up that the law should be applicable for that scenario?

[tgeezer]

Come on, that is not applicable for the scenario where roads have several lanes in the same direction and cars have their own dedicated lanes to do overtaking in

"same direction and cars have their own dedicated lanes to do overtaking " This was the situation of the accident, if you were able to make up your own law, what do you think the procedure should have been?

There is no law saying that cars should flip their lights or whatever to ask way when a car driving in lane 3 is planning to overtake a car that is driving in lane 2. The law is not written for that scenario and is not applicable for that scenario.

Are you making up that the law should be applicable for that scenario?

The law is written for a safe overtaking manoeuvre on any road. I don't know why you are so reluctant to accept it. Flashing lights is a good procedure for warning of approach, if warning is thought prudent, which has the advantage of being understood by the majority of drivers. The minority of foreigners may have various other ideas each from their own countries, I did ask what yours was, but you haven't answered have you?

[MikeyIdea]

Come on, that is not applicable for the scenario where roads have several lanes in the same direction and cars have their own dedicated lanes to do overtaking in

"same direction and cars have their own dedicated lanes to do overtaking " This was the situation of the accident, if you were able to make up your own law, what do you think the procedure should have been?

There is no law saying that cars should flip their lights or whatever to ask way when a car driving in lane 3 is planning to overtake a car that is driving in lane 2. The law is not written for that scenario and is not applicable for that scenario.

Are you making up that the law should be applicable for that scenario?

The law is written for a safe overtaking manoeuvre on any road. I don't know why you are so reluctant to accept it. Flashing lights is a good procedure for warning of approach, if warning is thought prudent, which has the advantage of being understood by the majority of drivers. The minority of foreigners may have various other ideas each from their own countries, I did ask what yours was, but you haven't answered have you?

I have already answered that there is no additional safety benefit in flipping headlights or other ways of asking way in the scenario we are talking about, hence, I have already answered what you originally asked for. Here's a clearer answer: Nothing further is needed according to Thai law for the scenario described. How to safely change lane is covered by other laws and had Thais showed better discipline at that, then there would have been many fewer accidents in Thailand

Now, imagine this: An elevated tollway has 3 lanes and there is a green car driving in lane 1, a yellow car driving in lane 2 and a pink car driving in lane 3. Car number one is overtaking car number 2 which in turn is overtaking car number 3. There is as usual a continuous line of cars overtaking, the next-following cars have different colours though. The speed difference between each lane is 20 km/hr.

You would have cars flashing their headlights so often that flashing headlights would not draw any attention after a minute or so and that is totally opposite to what you want. Flashing headlights should draw attention to something that can benefit safety. Like asking way, which you don't have to do because you and the car you overtake are already in different lanes

Edit: Added underline

Edited January 5, 2011 by MikeyIdea

[selftaopath]

I think I know this one. If that person had not been standing wher they were standing my fist would not have hit them. Some call it blaming the victim but I call it an exercise in illogic.

I don't find that illogical, if you were known to be the type to throw a punch then others should take care not to be in range. I didn't say that the van threw his face at the fist.

This topic is what went wrong, and I am focusing on the collision itself. The girl shouldn't have hit the van; 90% the van shouldn't have been in a position to be hit 10% .

The girl an inexperienced driver lacking in judgement and skill hit the van which was in her field of vision. The van driver,a professional driver was hit by the car which was not in her field of vision.

The consequences are not relevent, although they may serve as motivation for the authorities to address the wider issues, and for the population to accept the resulting measures.

The rules say that if you intend to overtake you should signal with your lights asking for a way when the vehicle in front slows down and signals by moving aside giving way then you can overtake. In the country large trucks tend to flash left-turn indicators. On the tollway it is fundementally no different; flashing your lights to indicate or ask for space is not arrogant, natuarally if space is not forthcoming, which appeared to be the case here, you should not continue as intended.

I have never seen the rule saying that you should signal with your lights before you overtake in Thailand. Indicators yes, lights no. Where is that written?

I would argue that on an elevated tollway with 3 lanes in each direction, then you should indicate when you change lane of course but you should not flash your lights only because you overtake a car that is in another lane, Why?

Speeding, as the mother admits that her daughter did, together with inexperience, is enough to explain what killed 9 people in this case I think

An unlicensed person has no "right" to operate a motor vehicle. GUILTY. But I doubt the punishment will fit the crime. This is a land where there are no enforced laws. It's more like a land of "pretend" or make believe. And god forbid anyone be asked to be responsible for their CHOSEN behavior. The "problem" is systematic/cultural.

