CM Fuzz - Let Us Prey

[FolkGuitar]

Like every thing else I do I run against the norm. The older I get the more I enjoy Thailand and it's culture regardless of the law breaking. In a way I kind of enjoy that. I am responsible now if I get hit crossing the street when the light is red no one else.

It's good that you take responsibility for your actions. Will you also take responsibility for the collateral damage your actions may cause? For example; you decide to step into the street against a red light. A car, coming through the intersection on a green light and having no reason to think he has to slow down, has to swerve suddenly to avoid hitting you, running up on the sidewalk and plowing through the group of tourists standing there looking at their guidebook, then careening into the shophouse behind them, injuring the driver of the car and the customers in the shop. Will you take responsibility for them?

This is why the Jaywalking Laws were passed. They weren't created to take away our personal freedoms. They weren't passed just to force people to behave with social awareness in spite of themselves. They were designed to save lives.

This happens often... As does cars having to move further out into an intersection to make a turn, risking collision because some selfish individual decided they didn't like the law that said they couldn't park so close to the corner. Or parks their car facing in the wrong direction on a street, opens their door to get out without looking and has some unsuspecting driver either slam into them or swerve into the oncoming traffic.

The laws aren't about you or me. They are about society. If we choose to go off and live as a hermit in a cave in the jungle, we don't have to deal with those laws. In that scenario our actions only affect ourselves. But if our choice is to live within a society, and wish to be a responsible adult, we need to think about how our actions affect others. At some point you are going to have to face the fact that while you DO have the choice to break these laws, your actions DO affect more than just you. They affect the rest of society. Like it or not. And this is the difference between ethics and morality. Ethics is knowing what is right or wrong. Morality is doing right even when it may not please you to do so.

Of course, you may simply not give a sh!t about anyone else.

Edited June 28, 2014 by FolkGuitar

[northernjohn]

Fed up with the well in a civilized country or where I come from posters.

It is indeed a sad thing to see Thai culture slowly turning into a western culture.

Can never figure out why those whiners bother to stay here.

If people want a nanny country to the best of my understanding their are air flights every day. What is the problem.

Maybe they are not wanted there. Or on the other hand are wanted there.

Because they for sure want what is there here.

It seems like the whiners on this occasion are the people that don't want the new rules. If people really want all these rules, and I very much doubt it, what would they have to whine about if the rules are being introduced? The whiners are the ones that don't want the rules, or their enforcement to be more precise, surely? Unfortunately, I don't fall into either category, I don't want most of the rules, but I can see that they are inevitable, so don't see the point in moaning or finding an imaginary scapegoat - nasty westerners that force the government to change the rules.

Your reactions are totally understandable, and I sympathise, but the reality is that things change, and when you reach a certain age, your tolerance and acceptance of change diminishes. If you're not careful, you become unhappy and end up being a classic miserable old bugger. Most of us don't want to be tied down by rules and regulations, but they will come whether we like it or not and whether Westerners want them or not, or whether Thais want them or not. How you handle that, is your choice.

Like every thing else I do I run against the norm. The older I get the more I enjoy Thailand and it's culture regardless of the law breaking. In a way I kind of enjoy that. I am responsible now if I get hit crossing the street when the light is red no one else. I failed to look and see if it was all clear. I enjoy what we would call jay walking back home it is legal here but even if it was illegal I would still do it. Not excited about trying to walk on the side walks but not complaining I just walk in the street.

As for the nasty westerners forcing them to change the rules. No opinion on that. I am against them trying to change the culture from a family orientated one to a materialistic one.

The point I am stating is if I know it is illegal and I do it and get fined I will not complain. I am totally responsible for myself. I got a package from the states today they charged me 490 baht on $79 of pills I had ordered. This was the first time in 4 shipments I am not complaining about it. I always knew there was the danger of going through customs. This time I am not sure what it was. They said it was a tax. At any rate I am not complaining about it and will order from the same company again when I run out. I take responsibility when I break a law even if it is a stupid one.

I agree except "the nasty western foreigners forcing them to change the rules". Who are you referring to? Presumably, you're not referring to expats because I can't think of any instance of them ever listening to us. Were you referring to western governmental pressures, maybe?

No idea of who they are. That is why I have no opinion on that.

[northernjohn]

Fed up with the well in a civilized country or where I come from posters.

It is indeed a sad thing to see Thai culture slowly turning into a western culture.

Can never figure out why those whiners bother to stay here.

If people want a nanny country to the best of my understanding their are air flights every day. What is the problem.

Maybe they are not wanted there. Or on the other hand are wanted there.

Because they for sure want what is there here.

It seems like the whiners on this occasion are the people that don't want the new rules. If people really want all these rules, and I very much doubt it, what would they have to whine about if the rules are being introduced? The whiners are the ones that don't want the rules, or their enforcement to be more precise, surely? Unfortunately, I don't fall into either category, I don't want most of the rules, but I can see that they are inevitable, so don't see the point in moaning or finding an imaginary scapegoat - nasty westerners that force the government to change the rules.

