Public backlash as Thais slam new pick-up passenger rules

[Maigaw6]

22 hours ago, jaltsc said:

In this case, people will continue to do what is convenient for them. Perhaps the only law that will affect them is that of natural selection. Unfortunately, there will be many innocent children who will affected by their elders stupidity.

It's amazing the overall view from many posters here that Thais are stupid. This really is arrogant. Just stop for a moment and remember that you come from developed countries and Thailand is a developing one, and not long ago was a 3rd world one. 

To the poster who said the above, I have a question. Did your parents allow you to ride in their car with no seatbelts on? 

Did the have adequate baby seats in their car? If your answers are yes and no, then do you agree that in your thinking, they were stupid?

Thailand is developing so get off your high horse and stop the self-righteous judgement of the Thais as a nation. 

I'm sure your countries have much wrong with them too, corruption etc.

We only know we were asleep when we wake up - my father gave me hell for smoking in my house with children there, even though I was in another room. he used to smoke when we were in the car! He didn't know then -was he stupid? No, I don't think so but everyone did it. Many people in my town drove drunk. We didn't wear m/c helmets and most still would rather not.

Ultimately, it's up to the Thais to decide. Ever heard of Democracy? But let's lay of the "holier than thou" insulting of the Thais. Rather ironic as most of the foreigners that I know around my area take advantage of Thailand's "developing status" by living cheaply, taking advantage of poor country girls, marrying for the subservient nature of them etc etc

[Miaow]

47 minutes ago, Maigaw6 said:

It's amazing the overall view from many posters here that Thais are stupid. This really is arrogant. Just stop for a moment and remember that you come from developed countries and Thailand is a developing one, and not long ago was a 3rd world one. 

To the poster who said the above, I have a question. Did your parents allow you to ride in their car with no seatbelts on? 

Did the have adequate baby seats in their car? If your answers are yes and no, then do you agree that in your thinking, they were stupid?

Thailand is developing so get off your high horse and stop the self-righteous judgement of the Thais as a nation. 

I'm sure your countries have much wrong with them too, corruption etc.

We only know we were asleep when we wake up - my father gave me hell for smoking in my house with children there, even though I was in another room. he used to smoke when we were in the car! He didn't know then -was he stupid? No, I don't think so but everyone did it. Many people in my town drove drunk. We didn't wear m/c helmets and most still would rather not.

Ultimately, it's up to the Thais to decide. Ever heard of Democracy? But let's lay of the "holier than thou" insulting of the Thais. Rather ironic as most of the foreigners that I know around my area take advantage of Thailand's "developing status" by living cheaply, taking advantage of poor country girls, marrying for the subservient nature of them etc etc

I think every foreigner caught bashing Thais should get an appointment with immigration to explain further what their comment really meant...See who would feel stupid then....

[richard_smith237]

3 minutes ago, Miaow said:

I think every foreigner caught bashing Thais should get an appointment with immigration to explain further what their comment really meant...See who would feel stupid then....

 

What about every Thai who bashes the daft actions of many here in Thailand ?... 

... if you were to read Thai Forums such as Panthip you see that many of the complaints and comments repeat what is discussed here...

... Adding to your comments; one of my friends is an Immigration Officer (Colonel) - we discuss such issues amongst many others regularly... you see, people are people we see many of the same issues and draw the same conclusions. There is no 'them and us' you would find that the majority of your opinions correspond very closely to those of your Thai neighbours, the difference being that the Thai neighbour is less inclined to express these opinions in a forum for foreigners. 

 

Its seems to me that the point you are trying to make is that as we are not Thai we have no right to any opinion which paints Thailand or Thai's in a negative light. I disagree - We all have rights to an opinion and to voice it, especially on discussion forums such as this.

....I also believe that with that right comes the responsibility not to be unfair, overly bias or insulting. 

[Miaow]

3 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

What about every Thai who bashes the daft actions of many here in Thailand ?... 

... if you were to read Thai Forums such as Panthip you see that many of the complaints and comments repeat what is discussed here...

... Adding to your comments; one of my friends is an Immigration Officer (Colonel) - we discuss such issues amongst many others regularly... you see, people are people we see many of the same issues and draw the same conclusions. There is no 'them and us' you would find that the majority of your opinions correspond very closely to those of your Thai neighbours, the difference being that the Thai neighbour is less inclined to express these opinions in a forum for foreigners. 

 

Its seems to me that the point you are trying to make is that as we are not Thai we have no right to any opinion which paints Thailand or Thai's in a negative light. I disagree - We all have rights to an opinion and to voice it, especially on discussion forums such as this.

....I also believe that with that right comes the responsibility not to be unfair, overly bias or insulting. 

