Big bike ran into back of Tuk Tuk so police breathalise the driver, but apparently not the big bike rifer.

Pretty difficult to breathalyse an unconscious person.

So? If you rear end someone you're always at fault, so that means the motorcyclist should be held responsible for this accident.

At face value, yes.

Big bike ran into back of Tuk Tuk so police breathalise the driver, but apparently not the big bike rifer.

Pretty difficult to breathalyse an unconscious person.

So? If you rear end someone you're always at fault, so that means the motorcyclist should be held responsible for this accident.

At face value, yes.

Normally true, but in this case the photographic evidence seems to suggest the motorcyclist side swiped the TT, which ties in with the "turning into Eneri's road" statement.

One would not expect rear ending it to cause it to tip sideways.

Not saying the tuk-tuk driver was drunk or not. But these tuk-tuks and red, white and yellow trucks think they own the road. Not at all safe and not following the Thai driving laws. Looking for passengers but do not care about road safety.

As this guy had 4 passengers on board I doubt he was looking for more.

I read that as a generalization about all TT drivers, not specific to this accident!

The opening sentence suggested otherwise.

True, but outvoted by three sentences to one!

The last of the three being specific to your four passengers comment.

Guilty as charged.

Completely disagree.

Not saying the tuk-tuk driver was drunk or not. But these tuk-tuks and red, white and yellow trucks think they own the road. Not at all safe and not following the Thai driving laws. Looking for passengers but do not care about road safety.

As this guy had 4 passengers on board I doubt he was looking for more.

I read that as a generalization about all TT drivers, not specific to this accident!

The opening sentence suggested otherwise.

True, but outvoted by three sentences to one!

The last of the three being specific to your four passengers comment.

Guilty as charged.

Completely disagree.

Possibly maths and logic are not your strong subjects (whereas no contest as far as rhetoric goes). Do not wish to be disputational and happy to be proven incorrect, but only on the factual grounds of English grammar.

Show me where I am wrong on mathematical or grammatical grounds and happy to dismiss the charges.

NB I expect I have to explain this is British Humour and not to be taken seriously or as a personal attack. I enjoy many of your posts. But I am curious as to how you arrive at your decision?

The opening to a piece of prose is in the estimation of this scribe the one that dictates the tone and direction of the rest of the content of the aforementioned prose.

Or

I just feel he was 'aving a pop like at the tuk tuk driver in this case.

Feel free to disagree with me.

Edit: I also am not taking this difference in views overly serious. Fact is we just interprete the post differently. Perhaps Nobb could enlighten us.

Edited April 15, 201610 yr by Bluespunk

The opening to a piece of prose is in the estimation of this scribe the one that dictates the tone and direction of the rest of the content of the aforementioned prose.

Or

I just feel he was 'aving a pop like at the tuk tuk driver in this case.

Feel free to disagree with me.

Edit: I also am not taking this difference in views overly serious. Fact is we just interprete the post differently. Perhaps Nobb could enlighten us.

Yes, good idea. Kop Jai.

But I must say that I have barely controllable urges to pop all TT drivers. Grrr.