Your reactions are totally understandable, and I sympathise, but the reality is that things change, and when you reach a certain age, your tolerance and acceptance of change diminishes. If you're not careful, you become unhappy and end up being a classic miserable old bugger. Most of us don't want to be tied down by rules and regulations, but they will come whether we like it or not and whether Westerners want them or not, or whether Thais want them or not. How you handle that, is your choice.

Like every thing else I do I run against the norm. The older I get the more I enjoy Thailand and it's culture regardless of the law breaking. In a way I kind of enjoy that. I am responsible now if I get hit crossing the street when the light is red no one else. I failed to look and see if it was all clear. I enjoy what we would call jay walking back home it is legal here but even if it was illegal I would still do it. Not excited about trying to walk on the side walks but not complaining I just walk in the street.

As for the nasty westerners forcing them to change the rules. No opinion on that. I am against them trying to change the culture from a family orientated one to a materialistic one.

The point I am stating is if I know it is illegal and I do it and get fined I will not complain. I am totally responsible for myself. I got a package from the states today they charged me 490 baht on $79 of pills I had ordered. This was the first time in 4 shipments I am not complaining about it. I always knew there was the danger of going through customs. This time I am not sure what it was. They said it was a tax. At any rate I am not complaining about it and will order from the same company again when I run out. I take responsibility when I break a law even if it is a stupid one.

HelloJohn,

Where did you get the information that jaywalking is legal here?

It was an assumption. Due to the lack of traffic lights it only makes sense.

Is it illegal here also. As I said makes no difference I will still do it and if I get hit it is my fault.

besides I just want to fit in with the crowd.

Walk down Huey Kaew and look at the number of places where there is no lights or over passes yet they have allowed a break in the bushes in the center of the road to jaywalk.

[hml367]

Like every thing else I do I run against the norm. The older I get the more I enjoy Thailand and it's culture regardless of the law breaking. In a way I kind of enjoy that. I am responsible now if I get hit crossing the street when the light is red no one else.

It's good that you take responsibility for your actions. Will you also take responsibility for the collateral damage your actions may cause? For example; you decide to step into the street against a red light. A car, coming through the intersection on a green light and having no reason to think he has to slow down, has to swerve suddenly to avoid hitting you, running up on the sidewalk and plowing through the group of tourists standing there looking at their guidebook, then careening into the shophouse behind them, injuring the driver of the car and the customers in the shop. Will you take responsibility for them?

This is why the Jaywalking Laws were passed. They weren't created to take away our personal freedoms. They weren't passed just to force people to behave with social awareness in spite of themselves. They were designed to save lives.

This happens often... As does cars having to move further out into an intersection to make a turn, risking collision because some selfish individual decided they didn't like the law that said they couldn't park so close to the corner. Or parks their car facing in the wrong direction on a street, opens their door to get out without looking and has some unsuspecting driver either slam into them or swerve into the oncoming traffic.

The laws aren't about you or me. They are about society. If we choose to go off and live as a hermit in a cave in the jungle, we don't have to deal with those laws. In that scenario our actions only affect ourselves. But if our choice is to live within a society, and wish to be a responsible adult, we need to think about how our actions affect others. At some point you are going to have to face the fact that while you DO have the choice to break these laws, your actions DO affect more than just you. They affect the rest of society. Like it or not. And this is the difference between ethics and morality. Ethics is knowing what is right or wrong. Morality is doing right even when it may not please you to do so.

Of course, you may simply not give a sh!t about anyone else.

FG,

If someone could be described by your statement, would that be a symptom of megalomania? (that person, not you.... I don't want to be accused of accusing)

[northernjohn]

Like every thing else I do I run against the norm. The older I get the more I enjoy Thailand and it's culture regardless of the law breaking. In a way I kind of enjoy that. I am responsible now if I get hit crossing the street when the light is red no one else.

It's good that you take responsibility for your actions. Will you also take responsibility for the collateral damage your actions may cause? For example; you decide to step into the street against a red light. A car, coming through the intersection on a green light and having no reason to think he has to slow down, has to swerve suddenly to avoid hitting you, running up on the sidewalk and plowing through the group of tourists standing there looking at their guidebook, then careening into the shophouse behind them, injuring the driver of the car and the customers in the shop. Will you take responsibility for them?

This is why the Jaywalking Laws were passed. They weren't created to take away our personal freedoms. They weren't passed just to force people to behave with social awareness in spite of themselves. They were designed to save lives.

This happens often... As does cars having to move further out into an intersection to make a turn, risking collision because some selfish individual decided they didn't like the law that said they couldn't park so close to the corner. Or parks their car facing in the wrong direction on a street, opens their door to get out without looking and has some unsuspecting driver either slam into them or swerve into the oncoming traffic.

The laws aren't about you or me. They are about society. If we choose to go off and live as a hermit in a cave in the jungle, we don't have to deal with those laws. In that scenario our actions only affect ourselves. But if our choice is to live within a society, and wish to be a responsible adult, we need to think about how our actions affect others. At some point you are going to have to face the fact that while you DO have the choice to break these laws, your actions DO affect more than just you. They affect the rest of society. Like it or not. And this is the difference between ethics and morality. Ethics is knowing what is right or wrong. Morality is doing right even when it may not please you to do so.