Well, i am fluent in Thai, spoken or written, discuss with Thai friends and neighbours on a daily baisis, read Thai newspapers and social media and i tell you, you would be surprised how expressive they are  if you can hold a converstaion with them for more than 5 minutes....They are everything but stupid...Calling anybody stupid cos you dont agree with them is pathetic, dont matter if you're Thai or farang...It gets really redondant....

[richard_smith237]

3 minutes ago, Miaow said:

Well, i am fluent in Thai, spoken or written, discuss with Thai friends and neighbours on a daily baisis, read Thai newspapers and social media and i tell you, you would be surprised how expressive they are  if you can hold a converstaion with them for more than 5 minutes....They are everything but stupid...Calling anybody stupid cos you dont agree with them is pathetic, dont matter if you're Thai or farang...It gets really redondant....

 

Agreed - I think we were making a similar point. 

[Humpy]

 I notice my comment has  gone again !!!!!!

[Miaow]

3 minutes ago, Humpy said:

 I notice my comment has  gone again !!!!!!

I seen it fly by a minute ago...

[Jai Dee]

9 minutes ago, Humpy said:

 I notice my comment has  gone again !!!!!!

You are looking in the wrong topic.

 

Here it is.

[Notadoctor]

2 hours ago, harrry said:

As you  bring up Austrlaia you should know that you do not have to wear seatbelts in Australia if they re not fitted and were not fitted as original maanafacture of the vehicle.  You will find thaT olderr vehicles do not have seat belts and they do not have to be worn.

As a comparison to anything Australia is not that good as it has a pretty bad road safety record, that is only improving through a long drawn out campaigns in both the states and nationwide. They unlike Thailand have looked to international science for help

[AdamR71]

I like the freedoms of Thais, but then I don't like to see their brains being scraped off the road. It's often a question of money - not everyone can afford safety!

Sent from my HTC 10 using Thaivisa Connect mobile app

[Elkski]

We all know riding in the back if a pickup is dangerous.  I have done it in the USA.  Enforcement of these laws is a good idea but I think it would need to be implemented after a large year long education campaign.  It's physics and human frailty.   

I guess Thailand needs minivans like large families have used.   It's the right thing to do but will take many years of education.  You can't enforce this sort of thing.   You need to educate so that people wont want to ride in the back.  I guess the problem is exacerbated by some kind of tax on vehicles that have more seat belts or something?

[steve73]

So if songtheaw's are excepted, what to stop someone buying a used (or new) ST, and putting the whole family in the back..?

[Notadoctor]

1 hour ago, AdamR71 said:

I like the freedoms of Thais, but then I don't like to see their brains being scraped off the road. It's often a question of money - not everyone can afford safety!

Sent from my HTC 10 using Thaivisa Connect mobile app
 

Safety SAVES money.

[thaisail]

I heard a rumor that the government is backing down on this new law about pick up trucks. Can anyone update me on the latest? I have an Open Cab Ford Ranger Wild Track and I fitted seatbelts in the back from Ford company. Am I still allowed to have my daughter in the back seat if she is attached with the seatbelt?
 

[thaisail]

I just heard from another source that on the island of Phuket, this new law will not be enforced but as soon as we leave Phuket Island for the mainland, I will have to follow the new law. Is there another thread that follows the latest story about changing the law back to the way it was before? I am planning to drive from Phuket to Bangkok with my 9 year old daughter strapped into her Ford supplied seat belt with built in brake. 

[BEVUP]

4 hours ago, thaisail said:

I just heard from another source that on the island of Phuket, this new law will not be enforced but as soon as we leave Phuket Island for the mainland, I will have to follow the new law. Is there another thread that follows the latest story about changing the law back to the way it was before? I am planning to drive from Phuket to Bangkok with my 9 year old daughter strapped into her Ford supplied seat belt with built in brake. 

I notice that a couple of posters here are not getting the fact that a ford which was designed to take the rear seat belts doesn't say Toyota Vigo on the front of it 

& as i noted if correct or maybe not a Toyota Smart Cab Vigo prior to 2009 was not fitted with mountings

am in the process of checking now but is not looking good 

So can any one back this up

[eeyang wah]

On 05/04/2017 at 6:59 PM, NormanW said:

I remember the outrage of compulsory seatbeltsin England in 1979 I think. 

 

Great move to ban people sitting in back of a pick-up. And seatbelts all round  (if fitted). 

 

You watch some people will actually remove them now!!!

Anyone that removes a seatbelt deserves everything that's coming to them. 

