Hong Kong photographer arrested in Bangkok for trying to carry bulletproof vest onto flight

[Doc46]

If wearing a bulletproof vest (it is not a weapon it is a protection) is illegal why is it not illegal for Muslims to hide their F,,,n Face so nobody can identify them if they on a wanted poster????This is out of this world bullshit.

[newnative]

We just had a thread asking if Thailand is a third world country. This is just another example of why the answer is yes. You could add the Koh Tao murder investigation and trial, as well.

[RBOP]

Check laws before you enter country. But really, why would he not just have checked his baggage? I always check my steel toed boots and hard hat.

[BuckBee]

Amazing stupid thailand :-O

would of been no problem if it was a small unlicensed handgun in his carry on luggage :-)

Really are showing the world what thainess is, news coverage on things like this & other hot incidents has changed peoples perspective of thailand drastically & irrecoverably ,,,

[gandalf12]

Kwan is being charged under the Arms Control Act 1987, which prohibits the possession of military equipment without a licence.

I suppose if I tried to carry military binoculars, that I purchased from Ebay, on a plane I would be arrested.

Police use them when there are riots. They are not military so are they going to be charged as well?

[arrowsdawdle]

"which prohibits the possession of military equipment without a licence."

But what if it is civilian body armor which can be bought? I would say having valid press credentials should be the license. Will be interesting how this plays out.

Live fire zones, no problem. Journalist with a protective vest....not tolerated.

[arrowsdawdle]

being charged with possessing an illegal weapon. The offence carries a prison sentence of up to five years, and the case will be tried in a military court.

The lack of quality leadership filters down throughout the Thai system...people being arrested and thrown into jail for exposing corruption...carrying non-aggressive articles of protection...and speaking their minds...while Southern Thailand is a danger zone being attacked by Muslim separatists...and civil unrest throughout the country due to an un-elected government making the rules...

Thailand is on the brink...democracy seems to be a dream which will never be realized...

A dream for Thai citizens...a nightmare for Stuphet and the junta.

[gchurch259]

What is wrong with checked luggage, everybody wants to bring everything in the Cabin.

[Echo Tango]

Why didn't they stop him when he entered the country with the vest? What a bunch of BS!

They catch the bombers yet? Nope! Idiots!

[little mary sunshine]

OMG, this can't be real....Is it April 1st? These

Reporters are on the line of fire and should be

Able to carry a bullet proof vest to their assignments

On any plane. Thailand officials, get a life!!!

[SheungWan]

OMG, this can't be real....Is it April 1st? These

Reporters are on the line of fire and should be

Able to carry a bullet proof vest to their assignments

On any plane. Thailand officials, get a life!!!

Why should one be entitled to carry a vest on to the plane rather than putting it into the checked-in luggage?

[harrry]

I did not know that body armor was a weapon never mind an illegal one.

Not legal in Australia. SImilar offence.

The reasoning is that if criminals can wear it they can put other citizens at risk because of the higher force that must be used against them. I think the potential penalties though are more than 5 years.

[coulson]

OMG, this can't be real....Is it April 1st? These

Reporters are on the line of fire and should be

Able to carry a bullet proof vest to their assignments

On any plane. Thailand officials, get a life!!!

Reporters go into the line of fire of their own accord. They are not above the law just because of their sensational career choice (which IMO doesn't deter this type of awful incident witnessed last week)

[harrry]

.R. 5344 is a bill currently going through Congress that would ban the purchase of body armor.

Violation would carry CRIMINAL penalties, including up to ten years in prison.

Many bullet-resistant items on the market now, such as bulletproof backpacks for school children, would be banned by this legislation.

It may soon be not legal in the US

[toooa]

What this clearly says, is they want the ability to use violence against anyone at their whim, and the peasants aren't allowed to protect themselves. The arrogance of these people is astounding, it's a pity they don't have the intelligence to back it up.

[Monomial]

While I enjoy a good bashing of Thai police as much as the next guy, I think it is important to realize there is a valid argument for this. You can argue the merits of it, but you should not deny its existence. Take this same thought to its extreme. A country develops an effective shield against nuclear missles. This is a purely defensive thing, just like a bullet proof vest. Do you think every other country would sit by and say, "That's OK."

Heck no, they wouldn't. They would scream bloody murder about how much this destabilized the global order and made use of nuclear weapons more likely. In the same way, possession of armored vests by certain groups increases the probability of the use of assault rifles. You can reasonably make the argument that he is just a journalist, but what if his illegal vest is stolen while he is in the country?

This is not the cut and dried ridiculous notion that most would naively believe. These types of defensive devices are categorized as weapons for a reason. It may not be a great reason, but it is a valid one in some circumstances.

Sorry, but the analogy doesn't quite measure up. Assume countries have offensive weapons, right? If country had no offensive weapons, and this was plain for all to see, then neighbors wouldn't care. Reporter is assumed to have no weapons also, other than pen being mightier than the sword sort of idea...he was going back to Hong Kong, not bringing it in. Police if worried should be happy it is leaving, removing chance that it could be stolen.