Of course, you may simply not give a sh!t about anyone else.

I suppose I would. Like I said in an earlier post I am responsible for getting hit if the light is red and I cross the street against it. Which I rarely do. When I do I pay attention to the traffic. What I was trying to say is I am responsible there fore I do not cross a street when a car is coming that has to run up on the side walk and kill people to avoid me.

What I really meant was red for him and green for me. You see I have quite a bit of experience at this and am well aware of the fact that just because the light is red for them that does not mean they will stop. I am responsible for checking it out. The same as I am responsible for walking down a side walk full of trips and motor bikes along with signs in the way.

[FolkGuitar]

Like every thing else I do I run against the norm. The older I get the more I enjoy Thailand and it's culture regardless of the law breaking. In a way I kind of enjoy that. I am responsible now if I get hit crossing the street when the light is red no one else.

It's good that you take responsibility for your actions. Will you also take responsibility for the collateral damage your actions may cause? For example; you decide to step into the street against a red light. A car, coming through the intersection on a green light and having no reason to think he has to slow down, has to swerve suddenly to avoid hitting you, running up on the sidewalk and plowing through the group of tourists standing there looking at their guidebook, then careening into the shophouse behind them, injuring the driver of the car and the customers in the shop. Will you take responsibility for them?

This is why the Jaywalking Laws were passed. They weren't created to take away our personal freedoms. They weren't passed just to force people to behave with social awareness in spite of themselves. They were designed to save lives.

This happens often... As does cars having to move further out into an intersection to make a turn, risking collision because some selfish individual decided they didn't like the law that said they couldn't park so close to the corner. Or parks their car facing in the wrong direction on a street, opens their door to get out without looking and has some unsuspecting driver either slam into them or swerve into the oncoming traffic.

The laws aren't about you or me. They are about society. If we choose to go off and live as a hermit in a cave in the jungle, we don't have to deal with those laws. In that scenario our actions only affect ourselves. But if our choice is to live within a society, and wish to be a responsible adult, we need to think about how our actions affect others. At some point you are going to have to face the fact that while you DO have the choice to break these laws, your actions DO affect more than just you. They affect the rest of society. Like it or not. And this is the difference between ethics and morality. Ethics is knowing what is right or wrong. Morality is doing right even when it may not please you to do so.

Of course, you may simply not give a sh!t about anyone else.

FG,

If someone could be described by your statement, would that be a symptom of megalomania? (that person, not you.... I don't want to be accused of accusing)

I'd love to answer your question, but I don't know to which part of my statement you refer? The one who breaks the laws, or the one who obeys them?

However, I'd say neither describes megalomania. Most often, breaking minor laws reflects little more than selfishness, or a self-centered view of the world that most grow out of as an adult. As children we believe that everything is about 'us.' We learn as we grow that this isn't the case at all. Obeying these same laws is simply civic concern and social responsibility. Nothing fancy about doing the right thing.

[hml367]

FG,

There is no need to answer further, and just to clarify (sorry I didn't make it more clear.... only 1 cup of coffee this morning... wait... that's another thread !) I was referring to the last line/paragraph/statement. It seems to me that one who does not care about anyone else cares only about themselves....... or maybe not even that!

[limegreenpatato]

Too many posters here don't seem to realise that the changes in rules and regulations in Thailand have very little to do with what westerners want. The Thai authorities are merely reaching the same conclusions that other countries, East and West, have made, whether I , you or anyone else here wants it or not. Whether we stay or go won't make any difference. I would imagine that those people who either favour the rules, or just accept them, are more likely to stay, so to see if the Thai authorities do indeed care what we think, let's see what happens when the westerners that don't like the changes leave.

Just to check if they are listening to us, we could all come on Thaivisa and complain about the necessity of making 90 day reports to immigration and see where that leads. I'll get the ball rolling........

Why do we need to make reports to immigration every 90 days? It's a waste of time, it serves no purpose and sometimes involves me missing a set or two of tennis. Scrap it now please.

Angry of Tunbridge Wells (best not to use my real name)

Great post. Up until you mistakenly said you had to report every 90 days. You can do it every 76 days if you like.

Aha! that Tunbridge Wells guy has arisen! Takes me back to the BBC comedies on the steam radio.

I agree we should grumble more about the 90 days malarky. Imagine the fuss if all Thais had to do this in Western countries.

If Thais had to do 90 day reporting in western countries you know what would happen they would do it without blinking and not whine about it.

Haven't you noticed how patient they are lining up at a bank or a Government Hospital where they might have to wait all day to see a Doctor.

I have always admired their tolerance to waiting, unlike Westerners, and I admit to be being impatient myself.

What are you talking about. They complain about everything. I've never met a group of people that whine about shit more than thais do.

[true blue]

i presume you can understand thai and can talk it fluently.i mean you never no they might just be talking about football,or what there having for tea tonight????.

[femi fan]

The laws aren't about you or me. They are about society. If we choose to go off and live as a hermit in a cave in the jungle, we don't have to deal with those laws. In that scenario our actions only affect ourselves. But if our choice is to live within a society, and wish to be a responsible adult, we need to think about how our actions affect others. At some point you are going to have to face the fact that while you DO have the choice to break these laws, your actions DO affect more than just you. They affect the rest of society. Like it or not. And this is the difference between ethics and morality. Ethics is knowing what is right or wrong. Morality is doing right even when it may not please you to do so.