[TheyCallmeScooter]

In today's paper, it says:

Pol Maj Gen Amnuay said police have contacted the owner of the car involved in the crash for questioning. The owner faces a fine of 2,000 baht for allowing a person without a license to use the vehicle, he said.

faces

I feel quite comfortable with suggesting that this might be a little bit ridiculous and perhaps the law should be updated from...? The year Henry T Ford launched his Model-T on the world? 2,000 baht fine? What is going on here?

[neverdie]

]

There is no such rule. There is a rule that addresses the issue of overtaking on single laned roads (ie: 2 lanes, where you have to cross to the incorrect side of the road) & this says you will use you horn, turn signals, hand signals.

The flashing of headlights isnt mentioned in the Land Traffic Act 1979. Perhaps, its missing from my copy? Perhaps its in the other act, "How to drive like a knob 101".

The book from which I take my rules is issued to prepare drivers for the driving licence exam, it claims to follow; ตามพระราชบัญญัติจราจรทางบก พ.ศ. ๒๕๒๒ which is The Road Traffic Act 2522

Unfortunately I don't have the advantage of the entire tome these are only excerpts with no reference numbers.

In a question and answer section the answer to; what must you do when intending to overtake it says:

ต้องไห้สัญญาณไพขอห้นารถอื่น the English translation of which appears in my post.

It is interesting that you don't agree with this procedure but you must concede that whatever we think of the law we should try to follow it.

Contempt for the law has been cited as one of the underlying problems in this country.

Yep, same act, same law, last time I checked 2522 was 1979.

The act does refer to signaling lights as in 'indicators' you know the funny little coloured lights on the corner of your car. I don't believe it says to signal with the vehicles headlights but to do so with 'signal lights'

[MikeyIdea]

I think I know this one. If that person had not been standing wher they were standing my fist would not have hit them. Some call it blaming the victim but I call it an exercise in illogic.

I don't find that illogical, if you were known to be the type to throw a punch then others should take care not to be in range. I didn't say that the van threw his face at the fist.

This topic is what went wrong, and I am focusing on the collision itself. The girl shouldn't have hit the van; 90% the van shouldn't have been in a position to be hit 10% .

The girl an inexperienced driver lacking in judgement and skill hit the van which was in her field of vision. The van driver,a professional driver was hit by the car which was not in her field of vision.

The consequences are not relevent, although they may serve as motivation for the authorities to address the wider issues, and for the population to accept the resulting measures.

The rules say that if you intend to overtake you should signal with your lights asking for a way when the vehicle in front slows down and signals by moving aside giving way then you can overtake. In the country large trucks tend to flash left-turn indicators. On the tollway it is fundementally no different; flashing your lights to indicate or ask for space is not arrogant, natuarally if space is not forthcoming, which appeared to be the case here, you should not continue as intended.

I have never seen the rule saying that you should signal with your lights before you overtake in Thailand. Indicators yes, lights no. Where is that written?

I would argue that on an elevated tollway with 3 lanes in each direction, then you should indicate when you change lane of course but you should not flash your lights only because you overtake a car that is in another lane, Why?

Speeding, as the mother admits that her daughter did, together with inexperience, is enough to explain what killed 9 people in this case I think

An unlicensed person has no "right" to operate a motor vehicle. GUILTY. But I doubt the punishment will fit the crime. This is a land where there are no enforced laws. It's more like a land of "pretend" or make believe. And god forbid anyone be asked to be responsible for their CHOSEN behavior. The "problem" is systematic/cultural.

An unlicensed person has the duty to say no to operating a vehicle. Guilty. Agree. I do think that the punishment will fit the crime pretty OK this time. In this, I include the punishment that the girl and her family already have faced, and will continue to face for years - it doesn't match that of the dead of course but it is still pretty significant, and that he girl faces criminal charges and not civil charges (yet), civil charges will come if the family don't pay up millions of bath totally, all that together is tough. We must also take into consideration that the poorer with no famous surname do what the girl did more often than the rich and the standard that is set must be suitable for the poor too or the most significant change coming out of all this will be enforcement of the double morale that caused the uproar in the first place.

