Police Want To Arrest Passengers Of Drunk Drivers

[VanZam]

Like most of the "New" laws, this too seems to be pointed at you and not Thais.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Bit paranoid ehh....yes all new laws are designed to get farang, no Thai would ever think about being a passenger in a car driven by a drunk, let alone being a drunk driver in the first place

All very well to say your well connected etc etc (yeah heard that before) but you still haven't mastered the art of "paragraphs".

[fire and ice]

In fact, I would even go one further and would be very interested into discovering as to which specific law the authorities would be able to use to charge passengers in a vehicle, operated by an individual who is found to be legally "drunk".

[Guest endure]

Police want to arrest passengers of drunk drivers as well

BANGKOK: -- Bangkok's police are calling for passengers of drunk drivers to be punished as well.

He said the passengers should face arrest for condoning drunk driving because they had agreed to let the drunk driver give them a ride.

Why stop with the arresting the drunk driver's passengers?? Following this same logic, it's apparent they should arrest the bartender that made the drinks...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It's not all that long ago that the Tory party in the Uk proposed a law that would make it possible to prosecute a publican if s/he served a drink to someone who later drove a vehicle while drunk. Do not ever underestimate the malice or stupidity of politcians.

[Maejo Man]

I've been very lucky as I've made quite a few friends in high places through golf and teaching so I've been spared alot of these BS traps.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I suppose you teach the Thais about paragraphs too They can actually make a very boring post almost readable.

[Nam Kao]

Another rip off the falang scam

[sriracha john]

I've been very lucky as I've made quite a few friends in high places through golf and teaching so I've been spared alot of these BS traps. It doesn't hurt either that my wife is the Education Coordinator for a very prominent law university with her MA in Political Law.

ohh... well... geez... that certainly validates everything you say. Who are we to disagree someone so far up the English teacher hierarchy like yourself? Thank you so much for listing your extremely impressive credentials....

[mraloha]

ANY enforcement of traffic laws in Thailand is a good thing and can save allot of lives. Their seems to be plenty of money here for government ego trips but not much when it comes to giving the street cop what he needs to do his job...i live in chaingmai and there is not much traffic enforcement here and many accidents and deaths on a daily basis.

But as long as lust for money exist, rank and file people will continue to die here and around the world like flies.

//Edit: Turn off your caps lock. It wasn't that special.

Edited November 6, 2005 by RDN

[Mason45]

In Melbourne Australia the drink driving laws have changed several times over a period of years. First it was drunk driving and this was thrown out of court many times. Then it was changed to driving whilst under the influence again challenged succesfully, so now its illegal for a driver to exceed the legal limit .05 for whatever reason, now most people plead guilty because their cases are normally unwinnable. The Melbourne Cup was run last Tuesday, police tested 2,500 people leaving the racecourse and only 8 people were positive and 114,000 attended this meeting, so it appears this system does work. Thailand is vastly different, it wouldn't matter how tough the laws were, you will never tell Thai people what to do regardless of the consequences, its the old story " fools rush in where angels fear to tread " with a little foresight millions of Thais would be still alive today to be with their friends and loved ones.

[Diablo Bob]

Why stop with the arresting the drunk driver's passengers?? Following this same logic, it's apparent they should arrest the bartender that made the drinks...

Well this isn't anything new...... in California, around 25 years ago an actor on a motorcycle was side swiped by a drunk driver. He ended up losing a leg and arm and his career. The Bar was sued along with the bartender for not stopping serving drinks to the drunk. The actor won the case......

Today, bartenders are given instruction on how to identify someone who is impaired and they can not legally serve you drinks in fear of a potential lawsuit.

While this proposal is ludicris, the intent is admirable. Again in the USA, when you get popped for a DUI, it is an automatic loss of your license if you refuse either the blood test, breath test etc...... IF you take the test and are legally drunk, it is an automatic 12 hours in Jail (Starting when they get you processed in!) and a subsequent levy of either 48 hours in Jail or 48 hours of community service plus a $2000 fine. In addition you are now required to carry an additional insurance binder which cost $??? a month for 2 years after serving a 90 day suspension on your license. Now that is for your first offense..... the penalties just get worse for the second and third offenses. I think that after number 3 you lose your license indefinitly.

Now, I know all about the first offense personally, there was never a second or third........ the costs for doing something stupid just weren't worth it. It started taking taxi's when I went to a party rather than drive myself. A lesson learned through the pocketbook.