Of course, you may simply not give a sh!t about anyone else.

This is such high horse stuff. One hopes you are not guilty of anything that might cause dangerous happenings or 'collateral damage' to other people, only then would you be free from hypocrisy.

Ethics and morality are not to be determined by you or any man/god. If you are deciding what morality and ethics are then you had better be sure you never cross the line on them.

I would argue that laws take away the sense of responsibility that individuals should carry for their own benefit and that of the society they live in. A responsible person on the other hand will consider carefully the laws that exist and the laws that don't exist, but either way will take actions that have no conscious intention of causing harm to others. Indeed, they will act in such a way as to avoid harming others. So they won't stupidly jaywalk causing cars to swerve and maim bystanding pedestrians. They will jaywalk when they have determined it is safe to do so.

There are many stupid laws, which according to you must be adhered to in order to avoid causing ramifications to others. On the other hand there are many non-laws that stupidly are not laws. Only discerning people can tell the difference. Those who blindly follow the law 'because it's the law' are abdicating their responsibility for being discerning human beings.

For example, if you happen to be a sugar-guzzling person who also eats a diet of fast foods (like most americans for example, and like many in other western nations), then you are creating huge ramifications and 'collateral damage' on others and on society in general. You are going to get ill and diseased, cause friends and family grief at your own predicament, and you're going to use up a huge amount of money in trying to fix you. Often that is taxpayers money, and often it is friends' and family's money. You are getting ill by your own actions, causing damage to society, but you have kept within the law.

If you are sugar-free, refined-foods-free, fastfood-free, coke-free, cigarette-free, a non-driver of any oil-run vehicle, if you don't buy poison-ridden produce, never think or act violently, then perhaps you can talk about ethics and morality, but otherwise you're a hypocrite.

Finally, let me repeat: responsiblilty for one's own actions often means ignoring laws, and it also means imposing limitations on one's own behaviour that has not been limited by government through the statute book.

[femi fan]

What are you talking about. They complain about everything. I've never met a group of people that whine about shit more than thais do.

Just to be clear, can you provide a few examples of other groups you've come across in life who complain less? And perhaps some examples of the kinds of things they complain about?

And where is it that you see all these thais complaining? What kind of places? Because in my long time living here i can barely recall much complaining in public places at all, if any.

[dao16]

Since the coup, I have noticed that the regular extorti---police checkpoints have been absorbed by the military and moved down the road. So, now the police are with the soldiers in a nearby location every day, but they don't stop people like before. They just keep an eye out on people coming and going. I can't believe I am saying this, but I actually like it better this way. It seems like everyone is better behaved now.

[CMHomeboy78]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

My first experience with extortion masquerading as law-enforcement came as a child in the 1950s travelling with my family from New England to Florida.

In those days, before the Interstate highway system was completed, main roads south passed through or near little towns in the Carolinas and Georgia.

The redneck sheriffs in many of those places would set up speed-traps with absurdly low limits - often 30 MPH.

The potential for "revenue enhancement" soon became obvious, and the deplorable practice quickly spread to other states. The introduction of seatbelt and motorcycle helmet laws in the '60s really got the gravy-train rolling.

This is one of the many things I was glad to leave behind long ago.

Now it has come to Chiang Mai along with the kind of people who so willingly bend over backward to justify it.

...........(SNIP for Brevity)......... Now it has come to Chiang Mai along with the kind of people who so willingly bend over backward to justify it.

Could you be so kind as to link to a post that tries to justify it?

Frankly, I haven't been able to find one. I see several that say 'learn to live with it,' several that say 'I'm not going to comply. I'd rather break the law and then whinge about it when I get caught,' but none that say it's right, it's OK, or that it's even needed. Please, which one is the justification post?

The peevish tone of your post suggests frustration at not being able to challenge any of the points I made other than the casual parting shot that obviously hit home in your case.

That many farangs, and even many "leun-mai" Thais, will support the most egregious official misconduct and enforce Mickey Mouse laws in the name of "law and order" or "security" is self-evident; and I don't have to cite specific posts to prove that point. I also meant people among the larger expat community as well, and not just TV posters, although they are numerous enough among the members here.

The attraction that Chiang Mai has for many people is that it seems to be in that blessed period between too little state control, and the nightmare of too much.

That's one of the many things I've always liked about it.

[Ulysses G.]

What are you talking about. They complain about everything. I've never met a group of people that whine about shit more than thais do.

Just to be clear, can you provide a few examples of other groups you've come across in life who complain less? And perhaps some examples of the kinds of things they complain about?

And where is it that you see all these thais complaining? What kind of places? Because in my long time living here i can barely recall much complaining in public places at all, if any.

My Thai is so lousy, I always thought that they talk non-stop about food and money.

[Mapguy]

Femi fan, above you accused Folk Guitar of posting "High horse stuff"? But who is really shoveling it?