I was back in the village over New Year, a neighbour further down the (dirt) road had bought a Honda Scoopy for her 15 year old daughters birthday that she will use to drive the 17 kilometers (on main inter-city road) from the village to her school in amphur muang and back again every school day for 3 years without a licence. This is so common among the poor that if it were to stop suddenly, then it would put a visible dent in the GDP... I'm not saying that it shouldn't be stopped of course, but punishment must be suitable for the poor as well as the rich

I see an enormous improvement in traffic safety in Thailand the last 20 years. This unfortunate issue will help to improve it even further

[Orac]

.....snip

I was back in the village over New Year, a neighbour further down the (dirt) road had bought a Honda Scoopy for her 15 year old daughters birthday that she will use to drive the 17 kilometers (on main inter-city road) from the village to her school in amphur muang and back again every school day for 3 years without a licence. This is so common among the poor that if it were to stop suddenly, then it would put a visible dent in the GDP... I'm not saying that it shouldn't be stopped of course, but punishment must be suitable for the poor as well as the rich

....snip

This is a different scenario though to what has happenned here - it is one thing to be driving underage and a different thing to be driving withough a licence. If your neighbours daughter could be bothered to get a motorcycle licence which she is entitled to do at 15 then she would be driving legally.

[MikeyIdea]

.....snip

I was back in the village over New Year, a neighbour further down the (dirt) road had bought a Honda Scoopy for her 15 year old daughters birthday that she will use to drive the 17 kilometers (on main inter-city road) from the village to her school in amphur muang and back again every school day for 3 years without a licence. This is so common among the poor that if it were to stop suddenly, then it would put a visible dent in the GDP... I'm not saying that it shouldn't be stopped of course, but punishment must be suitable for the poor as well as the rich

....snip

This is a different scenario though to what has happenned here - it is one thing to be driving underage and a different thing to be driving withough a licence. If your neighbours daughter could be bothered to get a motorcycle licence which she is entitled to do at 15 then she would be driving legally.

Apologies for my miss here, the girl just entered matayom ton and is 12 years old, not 15 as I wrote. 15 as you wrote is the age for driving licence for motorcycles

[TheyCallmeScooter]

the girl just entered matayom ton and is 12 years old

Oh that is just sheer madness. 15 would be madness. 12 is just...

At least with 2-wheelers, god forbid should she make that almost surely inevitable mistake...the potential impact (on others) is drastically reduced.

What a world we live in. Responsible, intelligent adults are nannied in insulting fashion by the state...which allows a culture in which the above is widely acceptable.

It's all so ridiculous.

[lannarebirth]

In today's paper, it says:

Pol Maj Gen Amnuay said police have contacted the owner of the car involved in the crash for questioning. The owner faces a fine of 2,000 baht for allowing a person without a license to use the vehicle, he said.

faces

I feel quite comfortable with suggesting that this might be a little bit ridiculous and perhaps the law should be updated from...? The year Henry T Ford launched his Model-T on the world? 2,000 baht fine? What is going on here?

Here's what's going on. Anyone on the periphery of this case who could be said to have aided or abetted this girl in her reckless behaviour is going to be dealt with almost immediately in the lightest of fashions. Later, when the girl comes before her accusers, her culpability will be diminished by re-directing a good share of the blame back to those who enabled such behaviour. Those enablers will have already been dealt with within the limits of the law and everyone will wring their hands as they perceive that "justice" has not been carried out.

I cannot fault the police in their handling of this case thusfar, but it is certainly easy to see that with Thai culture firmly overlaid upon "the law" there will be many opportunities for unequal treatment before the law for the accused and for unequal protection by the law for those who are victims of this tragic affair.

[MikeyIdea]

the girl just entered matayom ton and is 12 years old

Oh that is just sheer madness. 15 would be madness. 12 is just...

At least with 2-wheelers, god forbid should she make that almost surely inevitable mistake...the potential impact (on others) is drastically reduced.

What a world we live in. Responsible, intelligent adults are nannied in insulting fashion by the state...which allows a culture in which the above is widely acceptable.

It's all so ridiculous.

12 is unfortunately still normal for many Thais to start to drive motorcycle. My first wife here was taught to drive motorcycle at school at the age of 12, by her teacher

Now that was 29 years ago though

[Orac]

the girl just entered matayom ton and is 12 years old

Oh that is just sheer madness. 15 would be madness. 12 is just...

At least with 2-wheelers, god forbid should she make that almost surely inevitable mistake...the potential impact (on others) is drastically reduced.

What a world we live in. Responsible, intelligent adults are nannied in insulting fashion by the state...which allows a culture in which the above is widely acceptable.