[DaveYo]

Some very good points have been raised up here regarding the topic. The burden for the passengers to determine if one had been drinking before you get into their car is way out of line, let alone even knowing such person is drunk. So arresting passengers all because the driver had a tit more than allowed by law is outrageous. However if one knew and saw their driver drinking a lot , that is a different story. What guarantee do passengers have when you have a bus driver, taxi driver and even motocycle taxi drivers who work for a living that they don't sic and sic a few here and there before picking you up????????

As to cracking down drivers who drink is good. It can truly save lives. No one should die all because some sick SOB getting drunk then high tailing it by driving on the road. Better yet, if one is found drunk, put him or her in the can for minimum 3 years. If one is found drunk and caused the accident with no deaths make it 5 years. If one is drunk and caused an accident and people got killed then lock them up for life.

Life is priceless, and cannot be valued in any kind of terms.

But for passengers geeeeezzzzz, say if this happens, huh what officer you mean he is drunk, I had no idea, huh what you arresting me for???? what, letting him drive, are you crazy, it is his car, and I had no way of knowing he took a few slickos back before he picked me up, and hey wait a minute you planning to put those cuffs on me all because of that SOB, and I leave the rest of what might possibly happen not only to that POLICE OFFICER but to that drunk SOB at the same time.

This kind of incident can lead to some very serious consequences all because of some stupid law trying to get into the books. You can bank on it.

Daveyo

[Welsh John]

Oh dear, the Tuk Tuks will be getting a hard time then !!!

[sanook1]

Police want to arrest passengers of drunk drivers as well

BANGKOK: -- Bangkok's police are calling for passengers of drunk drivers to be punished as well, while seeking jail terms for drivers who are repeat offenders.

"Such measures should reduce the number of road accidents," Metropolitan Police Commissioner Lt-General Viroj Jantarangsi said Friday.

He said the passengers should face arrest for condoning drunk driving because they had agreed to let the drunk driver give them a ride.

Viroj said police would also ask the courts to send repeat drunk drivers to jail, especially if they were caught while still under probation from a previous drink driving offence.

Police stations across the capital had been instructed to set up 112 more checkpoints for drink driving, he said.

"We will take comprehensive details of drunk drivers upon their arrest. If they repeat the offence, we will propose that they are given a jail term," he said.

He said the Don't Drive Drunk Foundation would recruit media members into a mobile team that will be dispatched to cover drunk-driving arrests.

"Some drivers refuse to take the alcohol test when intercepted by police. In most cases they have been arrested before and hardly cooperate with police, so the media presence should help us a lot. These drivers are afraid of getting themselves in the news," Viroj said.

--The Nation 2005-11-05

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The police should also arrest themselves for not catching the person in the first place before the drunk started to drive lols

[DaveYo]

By the way, even if the passenger did get arrested, the burden of proof still will lie with the state to prove beyond a reasonable doubtin court with real proof and evidence that we being the passengers knew he was drunk!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! before we got into that car. If they cannot prove it then we can sue the state for false arrest, plus loss of our face and reputation and several others that can be applied period.

Lawsuits here in Thailand can be made plentiful.

That is why it will be one very idiotic stupid law to enforce because it will obviously expose the state to many lawsuits.

One thing for sure the state or the police cannot include that exemption if they make that law. If they do, they will have a riot on their hands. It is either one for all or none for all. one or the other.

Daveyo

[richard10365]

Police want to arrest passengers of drunk drivers as well

BANGKOK: -- Bangkok's police are calling for passengers of drunk drivers to be punished as well.

He said the passengers should face arrest for condoning drunk driving because they had agreed to let the drunk driver give them a ride.

Why stop with the arresting the drunk driver's passengers?? Following this same logic, it's apparent they should arrest the bartender that made the drinks... the waitress that served the drinks... the club's bouncer at the door that saw the drunk get into his car... all the customers in the club that observed the driver getting drunk and failed to report him... all the drivers who followed behind the drunk's swerving car before he got stopped and failed to call police on their mobile phones... the drunk's parents for raising him in such a manner that he became a drunk driver... the obstetrics physician who delivered the drunk driver and failed to recognize he would grow up to be a drunk driver... etc. etc.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

sriracha john reminds me of another point about US Military Commanders. If they could prove a soldier came from a party of another soldier, the soldier who threw the party, even though he wasn't in the car, got in trouble as well.

Edited November 6, 2005 by richard10365

[cwilliam]

Why don't they just make alcohol illegal in Thailand.Ban cigarettes too !