I share many of your expressed concerns about diet and vehicles. Had you included the collateral societal damage of increased meat in the diet upon world food security, you'd have had half of TV Chiangmai posters carving you up for hamburgers.

You indirectly rail about some serious problems with some food and vehicles and about some corporate sins of one sort or another. Getting involved in combatting them constructively would be laudable, but your curious take on what constitutes civil disobedience sounds more like adolescent rebellion, nothing purposeful, as you wrote in post #88:

I once read to rebel is to keep one's sanity...

Ahh, that most excellent term, 'civil disobedience'. Brings tears of joy to the eyes! Can't do it to much extent in thailand, although not much need. Yet. Changes are in air though. If my life wasn't so good here i'd be back to england in a shot to practise as much civil disobedience as i could. It's needed to stop the rampant rape of our lands by western corporations. Eg fracking, just for one.

Can't do it here, we'd be on the first plane home, or bumped off! But, the trick is to do whatever one can within the context.

Edited June 28, 2014 by Mapguy

[FolkGuitar]

...........(SNIP for Brevity)......... Now it has come to Chiang Mai along with the kind of people who so willingly bend over backward to justify it.

Could you be so kind as to link to a post that tries to justify it?

Frankly, I haven't been able to find one. I see several that say 'learn to live with it,' several that say 'I'm not going to comply. I'd rather break the law and then whinge about it when I get caught,' but none that say it's right, it's OK, or that it's even needed. Please, which one is the justification post?

The peevish tone of your post suggests frustration at not being able to challenge any of the points I made .....

No... I just didn't think they merited any comments. Sort of like this last post of yours...

[FolkGuitar]

The laws aren't about you or me. They are about society. If we choose to go off and live as a hermit in a cave in the jungle, we don't have to deal with those laws. In that scenario our actions only affect ourselves. But if our choice is to live within a society, and wish to be a responsible adult, we need to think about how our actions affect others. At some point you are going to have to face the fact that while you DO have the choice to break these laws, your actions DO affect more than just you. They affect the rest of society. Like it or not. And this is the difference between ethics and morality. Ethics is knowing what is right or wrong. Morality is doing right even when it may not please you to do so.

Of course, you may simply not give a sh!t about anyone else.

This is such high horse stuff. One hopes you are not guilty of anything that might cause dangerous happenings or 'collateral damage' to other people, only then would you be free from hypocrisy.

Ethics and morality are not to be determined by you or any man/god. If you are deciding what morality and ethics are then you had better be sure you never cross the line on them.

I would argue.......

I believe this last line of yours pretty much sums it up. You would argue.

As Mapguy so nicely put it, 'your curious take on what constitutes civil disobedience sounds more like adolescent rebellion, nothing purposeful.'

It reminds me quite a bit of the Assertiveness Training Classes women were taking in the 70's. There is no question that they were needed, and no question about the fact that they worked. But the trainers forgot one major concept; 'when' to be assertive and when 'not' to be. So for the first six months after taking these classes, the women were alienating people right and left by being assertive over issues that would have been better handled differently. Eventually they learned how to control their new skill, but if your only tool is a hammer, you see the answer to every problem a nail. You are rebeling over everything just like a typical 15yr old. And like him, you really still don't see beyond your own world the consequences of your actions.

Frankly, people with your attitude are a danger to society, which is why you are found in violation and fined. That fine is a gentle slap on the wrist in hopes that you will behave in accordance with the rest of society next time. Unfortunately, you will only see it as a form of police corruption, forgetting that before the fine could even be imposed, you broke the law. "That mean teacher gave me detention! The bitch! All I did was blow off my homework and cut her class. That's all! Nothing else! And she gave me detention! Can you believe that?!? It's not fair!!"

Yeah... for some folks, life just doesn't seem fair.

[Oscar2]

Like every thing else I do I run against the norm. The older I get the more I enjoy Thailand and it's culture regardless of the law breaking. In a way I kind of enjoy that. I am responsible now if I get hit crossing the street when the light is red no one else. I failed to look and see if it was all clear. I enjoy what we would call jay walking back home it is legal here but even if it was illegal I would still do it. Not excited about trying to walk on the side walks but not complaining I just walk in the street.

As for the nasty westerners forcing them to change the rules. No opinion on that. I am against them trying to change the culture from a family orientated one to a materialistic one.

The point I am stating is if I know it is illegal and I do it and get fined I will not complain. I am totally responsible for myself. I got a package from the states today they charged me 490 baht on $79 of pills I had ordered. This was the first time in 4 shipments I am not complaining about it. I always knew there was the danger of going through customs. This time I am not sure what it was. They said it was a tax. At any rate I am not complaining about it and will order from the same company again when I run out. I take responsibility when I break a law even if it is a stupid one.

HelloJohn,

Where did you get the information that jaywalking is legal here?

It was an assumption. Due to the lack of traffic lights it only makes sense.

Is it illegal here also. As I said makes no difference I will still do it and if I get hit it is my fault.

besides I just want to fit in with the crowd.

Walk down Huey Kaew and look at the number of places where there is no lights or over passes yet they have allowed a break in the bushes in the center of the road to jaywalk.

first he says that jaywalking is legal, then when questioned, he says "it was an assumption", followed immediately by "Is it illegal here also."

