Accident today in Chalong

[stupidfarang]

9 hours ago, Psimbo said:

I'm curious as to what people find to be the problem. There are people on scene and on phones within 30 seconds. What purpose would be served by loads of vehicles stopping? In the past it has just caused MORE accidents. How do you know the vehicle DIDN'T stop just out of range of the camera.

 

Maybe if the guy hadn't ridden into a vehicle that was clearly visible and was wearing a helmet I would feel a bit more sympathetic. 

 

I not that he actually had a green turn filter and a lot of the vehicles headed north actually ran the red in their lane. Too many people too quick to judge without being aware of the facts.

Yes true we do not know if the car stopped out of range of the camera, but why did the car not stop at any stage during the time it was captured by the camera? 

[steelepulse]

The white car definitely blew through a red light as there is usually a 2-3 second delay between red and when the next light turns green.  Not uncommon to see a number of cars run red lights at pretty much every signal on the island.

[Valentine]

I have seen quite a few cars go through that particular intersection after the light stops being green, I have done it myself. There seems to be a delay for the light to turn red & so it can be a bit confusing especially when the vehicles opposite have not started to move. The other thing about that intersection is coming from the side road (one on the left when heading south) & their light turns red many vehicles think that is their cue to move when in actual fact a green light goes on for the side street next to the school.

However, on all traffic light intersections it seems to be accepted, by most, that it is best to wait for the cars opposite to actually stop before proceeding to turn right. Unfortunately for the poor soul in the video he did not follow this unwritten rule.

[muzmurray]

12 hours ago, KarenBravo said:

There is no good Samaritan clause in Thailand.

I would call an ambulance, but, I wouldn't touch the victim........too much risk.

It goes against all the values I was taught, but, the first rule of safety when helping others is to make sure you are safe first.

 

I'm not going to take the chance of having my life ruined just because I tried to do the right thing.

 

Thailand Public Health & Safety Laws

Q. Since arriving here, I have heard that there is no Samaritan law shielding those trying to help someone who is injured. Is this true? Are you legally responsible for trying to help someone who may die if you do nothing? My first instinct would be to try to help someone if possible. However, if this opens you up to lawsuits, I would be very hesitant to help except in the most dire circumstances. Therefore, I thought it might be helpful to get a professional opinion.

Thai Lawyer's Response

According to the Criminal Code, Section 5, 5th paragraph, if you have training in first aid that enables you to save lives, you are by law required to help, but if you are a normal Samaritan with no training you are not legally required to help. You normally are not responsible of the outcome if you tried to help.

Q. I have been CPR/First Aid/Aed certifed in thailand 3 times. I will always keep my AED cert. Each time I recrert for CPR, we are told, even as a 'layperson' holding an AED cert, legally here, we are not allowed to use them. When I had a buisness 2 years ago, I wanted one in, i was told the same thing by the lawyer. I have just been told that this is a lie, that an layperson (untrained professionally) who is Certified to use an AED, it is not illegal here. Has this law changed since Nov 2013?

Thai Lawyer's Response

A layperson can use an AED legally and you will not have any legal implications, but if you are a doctor then you will be legally liable.

 

https://www.firstaidtrainingbangkok.com/about/good-samaritan-laws.html

[stevenl]

29 minutes ago, muzmurray said:

 

Thailand Public Health & Safety Laws

Q. Since arriving here, I have heard that there is no Samaritan law shielding those trying to help someone who is injured. Is this true? Are you legally responsible for trying to help someone who may die if you do nothing? My first instinct would be to try to help someone if possible. However, if this opens you up to lawsuits, I would be very hesitant to help except in the most dire circumstances. Therefore, I thought it might be helpful to get a professional opinion.

Thai Lawyer's Response

According to the Criminal Code, Section 5, 5th paragraph, if you have training in first aid that enables you to save lives, you are by law required to help, but if you are a normal Samaritan with no training you are not legally required to help. You normally are not responsible of the outcome if you tried to help.

Q. I have been CPR/First Aid/Aed certifed in thailand 3 times. I will always keep my AED cert. Each time I recrert for CPR, we are told, even as a 'layperson' holding an AED cert, legally here, we are not allowed to use them. When I had a buisness 2 years ago, I wanted one in, i was told the same thing by the lawyer. I have just been told that this is a lie, that an layperson (untrained professionally) who is Certified to use an AED, it is not illegal here. Has this law changed since Nov 2013?

Thai Lawyer's Response

A layperson can use an AED legally and you will not have any legal implications, but if you are a doctor then you will be legally liable.

 

https://www.firstaidtrainingbangkok.com/about/good-samaritan-laws.html

No, this law has not changed. People saying AED's can not be legally used and there are no good Samaritan laws are just spreading incorrect information they themselves picked up from not knowledgeable wives, internet, etc.

[Valentine]

1 hour ago, stevenl said:

No, this law has not changed. People saying AED's can not be legally used and there are no good Samaritan laws are just spreading incorrect information they themselves picked up from not knowledgeable wives, internet, etc.