[cwilliam]

Ban all alcohol and cigarettes.Get rid of all farangs too.

[calibanjr.]

Why stop with the arresting the drunk driver's passengers?? Following this same logic, it's apparent they should arrest the bartender that made the drinks...

Well this isn't anything new...... in California, around 25 years ago an actor on a motorcycle was side swiped by a drunk driver. He ended up losing a leg and arm and his career. The Bar was sued along with the bartender for not stopping serving drinks to the drunk. The actor won the case......

Today, bartenders are given instruction on how to identify someone who is impaired and they can not legally serve you drinks in fear of a potential lawsuit.

While this proposal is ludicris, the intent is admirable. Again in the USA, when you get popped for a DUI, it is an automatic loss of your license if you refuse either the blood test, breath test etc...... IF you take the test and are legally drunk, it is an automatic 12 hours in Jail (Starting when they get you processed in!) and a subsequent levy of either 48 hours in Jail or 48 hours of community service plus a $2000 fine. In addition you are now required to carry an additional insurance binder which cost $??? a month for 2 years after serving a 90 day suspension on your license. Now that is for your first offense..... the penalties just get worse for the second and third offenses. I think that after number 3 you lose your license indefinitly.

Now, I know all about the first offense personally, there was never a second or third........ the costs for doing something stupid just weren't worth it. It started taking taxi's when I went to a party rather than drive myself. A lesson learned through the pocketbook.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, there are 50 states, with wildly varying processes and punishments, it's not one size fits all everywhere.

As to the bar liability, you're right at least in some states. Unfortunately, I too have had personal experience in the process, in the dock, as well as with a few friends as wing-man. As you say, in MA, every defendant found guilty is asked where they had been drinking. If a bar is found to have knowingly served you after intoxication, they are in danger of suspension or loss of their liquor license, and also, if there is an accident, they may be liable to a lawsuit as well as the driver, thus all of the education. This is also true of private citizens in some states.

[albertvb]

Bangkok's police are calling for passengers of drunk drivers to be punished as well.

When i read that i think i can't read English anymore?

[DaveYo]

Ban all alcohol and cigarettes.Get rid of all farangs too.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hmmm your voice rang my ears loudly. Cigs have nothing to do with drinking. Cigs only involves health. Drinking is the biggest damage of all. In fact my barber is now in ICU because of his drinking soon to die from complications related to such, and of course cigs can do the same. But cigs do not cause the horrendous crashes one has to endure let alone see being caused from some Drunk SOB. You can bet on that .

Daveyo

[DaveYo]

one other thing, at least Thailand is acknowledging that there is a very serious problem with their people here. Give them credit for this much. Most of Thailand is under a state of some amount of booze and the minds wooooozzzzzzzzzzzzzzyyyyyyyy.

Daveyo

[ray23]

Bangkok's police are calling for passengers of drunk drivers to be punished as well.

When i read that i think i can't read English anymore?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hey this is Thailand there law a they want them. Recently we were hiit by a hit and run driver who was caught the following day. Yep Surprise Surprise, the cops did thier job and no money was given to them. Now the other surpirise it appears there is no criminal law for hit and run it becomes a civil matter for the courts to settle. How much money does the offender have to pay to the victim. There law not mine.

They really do arrest drunk drivers here

Well if I read this article correctly even if they do the courts don't follow up with punishment that may be effective. Lets see no punishment for the driver that is effective. so lets punish the passenger. As one poster pointed that seems like good military logic. Oh we forgot one apect though there is punishment in the military. Hey as I said thier country thier laws. Will it go anywhere probably not, but that is really not up to us, we have options , except what we have here or find something we could enjoy more.

I'm really more concerned about immigration laws that do directly efffet me. then drum beating by by frustrated Thai's.

I know we all like to get on the crooked cops case here, I just pointed out one more incident where they did thier job with put money being paid. Look it's not just the cops it is the entire system. They are just the easy ones for us to spot.

We are not going to change what has went on here throughout it's history. We accepted this when we pitched tent.

In my heart of hearst do I think it's right no I don't.

[h5kaf]

In the uk there is no question of doubt in the case of drink driving offences. Drink driving comes under the heading of "strict liability" which means there are no excuses (or mitigation). If a driver is over the limit he/she is guilty and the only variable is the penalty to be imposed. Magistrates have no discretion over the 1 year driving ban but they do have discretion to increase the ban and to decide upon the level of fine.