[femi fan]

folk guitar, you fail to address the post and instead attack the poster. I acknowledge this, but cannot therefore continue debating with you. I see this is the second time you've done this on this thread. I think i'm right in saying this is flouncing. Argue the points instead of defending your ego.

[FolkGuitar]

folk guitar, you fail to address the post and instead attack the poster. I acknowledge this, but cannot therefore continue debating with you. I see this is the second time you've done this on this thread. I think i'm right in saying this is flouncing. Argue the points instead of defending your ego.

You're right. I apologize to you. Please forgive me.

The point; There are laws. The laws are in place to protect the safety and welfare of the society as a whole, rather than catering to individual choice.

If someone chooses to willfully break those laws, they are selfishly placing their own personal desires ahead of the safety and welfare of others. Period.

There is no justification for this sort of behavior, regardless of the motives of the individual. It's called 'breaking the law,' and the punishments for it are in place. If a person feels that these laws are unjust, they have the right to bring the issue to the courts and let the courts decide. They do NOT have the right to take the law into their own hands. Doing that is also breaking the law, compounding the problem.

This isn't some cloudy issue. The law exists. It's really pretty simple.

[JingerBen]

folk guitar, you fail to address the post and instead attack the poster. I acknowledge this, but cannot therefore continue debating with you. I see this is the second time you've done this on this thread. I think i'm right in saying this is flouncing. Argue the points instead of defending your ego.

You're right. I apologize to you. Please forgive me.

The point; There are laws. The laws are in place to protect the safety and welfare of the society as a whole, rather than catering to individual choice.

If someone chooses to willfully break those laws, they are selfishly placing their own personal desires ahead of the safety and welfare of others. Period.

There is no justification for this sort of behavior, regardless of the motives of the individual. It's called 'breaking the law,' and the punishments for it are in place. If a person feels that these laws are unjust, they have the right to bring the issue to the courts and let the courts decide. They do NOT have the right to take the law into their own hands. Doing that is also breaking the law, compounding the problem.

This isn't some cloudy issue. The law exists. It's really pretty simple.

What you need is some remedial education.

Orwell; Gandhi; Thoreau, and Kafka would do for starters.

[northernjohn]

Like every thing else I do I run against the norm. The older I get the more I enjoy Thailand and it's culture regardless of the law breaking. In a way I kind of enjoy that. I am responsible now if I get hit crossing the street when the light is red no one else. I failed to look and see if it was all clear. I enjoy what we would call jay walking back home it is legal here but even if it was illegal I would still do it. Not excited about trying to walk on the side walks but not complaining I just walk in the street.

As for the nasty westerners forcing them to change the rules. No opinion on that. I am against them trying to change the culture from a family orientated one to a materialistic one.

The point I am stating is if I know it is illegal and I do it and get fined I will not complain. I am totally responsible for myself. I got a package from the states today they charged me 490 baht on $79 of pills I had ordered. This was the first time in 4 shipments I am not complaining about it. I always knew there was the danger of going through customs. This time I am not sure what it was. They said it was a tax. At any rate I am not complaining about it and will order from the same company again when I run out. I take responsibility when I break a law even if it is a stupid one.

HelloJohn,

Where did you get the information that jaywalking is legal here?

It was an assumption. Due to the lack of traffic lights it only makes sense.

Is it illegal here also. As I said makes no difference I will still do it and if I get hit it is my fault.

besides I just want to fit in with the crowd.

Walk down Huey Kaew and look at the number of places where there is no lights or over passes yet they have allowed a break in the bushes in the center of the road to jaywalk.

first he says that jaywalking is legal, then when questioned, he says "it was an assumption", followed immediately by "Is it illegal here also."

Well is it or is it not? A yes or no question.

[Tywais]

first he says that jaywalking is legal, then when questioned, he says "it was an assumption", followed immediately by "Is it illegal here also."

Well is it or is it not? A yes or no question.

From a Thaivisa article in 2009. Seems the same arguments going on then as there are now.

Jaywalkers subject of police blitz

By John Le Fevre

BANGKOK (thaivisa.com): -- People who fail use crosswalks or footbridges will start receiving on-the-spot Bt200 (about $US5.88) fines from traffic police commencing August 1.

People who drop litter, including cigarette butts in a city almost bereft of public ashtrays or rubbish bins are already subject to fines of up Bt2,000 (about $US58.76) and now police have decided to target jaywalkers in a city where crossing the road is often a mad dash followed by furtive creeping steps to avoid cars and motorcycles that pay little regard for pedestrians.

For their part, impatient Bangkokians are known to attempt to dash between cars, or walk out from in front of buses directly into the path of traffic, often without looking.

Traffic police chief Police Major Weerapat Tansrisakul said traffic police in Bangkok will begin to arrest people who crossed the street without using crosswalks, footbridges, and other crossways.

He said the area around Victory Monument, Silom Road and Ratchaprasong Junction will receive the initial focus and urged people to comply with the traffic laws for their own safety.