Probably stems from the notion that Farangs get blamed for everything even when not wrong.

[stevenl]

3 minutes ago, Valentine said:

Probably stems from the notion that Farangs get blamed for everything even when not wrong.

Which is another misconception (or urban myth).

[KarenBravo]

OK, there does seem to be a good Samaritan law, but........

 

Sorry, but, to quote a law in a country that has scant regard for the rule of law, is not really the answer.

It certainly doesn't change my mind about not helping. How does this law protect you from mob justice, or, for being used as a scape-goat so that the injured can make some money?

 

Every Thai that I've asked about stopping to help, has told me not to and that I could get into a lot of unforeseen problems.

If the Thais themselves say this, who am I to argue?

 

Call me selfish, but, my first responsibility is to myself and those that rely on me.

[stevenl]

14 minutes ago, KarenBravo said:

OK, there does seem to be a good Samaritan law, but........

 

Sorry, but, to quote a law in a country that has scant regard for the rule of law, is not really the answer.

It certainly doesn't change my mind about not helping. How does this law protect you from mob justice, or, for being used as a scape-goat so that the injured can make some money?

 

Every Thai that I've asked about stopping to help, has told me not to and that I could get into a lot of unforeseen problems.

If the Thais themselves say this, who am I to argue?

 

Call me selfish, but, my first responsibility is to myself and those that rely on me.

"If the Thais themselves say this, who am I to argue?"

Somebody with different moral standards?

[KarenBravo]

Not at all. Just I'm not willing to take the chance that people with different moral standards will penalize/victimize me for having and acting on those different moral standards.

 

You want to take the risk Steven, that's up to you. It's a personal decision and I made mine long ago and the reasons for that decision have not changed, or, gone away.

[stevenl]

3 minutes ago, KarenBravo said:

Not at all. Just I'm not willing to take the chance that people with different moral standards will penalize/victimize me for having and acting on those different moral standards.

 

You want to take the risk Steven, that's up to you. It's a personal decision and I made mine long ago and the reasons for that decision have not changed, or, gone away.

Yes, very much a personal choice, and your decision.

 

However, you now say the reasons for that decision have not changed, even though according to your first post in this thread you make this decision on incorrect information " There is no good Samaritan clause in Thailand. ".

[KarenBravo]

15 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Yes, very much a personal choice, and your decision.

 

However, you now say the reasons for that decision have not changed, even though according to your first post in this thread you make this decision on incorrect information " There is no good Samaritan clause in Thailand. ".

 

Two reasons. First I thought there was no good Samaritan clause, but, also the possibility of being stitched up, which is why the Thai people I know have all advised not to stop.

In my first post I only pointed out one reason (which I felt was enough).

Now that I know that there is a good Samaritan clause that's one reason gone. The other is still there and frankly, it won't change.

 

If others disapprove, I really couldn't give a small, furry rodents behind.

 

PS. If, as you say the Thais have different moral standards, then, wouldn't that also apply to the victim? Does that not make my decision valid?

Edited September 5, 2016 by KarenBravo

[stevenl]

27 minutes ago, KarenBravo said:

 

Two reasons. First I thought there was no good Samaritan clause, but, also the possibility of being stitched up, which is why the Thai people I know have all advised not to stop.

In my first post I only pointed out one reason (which I felt was enough).

Now that I know that there is a good Samaritan clause that's one reason gone. The other is still there and frankly, it won't change.

 

If others disapprove, I really couldn't give a small, furry rodents behind.

 

PS. If, as you say the Thais have different moral standards, then, wouldn't that also apply to the victim? Does that not make my decision valid?

Sorry, no, I am not basing any decision to assist yes or no on the victim's nationality/skin colour, etc.

 

But I think enough of this, you have your reasons for your decision, and have made those reasons clear. I am of a different opinion.

[bearpolar]

15 hours ago, lostinisaan said:

  

     It seems that the guy on the motorbike had green, watching the others making their turn. The guy in the white car doens't seem to know what he's doing. he could have made a sharp turn and prevented the crash.

 

   The guy on the motorbike first thought the car would go straight. How could he have avoided that crash?

 

       I drive bikes since 40 years, the only chance would have been to accelerate. Sad to see such car drivers on the road.

 

   Just read that the guy died. RIP, it wasn't your fault. 

 

 

That effin light has no yellow(the red takes forever to show up and its dim) so an unaware driver thinks it's simply out and the main road has the right of way.

 

Not "happy" about the death of a man, but we should take this as a positive. Once the car driver is found, he'll maybe get jailed and we do not have to worry about this dangerous motorbike driver, accelerating into incoming cars, anymore .

[Ace of Pop]

What's this attitude towards Traffic LightsThey are an aid,not Right of Passage.Go if it's safe to do so ,not piss off it's my right like so many idiots,more so the Young think it isPerhaps if all parties were guilty regardless it would make em change their ME Right it's Green mentality..I'm Right but Rater Dead ,ah well


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[stevenl]

The driver has been charged and apparently did not flee, see