It's all so ridiculous.

12 is unfortunately still normal for many Thais to start to drive motorcycle. My first wife here was taught to drive motorcycle at school at the age of 12, by her teacher

Now that was 29 years ago though

Sadly I can't think of any 12 year olds in our small village that can't/don't ride a motorbike.

[TheyCallmeScooter]

In today's paper, it says:

Pol Maj Gen Amnuay said police have contacted the owner of the car involved in the crash for questioning. The owner faces a fine of 2,000 baht for allowing a person without a license to use the vehicle, he said.

2,000 baht fine? What is going on here?

Here's what's going on. Anyone on the periphery of this case who could be said to have aided or abetted this girl in her reckless behaviour is going to be dealt with almost immediately in the lightest of fashions. Later, when the girl comes before her accusers, her culpability will be diminished by re-directing a good share of the blame back to those who enabled such behaviour. Those enablers will have already been dealt with within the limits of the law and everyone will wring their hands as they perceive that "justice" has not been carried out.

I cannot fault the police in their handling of this case thusfar, but it is certainly easy to see that with Thai culture firmly overlaid upon "the law" there will be many opportunities for unequal treatment before the law for the accused and for unequal protection by the law for those who are victims of this tragic affair.

Sigh. Okay, but shouldn't the outcry be done now? At those who are genuinely culpable to a degree, completely escaping all justice?

This is what I haven't understood about this case from the start of the outcry. Why go after the child? Will we see an exponentially greater uproar now that those who really do have a case to answer, are receiving (maybe, they have been fined the 2000 baht yet) their 'punishments'?

I'm all for justice and all for equality. But I don't see any logic in the nature of the rage expressed. Which is why I'll be found arguing on the other side. When the hatred is hypocritical and illogical and selectively applied, that is more dangerous than any 'status quo'.

12 is unfortunately still normal for many Thais to start to drive motorcycle.

Is there any accurate records for national road accident statistics? The sheer number of accidents must be astronomical if 12 year olds are riding 2-wheelers all over the place...omg

[whybother]

There is no law saying that cars should flip their lights or whatever to ask way when a car driving in lane 3 is planning to overtake a car that is driving in lane 2. The law is not written for that scenario and is not applicable for that scenario.

Are you making up that the law should be applicable for that scenario?

The law is written for a safe overtaking manoeuvre on any road. I don't know why you are so reluctant to accept it. Flashing lights is a good procedure for warning of approach, if warning is thought prudent, which has the advantage of being understood by the majority of drivers. The minority of foreigners may have various other ideas each from their own countries, I did ask what yours was, but you haven't answered have you?

Actually, isn't the MikeyIdea's scenario "Passing" and NOT "Overtaking"?

Geezer, do you flip you lights every time you pass a car on the expressway? Do you think people should? Do you really think the law says that you should?

[TheyCallmeScooter]

I think I understand so much more now, about everything. But to confirm, can Thais or anyone with an in-depth knowledge of Thai family culture please let me know the answer to this question (or their opinion):

At what age does Thai culture generally believe marks the turning point from childhood to adulthood?

[MikeyIdea]

12 is unfortunately still normal for many Thais to start to drive motorcycle.

Is there any accurate records for national road accident statistics? The sheer number of accidents must be astronomical if 12 year olds are riding 2-wheelers all over the place...omg

What is more important to note here is that Thais, unlike westerners, really try to avoid accidents. The number of small accidents are astronomical, the number of big accidents are just big

Thais have a more practical approach. Why did the girl get a motorcycle to drive at the age of 12? Because her parents don't want her to go in the village school any longer because the education there far from what she will get in amphur muang. It is an opportunity for her parents to have the possibility to now send her to a better school and that will benefit their daughter for the rest of her life. But the girl has to drive herself because her parents are working and can't send her and they couldn't afford the petrol to go back and forth even if they did have the time anyway

Now you understand why they bought a motorcycle for their 12 year old daughter

One comment to another post

Sigh. Okay, but shouldn't the outcry be done now?

It is done now. The website on facebok is up to nearly 300,000 "likes" now, we are going to see a harder response in this case than Thailand has ever seen

We should just be aware of that the justice demanded - if it is applied equally to rich and poor - will hurt the poor the most

Now that is not what we want, is it?