By that logic, every drunk driver who reached home safely should be congratulated by the police, because he committed an offense which may have endangered people, but instead got lucky and didn't have a problem. Somehow I don't think the police would agree with your reasoning if they caught someone turning into his driveway over the legal limit.

Again, you may not agree with the law, but you have to accept there is a kind of logic behind it. You have every right to believe that the logic is weak and that other factors should outweigh this argument, but it does not mean that Thailand is the fool for outlawing body armor. There are many things that better demonstrate the abject stupidity of the Royal Thai Police, and the Thai government in general, than this instance.

[phazey]

It's a shame about the HK journo. In my opinion, the world does not need bulletproof vests, it needs bulletproof guns.

[Torrens54]

A couple of Words of Advice to whoever is responsible for these charges.

DON'T pick a fight with the WORLD MEDIA. You might slap a few people in jail on stupid charges BUT do you REALLY want the World's

NEWS HOUNDS, HOUNDING you every twist and turn?

[speedtripler]

As if Thailand elite knows or cares about how they get portrayed by the rest of the world.... Most of them don't care about anything further away than the next bowl of noodlesoup

[MaxLee]

It's a shame about the HK journo. In my opinion, the world does not need bulletproof vests, it needs bulletproof guns.

One thing that the RTP and the rest of the influential elite is good is, is to protect "bulletproof FACE-FARCE"

[speedtripler]

Very weird case, the Japanese company sent him the vest to wear in Thailand even though it's illegal and they either didn't know or didn't care about their responsibilities..... But if they don't even have the license for it in Japan its even stranger...

Is this some payback to Japan for embarrassing the Thai cop?

If protecting yourself from bullets is illegal now the world has totally turned upside down...

What about the expensive limos with the bullet and blast resistant panels?

No country wants all its citizens bulletproof for obvious reasons but journalists in foreign warzones should be made to wear them compulsory like troops imo... I hope he gets out fast but I predict about 2 Weeks for a deal to be brokered, just like the Thai cop..

If he's sentenced to 5 yrs Thailand should be hammered by trade sanctions from Japan and the rest of the world...

[hawker9000]

While I enjoy a good bashing of Thai police as much as the next guy, I think it is important to realize there is a valid argument for this. You can argue the merits of it, but you should not deny its existence. Take this same thought to its extreme. A country develops an effective shield against nuclear missles. This is a purely defensive thing, just like a bullet proof vest. Do you think every other country would sit by and say, "That's OK."

Heck no, they wouldn't. They would scream bloody murder about how much this destabilized the global order and made use of nuclear weapons more likely. In the same way, possession of armored vests by certain groups increases the probability of the use of assault rifles. You can reasonably make the argument that he is just a journalist, but what if his illegal vest is stolen while he is in the country?

This is not the cut and dried ridiculous notion that most would naively believe. These types of defensive devices are categorized as weapons for a reason. It may not be a great reason, but it is a valid one in some circumstances.

"but it is a valid one in some circumstances"

OK, so let's hear it? He's a journalist. And he was in the country investigating a bomb blast!

This really doesn't have anything to do with strategic missile defense (LOL - so bizarre to even be mentioning that). And if he left it in his luggage for the Thai baggage handlers and "security" checkers, he'd surely never see it again. Are these vests on the list of prohibited items? The authorities sure aren't bashful about listing all the things they think are dangerous, but I've never seen this.

For a country where shooting oneself regularly in the foot is a daily occurrence, it seems strange that a foreigner with nothing more than a protective vest should get the BIB so stirred up. "Weapon" -- PLEASE ... Then again, TIT. Yeah, it actually IS the cut and dried ridiculous notion that anyone with a shred of common sense realizes.

And BTW, WHO categorizes bulletproof vests as "weapons"?

[ksamuiguy]

Who did he piss off?

[duckmandon]

Just a joke. Let the Retired Cop carry a gun on a plane with no charges being layed & we will once again show the world how hypocritical the Thai law is. Message to all foriegners "do as I say not as I do". You easy target for us.

[casualbiker]

Kwan is being charged under the Arms Control Act 1987, which prohibits the possession of military equipment without a licence.

I suppose if I tried to carry military binoculars, that I purchased from Ebay, on a plane I would be arrested.

Police use them when there are riots. They are not military so are they going to be charged as well?

Can you ACTUALLY read.. It says licence.

[casualbiker]

Very weird case, the Japanese company sent him the vest to wear in Thailand even though it's illegal and they either didn't know or didn't care about their responsibilities..... But if they don't even have the license for it in Japan its even stranger...

Is this some payback to Japan for embarrassing the Thai cop?

If protecting yourself from bullets is illegal now the world has totally turned upside down...

What about the expensive limos with the bullet and blast resistant panels?

No country wants all its citizens bulletproof for obvious reasons but journalists in foreign warzones should be made to wear them compulsory like troops imo... I hope he gets out fast but I predict about 2 Weeks for a deal to be brokered, just like the Thai cop..

If he's sentenced to 5 yrs Thailand should be hammered by trade sanctions from Japan and the rest of the world...