There are 3 very limited categories of appeal against the driving ban - but not against the offence (strict liability). An example would be a surgeon off duty, and not on call, at a party who was phoned that an unexpected emergency had arisen and he was wanted to operate or assist. He would be expected to call a taxi if he had been drinking and only if the taxi was not available (and he had made all reasonable attempts to get to work by not driving) would he be understood to have got in his car and driven. If his breath sample was over the limit but not by more than say 50% then he might be able to persuade the magistrates not to impose the ban - under these exceptional circumstances. They have that discretion in these sort of circumstances but the offence stands and the fine is usually increased.

In the above example it would be almost impossible to persuade magistrates or a judge and jury that any passenger was in any way responsible. After all if the surgeon considered himself capable of operating (presumably after some strong coffee etc) then how would the passenger be in a position to know any better. The issue is that the police have accurate machines and passengers do not.

However TIT and the substantive issues have been well rehearsed by other contributors. I am not convinced that this is aimed at farangs. It is an incontovertable fact that most of the drunken driving and fatalities which result is done by Thais. It is also true that Thais will continue to ignore laws they dislike. It will be very interesting to see how this and other unpopular, but necessary, laws are imposed or not.

One interesting point raised by other contributors concerns bus drivers and tuk tuk drivers, but mainly tuk tuk drivers. How many times have I followed a swerving tuk tuk driver, and not always after dark.

[John K]

I think they are just looking to expand the amount of people they can hit on for money. Kinda like shopping in bulk.

[frankthetank]

Ban all alcohol and cigarettes.Get rid of all farangs too.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

But cigs do not cause the horrendous crashes one has to endure let alone see being caused from some Drunk SOB. You can bet on that .

Daveyo

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

interesting statement!

reminds me of an accident i had about 8 years ago.

briefly it went like this...

light ciggy, puff on ciggy, cough, drop ciggy, scream in agony as ciggy burns into

my lap, try to locate ciggy, eyes off road, crash into oncoming car, ok so nobody was injured except me, but yes cigs can be an aiding factor in a crash.

at least if i was drunk i most likely would not have felt anything!!

[carlthailand]

C'mon it's Sunday.

They'll have a new idea tomorrow and this will go on the eternal backburner like the others mentioned.

Thailand the Hub of drunk driving pax.

C

[jaapfries]

I've been very lucky as I've made quite a few friends in high places through golf and teaching so I've been spared alot of these BS traps. It doesn't hurt either that my wife is the Education Coordinator for a very prominent law university with her MA in Political Law.

ohh... well... geez... that certainly validates everything you say. Who are we to disagree someone so far up the English teacher hierarchy like yourself? Thank you so much for listing your extremely impressive credentials....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hey Sriracha John: you said it; I thought it !

[jef]

I've known military commanders to punish soldiers for this as far back as the late 80s. It is effective as a deterrent. As far as I know, military commanders are still doing this.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I never met an alcohol-free military

[Upcountry]

Maybe if the driver and passengers are incapable of judging drunkeness, the vehicle can! All cars, truck and motorcycles should come with a breathalizer connected ignition factory installed.

I think these things are available and in some cases applied to the vehicles of convited drunk drivers. Not sure.

Might sound impractical, but it would be at least as effective a safety feature as seatbelts and airbags.

Now, if we can get them made in Thailand....

[Noel]

I've been very lucky as I've made quite a few friends in high places through golf and teaching so I've been spared alot of these BS traps. It doesn't hurt either that my wife is the Education Coordinator for a very prominent law university with her MA in Political Law.

ohh... well... geez... that certainly validates everything you say. Who are we to disagree someone so far up the English teacher hierarchy like yourself? Thank you so much for listing your extremely impressive credentials....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

He neglected to include his statement of net worth!

Tsk, tsk, how remiss...

'Makes me wonder if he has one of these:

[moobie]

Just out of curiousity, what is the limit of alcohol allowed before it is prohibited to drive in Thailand?

For my 2 pennys-worth, I can readily understand the statement about prosecuting passengers of their friend/associate who travel knowing he/she is pissed but find it difficult to comprehend how an individual would be able to assess the sober/pissed state of some taxi driver, etc. especially if pissed oneself.

(Incidentally, many years ago I worked for a corporation which amongst other things manufactured breathaliser devices - it was amazing to notice after a night out how many people would self-test and discover that they were "over the limit" set in the UK the next morning - after they had driven into work!)