Edited January 6, 2011 by MikeyIdea

[Orac]

I think I understand so much more now, about everything. But to confirm, can Thais or anyone with an in-depth knowledge of Thai family culture please let me know the answer to this question (or their opinion):

At what age does Thai culture generally believe marks the turning point from childhood to adulthood?

A difficult question since there does not appear to a defining cultural ceremony, such as the Bar Mitzvah that the Jewish have at 12/13, that I can see - maybe, as you say, someone with more cultural knowledge can advise??

One might use the marriage laws as an example which, from Wiki, are:

Thailand: 20, 17 with parental consent, 15 in special circumstances with court approval. Note: The hill tribes follow traditional rules, as 12 for female be found

This would indicate that, for certasin hill tribes view 12 as the age of adult responsibility.

The problem with using cultural/historic details is that, in modern society, we live a lot longer and put far more value on childhood and education than has happenned in olden days. Maybe this is part of the problem here in that where most of the 'western world' has moved on and increased the age of adult responsibility it has not been fully recognised culturally by all which is reflected in some of the odd age laws for marriage and sexual consent along with others that we see for some countries.

[MikeyIdea]

I think I understand so much more now, about everything. But to confirm, can Thais or anyone with an in-depth knowledge of Thai family culture please let me know the answer to this question (or their opinion):

At what age does Thai culture generally believe marks the turning point from childhood to adulthood?

A difficult question since there does not appear to a defining cultural ceremony, such as the Bar Mitzvah that the Jewish have at 12/13, that I can see - maybe, as you say, someone with more cultural knowledge can advise??

One might use the marriage laws as an example which, from Wiki, are:

Thailand: 20, 17 with parental consent, 15 in special circumstances with court approval. Note: The hill tribes follow traditional rules, as 12 for female be found

This would indicate that, for certasin hill tribes view 12 as the age of adult responsibility.

The problem with using cultural/historic details is that, in modern society, we live a lot longer and put far more value on childhood and education than has happenned in olden days. Maybe this is part of the problem here in that where most of the 'western world' has moved on and increased the age of adult responsibility it has not been fully recognised culturally by all which is reflected in some of the odd age laws for marriage and sexual consent along with others that we see for some countries.

To answer from a Thai family culture perspective is very difficult. Things often happen because of necessity, it is not that the parents of the 12 year old motorcycle driver consider her an adult now, the same with the 15 year old driver. At the same time, the parents to the same poor girl may say that - You are 15 now and you have to start to work full time - but it's not because they consider her an adult. Welcome to the world filled with hard necessities,

Responsibilities grow with age, most (poorer) Thais would consider a 16 year old ready to be fully aware of her responsibilities but they are also at the same time fully aware of that it is unlikely to happen, hence they would not consider a 16 year old a "Full Adult" as such, it's getting close though. The rich probably see 18 as adult. This is my personal opinion, I live and speak more Thai than English in an average year for the last 10 years now, been here for nearly 20 years

Edited January 6, 2011 by MikeyIdea

[Forethat]

The rules say that if you intend to overtake you should signal with your lights asking for a way when the vehicle in front slows down and signals by moving aside giving way then you can overtake. In the country large trucks tend to flash left-turn indicators. On the tollway it is fundementally no different; flashing your lights to indicate or ask for space is not arrogant, natuarally if space is not forthcoming, which appeared to be the case here, you should not continue as intended.

I have never seen the rule saying that you should signal with your lights before you overtake in Thailand. Indicators yes, lights no. Where is that written?

I would argue that on an elevated tollway with 3 lanes in each direction, then you should indicate when you change lane of course but you should not flash your lights only because you overtake a car that is in another lane, Why?

It is considered best practice in Thailand to flash your headlight at the vehicle in front of you. By doing so you communicate to the driver up front that he's a slow idiot that shouldn't be allowed to access the roads. It is customary to combine this tradition with the habit of speeding up as fast as you can behind the vehicle in front of you, and at the last second throw your car to the lane to the right of the vehicle in front and overtake on the inside.

The idea is to overtake on the inside maintaining as high difference in speed between your vehicle and the other car as possible, this way it'll be clear to everybody involved how big idiot the driver of the vehicle in front really is.

Flashing the headlights acheives little. It blinds drivers going the other way (keeping in mind they don't just use this technique when on divided roads), it blinds people up front through their mirrors & if more than 1 or 2 cars are doing it, it can at times be a little confusing.

Its a stupid thing to do, kind of like driving along with your hazard lights on and then executing a turn (happens often).