Bangkok Thailand is not a war zone.

[GAZZPA]

Thailand please!

Anyone can see this is a pile of crap, can someone in Thailand apply some common sense,, please! You are losing face to the world!

Let this man go home.

[Don Mega]

Thailand please!

Anyone can see this is a pile of crap, can someone in Thailand apply some common sense,, please! You are losing face to the world!

Let this man go home.

Good to see the Thai's enforcing laws. If only they would do it uniformly across the board instead of selectively based on wealth/social status.

Edited August 25, 2015 by Don Mega

[speedtripler]

Very weird case, the Japanese company sent him the vest to wear in Thailand even though it's illegal and they either didn't know or didn't care about their responsibilities..... But if they don't even have the license for it in Japan its even stranger...

Is this some payback to Japan for embarrassing the Thai cop?

If protecting yourself from bullets is illegal now the world has totally turned upside down...

What about the expensive limos with the bullet and blast resistant panels?

No country wants all its citizens bulletproof for obvious reasons but journalists in foreign warzones should be made to wear them compulsory like troops imo... I hope he gets out fast but I predict about 2 Weeks for a deal to be brokered, just like the Thai cop..

If he's sentenced to 5 yrs Thailand should be hammered by trade sanctions from Japan and the rest of the world...

Bangkok Thailand is not a war zone.

You must be new here....

[sunshine51]

What's the difference between a flak jacket and military grade bulletproof vest?

I will only discuss military grade body armour here...too many civilian variants that claim military usage

to talk about & most of those claims are false.

There really is no such thing as a "bulet proof vest" as "bullets" come in many sizes & proceed to target

in varying velocities. Body armour is intended to spread out the impact area of a projectile (bullet) over

a wider area than the area of a normal impact which is very small. Most "bullets" lose 70% of their

velocity upon impact with a target regardless of what the make up of the target is...ie...flesh, wood, steel

etc. The kevlar or whatever composite material is used, to include experimental spider web, takes the

initial "hit", 70% of the velocity is lost at that moment & the material spreads out the shock wave from

the "hit" in a manner similar to a stone tossed into a pond...relatively a circular pattern whch spreads

the "bullet" energy outwards instead of the "bullet" concentrating it's impact velocity to a relatively

small area. The nose of he "bullet" will also be blunted by the body armour upon impact causing a further

and faster reduction in velocity. The "bullet" energy, measured usually in foot-pounds or meters-kilos

is not reduced by the body armour so while the target may sustain the hit without being penetrated the

target will usually get knocked over...especialy if the target is a human being and said target may receive

some nasty bruising & if a chest shot...some broken bones such as the sternum or ribs...depending on

the range from the shooter.

Another variabe with body armour is distance...meaning the distance from the shooter to the target.

Further away the shooter is the better chance of survival with body armour...even down to level 2A.

To a trained marksman or sniper defeating body armour is nothing more than a well placed head shot

or by using a larger caliber weapon...say from .338 and upwards....body armour will not help at all.

Ballistic body armour, the type I have mentioned above is much different from the body armour which

protects the wearer from knives & other sharp oblects such as ice picks. I won't discuss that type here.

A "flak jacket" is just that...it is supposed to stop flak (shrapnel) from entering the center mass of a

human being (torso-front & back) at some distance from the item generating said flak/shrapnel.

Shrapnel looses it's velocity relatively faster than a bullet does and that loss of velocity is dependent

upon the size of the particular piece of shrapnel. In other words...large pieces lose velocity faster

than small pieces do at a predetermined radius from the explosion creating the shrapnel. But all

pieces of shrapnel from an explosion do not travel as far as "bullets" do simply because the

shrapnel is not pushed down a barrel. Mind you shrapnel can be quite large...say a tail assembly

from a general purpose 500 pound aerial bomb down to the size of a grain of sand and anything

in between. Shrapnel sizes depend on what type of weapon s being used....hand grenade, mortar

round (many diferent sizes there), RPG's, artillery rounds and dumb or smart bombs.

Most of the older flak jackets (Vietnam era) are no longer used mainly because they're too damn

heavy because the armour inside the carrier was usually 1/4 or 5/16 inch thick steel armour plate.

These plates were flat or curved (bit of comfort to the wearer but not much) and covered the wearers

front & back. They weighed a ton...or so it seemed.

Today's body armour is becoming lighter in weight and slightly more comfortable however when

you add up what a soldier carries into battle plus the body armour (if the soldier decides to wear it)

that soldier is humping plenty of kilos & the weight causes one to wear down quickly which reduces

battle effiency quickly.

There is Level 4 body armour available today that will take multiple hits with 7.62x39 or 7.62x51

that will enable high survivability of the person wearing it....but it's still heavy...and very expensive.

However...if the bad guy doing the shooting uses a 12.7mm (.50 cal) no body armour of today

will save the wearer.

Google terminal ballistics vs body armour for more info....the nfo is out there. What I have written

is from personal experience beginning in 1971 through to 2008.

Hope this helps you & other readers.