-- thaivisa.com 2009-08-01

More here - Bangkok Jaywalkers Subject of Police Blitz

[femi fan]

folk guitar, you fail to address the post and instead attack the poster. I acknowledge this, but cannot therefore continue debating with you. I see this is the second time you've done this on this thread. I think i'm right in saying this is flouncing. Argue the points instead of defending your ego.

You're right. I apologize to you. Please forgive me.

The point; There are laws. The laws are in place to protect the safety and welfare of the society as a whole, rather than catering to individual choice.

If someone chooses to willfully break those laws, they are selfishly placing their own personal desires ahead of the safety and welfare of others. Period.

There is no justification for this sort of behavior, regardless of the motives of the individual. It's called 'breaking the law,' and the punishments for it are in place. If a person feels that these laws are unjust, they have the right to bring the issue to the courts and let the courts decide. They do NOT have the right to take the law into their own hands. Doing that is also breaking the law, compounding the problem.

This isn't some cloudy issue. The law exists. It's really pretty simple.

FG, i can continue talking now!

So, the laws i have broken with the CM fuzz:

• one time my car wheel was clamped for being parked in the right place in daylight, but facing the wrong way. I am a careful parker in chiang mai because i know about the times, odd days, and police love of clamping. I only learned about this law when i found the clamp on my wheel
• another time i was randomly stopped (wearing seatbelt, car tax in order) and i discovered a new law again when i could not produce either my book or photocophy of the book
• another time my car got clamped when i got carried away having a nice social lunch (with tea, not beer) and forgot the time. I got to my car at about 2.05. Too late, the 2pm time had kicked in and i was clamped

These are the laws, as you have been saying. Please tell me in what way these laws are protecting the safety and welfare of society.

You seem to miss out on one very important concept with your rather rigid approach to 'the laws', and it's a point i've made already, but wish to make again...

Living one's life by the laws means one is abdicating responsibility for decision-making to the laws on the statute books. That would be fine in theory if we could trust that these laws have been properly formed for proper reasons. But that is not the case. Many laws exist to perpetuate the power of those running the state. They are not in place for our safety, only to disempower us from challenging their unjust actions.

I've tried to say that in as non-provocative terms as possible. See jingerben's post for a related question.

I really cannot believe you live life with the view that every single law exists to promote the safety and welfare of society at large. It seems impossible to me that anyone can think this. You also seem to promote the wellbeing of society - whatever that actually is - over and above that of the individual. So, no freedom for people even if it means they harm no others???

You must be a communist!

[Ulysses G.]

folk guitar, you fail to address the post and instead attack the poster. I acknowledge this, but cannot therefore continue debating with you. I see this is the second time you've done this on this thread. I think i'm right in saying this is flouncing. Argue the points instead of defending your ego.

You're right. I apologize to you. Please forgive me.

The point; There are laws. The laws are in place to protect the safety and welfare of the society as a whole, rather than catering to individual choice.

If someone chooses to willfully break those laws, they are selfishly placing their own personal desires ahead of the safety and welfare of others. Period.

There is no justification for this sort of behavior, regardless of the motives of the individual. It's called 'breaking the law,' and the punishments for it are in place. If a person feels that these laws are unjust, they have the right to bring the issue to the courts and let the courts decide. They do NOT have the right to take the law into their own hands. Doing that is also breaking the law, compounding the problem.

This isn't some cloudy issue. The law exists. It's really pretty simple.

What you need is some remedial education.

Orwell; Gandhi; Thoreau, and Kafka would do for starters.

I know FolkGuitar and would guess that he has read all of them. He has much more than a "remedial" education.

[FolkGuitar]

So, the laws i have broken with the CM fuzz:

• one time my car wheel was clamped for being parked in the right place in daylight, but facing the wrong way. I am a careful parker in chiang mai because i know about the times, odd days, and police love of clamping. I only learned about this law when i found the clamp on my wheel
• another time i was randomly stopped (wearing seatbelt, car tax in order) and i discovered a new law again when i could not produce either my book or photocophy of the book

These are not 'new' laws. Both of these were in force in Thailand 15 years ago when I started driving here. Ignorance of the law has never been an excuse, be it in Thailand, the UK, or in the US. The fact that many Thais break these laws doesn't mean that they don't exist. My question to you is 'why didn't you learn the laws before you began to drive here?' That seems pretty foolish to me. Many people in the UK and the US break these laws too. Break the law - pay the penalty. Makes no difference the location.

There is no need to discuss the safey benefits. There is only the reqirement for you to either obey them or challenge them in a court of law. Legally you may not take it upon yourself to simply break them and expect to do so without recrimination. Legally, it's the same when a landlord doesn't maintain your rental and you think you can just withhold the rent. You can't. That is illegal although you might think it justified. By law, you must either pay the rent and take the landlord to court, or you can 'try' to place the required rent into a specially established escrow account each month, but you can NOT take it upon yourself to simply not pay, no matter how justified you may feel it to be. THAT is the law in Thailand, the UK, and the US.

You seem to miss out on one very important concept with your rather rigid approach to 'the laws', and it's a point i've made already, but wish to make again...

Living one's life by the laws means one is abdicating responsibility for decision-making to the laws on the statute books. That would be fine in theory if we could trust that these laws have been properly formed for proper reasons. But that is not the case. Many laws exist to perpetuate the power of those running the state. They are not in place for our safety, only to disempower us from challenging their unjust actions.