[Elkski]

A very low % of crashes result in fire or deaths cased by fire.  Seat belt placement and design and testing is a very large expense for car manufactures.  It is not something any mechanic can do with assurances.. His liability is high.. Why would he do it?. Some cars may have tested and reinforced anchor points in the car but I assume there is some tax reason to not install them in Thailand?   Seat belts keep a person inside the car rather than being ejected. They also keep passengers from hitting each other and hard objects inside the car... It is very important that the belt starts to decelerate the person immediately rather than let the person impact the dashboard.

One very important measurement of a life sustaining crash is the acceleration or actually the deceleration rate.  Deceleration is measured by change in velocity.  
So time is a very critical factor. Having the seat belt begin the deceleration immediately and allowing the cars designed crumple zone to extend the time to zero velocity is critical.  Seat belts help decelerate the fragile human body over a longer time greatly influencing the impulse force and deceleration curves. The human brain can only handle so much impact with the skull. IE.: deceleration. 

This is why is is so important to not crash into a  solid fixed object and head on crashes are so deadly. especially if you are the lower mass vehicle. In this case the velocity change (G forces) is drastically different between the vehicle that continues forward and the one who changed direction in the same time frame.

 

I remember in the 60's that seatbelts were not used much.. I remember laying in the back window on trips in the old impala in the mid 60's.  No other car honked or expressed outrage but that would not be the case today..

It takes 50 years to change habits... But I am very concerned at how many of you are complaining about this well intentions however poorly implemented idea... I expected more education and common sense out of the average  farang..  I guess it is true that the average Farang  who retired to Thailand is not the sharpest from his home country. I hate to be so blunt but it seems to be so obvious to me.

[jojothai]

51 minutes ago, Elkski said:

A very low % of crashes result in fire or deaths cased by fire.  .....

,,, etc

 

It takes 50 years to change habits... But I am very concerned at how many of you are complaining about this well intentions however poorly implemented idea... I expected more education and common sense out of the average  farang..  I guess it is true that the average Farang  who retired to Thailand is not the sharpest from his home country. I hate to be so blunt but it seems to be so obvious to me.

 

It is not well intentioned when it is going to force many more people onto motorbikes to get around .

 

I remember the headlines  from only a few years ago. WHO reports 74% of fatalities on the road are motorcycle riders.

Worst ever  New year 2017? "In total, 3,919 accidents occurred between Dec 29 and Jan 4, killing 478 and injuring 4,128 people.

Most of the accidents (36.6%) were caused by drink driving, followed by speeding (31.31%). Most, or 81.82%, involved motorcycles, and 8% pick-up trucks.

Doesnt anybody have the sense to assess these statistics.

It is obvious to me that there needs to be some thought given to considering the justification and consequences of the new rules, and what it will cause, instead of a bigotted single mindedness to do what some people think is a good idea. 

 

It will not only likely put more lives at risk, but also affect the livelihood of many poor people who will have to find other means to get to work.

 

I dont believe  that forcing people onto motorbikes is common sense.

I doubt that anybody will be able to give you statistics that will make any sense for forcing this change. 

 

Although we hear a lot about drunken driving of motorbikes, the deaths are often not the fault of the motorbike drivers who are hit by speeding vehicles. Are these same speeding vehicles the pickups carrying people to their jobs for a livelihood or for family outings?

I don't seem to see  these pickups racing around to kill people, unlike  the  incidents we see reported in the media - untouchables in bangkok, and the minivans that can take such a large toll on life.

Does anybody reading here  think that the pickups  transporting people  to work  (or families for outings to market / visit relatives) are the killing fields?  Please enlighten me.

Why force a lot more people onto motorbikes?  Do people not care how many more may be killed?

Its the poorest we are talking about here. Does it not matter.

 

Never mind the number of extra deaths it may cause due to the extra motor bikes on the road,  

Is it also common sense for the environment ?

 

 

 

[William C F Pierce]

Everywhere outside of BBK is Rural. A very pointless law and it's exceptions.

[gk10002000]

The rules are not new.  They have always been on the books to some extent.  Many of us I am sure remember or still do occasionally ride along in the back of a pickup truck, holding down the mattress or chair or whatever it is we are hauling some short distance.  The problem in Thailand is, many of the people are used to just driving around some dirt roads in a quiet village, then they go to a city and get on the main road and go 40 or 50 MPH or of course are on a road where other vehicles are going high speeds and things are dangerous.

[gk10002000]

On ‎4‎/‎5‎/‎2017 at 6:31 AM, Black arab said:

If this gets enforced it will take a while for things to change, thais cant see how dangerous this practise is .I pointed this out to my wifes family only last week , did they take any notice.What do you think!