Best practise would be to travel @ the speed limit or lower and only occupy the RHL if overtaking or turning right. If the right hand lane is occupied with another vehicle in front of yours, keep a 2 second gap and wait your turn to overtake.

You see, its not that hard.

After undertaking a 8500km just after new year I am confident that even travel at the speed limit would be to hard (I mention this especially in relation to the number of drivers who decided that the small strip of grass directly to the right of the hard shoulder on highway 4 is a perfect strip of road to drive a vehicle at 100 km/h while the remaining ~100.000 cars stuck in a solid congestion.

The average driving skill, traffic moral and safety awareness in Thailand is extremely low. Someone posted stats that showed the fatality rate was over 2.0 in Thailand compared to ~ 0.1 in 99% of the western world. I am flabbergasted when I see these stats - I was confident that the stats would be much higher for Thailand. 20.0 would have made sense.

[tgeezer]

]

There is no such rule. There is a rule that addresses the issue of overtaking on single laned roads (ie: 2 lanes, where you have to cross to the incorrect side of the road) & this says you will use you horn, turn signals, hand signals.

The flashing of headlights isnt mentioned in the Land Traffic Act 1979. Perhaps, its missing from my copy? Perhaps its in the other act, "How to drive like a knob 101".

The book from which I take my rules is issued to prepare drivers for the driving licence exam, it claims to follow; ตามพระราชบัญญัติจราจรทางบก พ.ศ. ๒๕๒๒ which is The Road Traffic Act 2522

Unfortunately I don't have the advantage of the entire tome these are only excerpts with no reference numbers.

In a question and answer section the answer to; what must you do when intending to overtake it says:

ต้องไห้สัญญาณไพขอห้นารถอื่น the English translation of which appears in my post.

It is interesting that you don't agree with this procedure but you must concede that whatever we think of the law we should try to follow it.

Contempt for the law has been cited as one of the underlying problems in this country.

Yep, same act, same law, last time I checked 2522 was 1979.

The act does refer to signaling lights as in 'indicators' you know the funny little coloured lights on the corner of your car. I don't believe it says to signal with the vehicles headlights but to do so with 'signal lights'

Well the same date at least, but you called it the 'Land Traffic Act' if the best you can get is a belief in what it says, there is little point in quoting it.

Road safety is a serious subject and the existence of an act of government is useless unless disseminated to the public. The source I quote is one means by which the public find out what the rules are, however it is not endorsed by anyone other than the publisher as far as I can tell and although it claims to follow the act and be up to date; it was published in 2546.

I have no reason to believe it is not accurate although I wouldn't describe it as comprehensive, but then perhaps as with many things Thai there has to be room for compromises to be made.

If the rules in the book were followed there would be no accidents, I leave it at that.

Edited January 6, 2011 by tgeezer

[tgeezer]

Geezer, do you flip you lights every time you pass a car on the expressway? Do you think people should? Do you really think the law says that you should?

Absolutely not, I would flash my lights if I had reason to think I had not been seen. I would expect overtaking vehicles to do the same for me, but of course I don't believe everyone should every time they plan to overtake.

I do believe it is in the handbook for drivers and is a practical application of the law because I have read it the book, a knowledge of which is necessary for a holder of a Thai driving licence. The flashing of lights is not the issue, clearly the spirit is to make sure that the vehicle in front knows that you are coming so that you can overtake safely. Not crashing into other cars is more likely the law, these actions are more recommendations to accomplich that object.

I really don't know what force these measures have; but I imagine the handbook is probably used to establish correct procedure, in the event of an incident the fact of them being ignored will not help your case. If there is no incident, then whether correct procedure was followed is not an issue which is where I think everybody is coming from.

[rixalex]

Thais have a more practical approach. Why did the girl get a motorcycle to drive at the age of 12? Because her parents don't want her to go in the village school any longer because the education there far from what she will get in amphur muang. It is an opportunity for her parents to have the possibility to now send her to a better school and that will benefit their daughter for the rest of her life. But the girl has to drive herself because her parents are working and can't send her and they couldn't afford the petrol to go back and forth even if they did have the time anyway

Now you understand why they bought a motorcycle for their 12 year old daughter

Depends.

Perhaps in the particular case you describe above, the distance from the home to the school is too great, but in many of the examples of cases like this that i have seen around Thailand, a much more sensible solution would be buying a bicycle. Yes, i know it's hot, but they seem to manage with this method of transport in Vietnam quite well. Why can't they in Thailand? One word: laziness.