No, not abdicating anything. We can't just break laws that we don't agree with. We are certainly free to challenge them. As a member of the society which has agreed as a society to live under those laws, the individual has no other option, other than through the court system, to challenge those laws without violating them.

If you don't like the laws you have three choices;

1. Challenge them through the courts. There will be no recrimination.

2. Leave the jurisdiction of those laws. There will be no recrimination.

3. Violate the laws. You will, as you have discovered, pay the penalty for that violation.

I really cannot believe you live life with the view that every single law exists to promote the safety and welfare of society at large.

I don't. I also don't see things only in black and white. But I do believe that if I wish to live within a society that has an established a code of conduct, it's my responsibility to follow that code of conduct. If I don't believe that part of it is in my best interest, I am always free to challenge its legality though the courts. It's never my legal right to simply violate that code simply because "I" don't think it's fair. That is what living within a society requires. If you wish to live outside that society, you are always free to do so.

You also seem to promote the wellbeing of society - whatever that actually is - over and above that of the individual.

That is correct. To think that my personal wellbeing is more important than yours or everyone else's is simply selfish. Hopefully, within a well-established and well thought out society, there will be a code of behavior that creates a comfortable and safe living environment for everyone. This requires some compromise on the part of the individual, but it seems to work in EVERY MODERN DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY. Granted, there are a few that don't feel comfortable living under it, and take it upon themselves to break that code when they see fit. Depending upon the severity of the laws they break, they are often given a special place to live, without cost to them, by society. For the wellbeing of society. Outlaws and rebels may be glorified by Hollywood, but not by most adults.

[FolkGuitar]

folk guitar, you fail to address the post and instead attack the poster. I acknowledge this, but cannot therefore continue debating with you. I see this is the second time you've done this on this thread. I think i'm right in saying this is flouncing. Argue the points instead of defending your ego.

You're right. I apologize to you. Please forgive me.

The point; There are laws. The laws are in place to protect the safety and welfare of the society as a whole, rather than catering to individual choice.

If someone chooses to willfully break those laws, they are selfishly placing their own personal desires ahead of the safety and welfare of others. Period.

There is no justification for this sort of behavior, regardless of the motives of the individual. It's called 'breaking the law,' and the punishments for it are in place. If a person feels that these laws are unjust, they have the right to bring the issue to the courts and let the courts decide. They do NOT have the right to take the law into their own hands. Doing that is also breaking the law, compounding the problem.

This isn't some cloudy issue. The law exists. It's really pretty simple.

What you need is some remedial education.

Orwell; Gandhi; Thoreau, and Kafka would do for starters.

I know FolkGuitar and would guess that he has read all of them. He has much more than a "remedial" education.

Thank you, Ulysses. Actually, I've taught university-level classes on both Thoreau and Gandhi.

'Civil Disobedience' was his take on the thinking of Emerson put down on paper, and related to the slavery issue, a major political debate at the time. However ever since, people have been 'quoting' it for everything from illegal parking to topless dancing...

[JingerBen]

folk guitar, you fail to address the post and instead attack the poster. I acknowledge this, but cannot therefore continue debating with you. I see this is the second time you've done this on this thread. I think i'm right in saying this is flouncing. Argue the points instead of defending your ego.

You're right. I apologize to you. Please forgive me.

The point; There are laws. The laws are in place to protect the safety and welfare of the society as a whole, rather than catering to individual choice.

If someone chooses to willfully break those laws, they are selfishly placing their own personal desires ahead of the safety and welfare of others. Period.

There is no justification for this sort of behavior, regardless of the motives of the individual. It's called 'breaking the law,' and the punishments for it are in place. If a person feels that these laws are unjust, they have the right to bring the issue to the courts and let the courts decide. They do NOT have the right to take the law into their own hands. Doing that is also breaking the law, compounding the problem.

This isn't some cloudy issue. The law exists. It's really pretty simple.

What you need is some remedial education.

Orwell; Gandhi; Thoreau, and Kafka would do for starters.

I know FolkGuitar and would guess that he has read all of them. He has much more than a "remedial" education.

If his posts are anything to go by, the time is ripe for a rereading... and the next time you see him, ask him to include Aldous Huxley. I reread Brave New World recently, and it's incredible how much of it has, or is, coming to pass.

Incidentally, we could all do with a little remedial education. The point is, some places are better to receive it in than others. For instance, a great little used bookshop on Chang Moi Khao would be preferable to Guantanamo Bay.

[hml367]

NorthernJohn,

To your question, "Well is it or is it not? A yes or no question.", my answer is I don't know if it is legal or illegal. That is why I did not make a statement one way or the other. Making a statement that something is legal or illegal should be backed up by fact. I don't read Thai and I have not been cited for "jay-walking" in Thailand, so I have no facts to back up such a statement.

I do know that everywhere I lived in the USA it was illegal to jay-walk... yet it was done all the time. I have read those laws when I lived in the USA.

[Saan]

Rawn, rawn or yen, yen are my wife's usual complaints, depending on the season.

Edited June 29, 2014 by Saan