And while laws are nice, the majority of Thai people are n the rural areas and don't maintain vehicles, barely have enough money to use them.  This is not a rich society where people have a lot of disposable in come.

[Elkski]

So if so many are so poor how will they afford to buy scooters?

Maybe there will be more taxi's maybe some people will have to buy different vehicles to transport their families safely.  Maybe some wages will have to rise to help pay for transportation that is safer... The main thing is more people may be alive and less maimed and less demand on the healthcare dollars.  I do agree you cant roll out some major new crackdown on the laws right before a big holiday... This issue needs to start with education in school and on tv.   We need to make people understand the human head is about as strong as a melon.   

[Moonlover]

On 4/5/2017 at 0:21 PM, thequietman said:

Daft question but can you pay the increased cash for tax and get the truck classed as a passenger vehicle ? it probably is based on the model of truck.

Yes, I think you're right. Daft question!

[ChiangMaiLightning2143]

Seatbelts won't help many here.
The way people many drive, agressive, unnecessary weaving, speeding, riding in truckbeds, no child seats. Drunk and high. Any policeman will tell you seatsbelts kill sometimes. Often when people get stuck in burning wrecks, or drown in canals anyway.

What is needed is mandatory gps for all vehicles, and speed limiting devices.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Moonlover]

9 hours ago, Elkski said:

A very low % of crashes result in fire or deaths cased by fire.  Seat belt placement and design and testing is a very large expense for car manufactures.  It is not something any mechanic can do with assurances.. His liability is high.. Why would he do it?. Some cars may have tested and reinforced anchor points in the car but I assume there is some tax reason to not install them in Thailand?   Seat belts keep a person inside the car rather than being ejected. They also keep passengers from hitting each other and hard objects inside the car... It is very important that the belt starts to decelerate the person immediately rather than let the person impact the dashboard.

One very important measurement of a life sustaining crash is the acceleration or actually the deceleration rate.  Deceleration is measured by change in velocity.  
So time is a very critical factor. Having the seat belt begin the deceleration immediately and allowing the cars designed crumple zone to extend the time to zero velocity is critical.  Seat belts help decelerate the fragile human body over a longer time greatly influencing the impulse force and deceleration curves. The human brain can only handle so much impact with the skull. IE.: deceleration. 

This is why is is so important to not crash into a  solid fixed object and head on crashes are so deadly. especially if you are the lower mass vehicle. In this case the velocity change (G forces) is drastically different between the vehicle that continues forward and the one who changed direction in the same time frame.

 

I remember in the 60's that seatbelts were not used much.. I remember laying in the back window on trips in the old impala in the mid 60's.  No other car honked or expressed outrage but that would not be the case today..

It takes 50 years to change habits... But I am very concerned at how many of you are complaining about this well intentions however poorly implemented idea... I expected more education and common sense out of the average  farang..  I guess it is true that the average Farang  who retired to Thailand is not the sharpest from his home country. I hate to be so blunt but it seems to be so obvious to me.

Anyone who is considering retro-fitting seat belts should read, very carefully, Elkski's submission above. 

 

Thanks for this Elkski. your post is excellent.

[NormanW]

Next debate: child seats!!!

 

[Moonlover]

14 hours ago, BEVUP said:

I notice that a couple of posters here are not getting the fact that a ford which was designed to take the rear seat belts doesn't say Toyota Vigo on the front of it 

& as i noted if correct or maybe not a Toyota Smart Cab Vigo prior to 2009 was not fitted with mountings

am in the process of checking now but is not looking good 

So can any one back this up

I'm very sure that a pick-up with an extended cab that has factory fitted seats and seat belts would comply with the law. Bevup, I'm sure you have nothing to worry about.

 

However extended cabs that do not come so equipped are a different matter and I doubt whether retro-fitments would be acceptable or safe. Read Elkski's submission above, particularly with regards to anchorage points. In that regard, retrofits would almost certainly not be up to standard.

[Moonlover]

8 minutes ago, NormanW said:

Next debate: child seats!!!

 

Oh I wish. The number of times I have sat and cringed, when travelling with my wife's niece!

 

Small child, sat on knee of unrestrained grandma in the front seat. Right in the firing line of a deadly airbag!

[tuktuktuk]

12 minutes ago, Moonlover said:

Oh I wish. The number of times I have sat and cringed, when travelling with my wife's niece!

 

Small child, sat on knee of unrestrained grandma in the front seat. Right in the firing line of a deadly airbag!

As I said in a related post, we bought a car seat for my wife's granddaughter.  Her parents tried it once and stopped because she didn't like it.  They say kids here aren't like in the US.  They can't stand to be restrained.  Kids in the US don't like it either, but after a few hours of screaming they usually surrender.