Pick-up seating ban a slap in the face for Thailand's poor!

[elgordo38]

1 minute ago, cruisemonkey said:

Only in Thailand -

We're not going to enforce the law... we're going to let you do something illegal and incredibly dangerous because the alternative (riding busses) is incredibly dangerous as the drivers are likely to be drunk and/or stoned, untrained and the vehicles poorly maintained... because we don't enforce the law.

Your talking in riddles but I can follow you. 

[kiwikeith]

2 hours ago, dotpoom said:

You certainly have a good point (even though I posted on the opposite side on here yesterday).

 

The centre of gravity changes when a pickup is loaded on the back especially with ten people standing on the back it becomes a suicide vehicle.

It is suicide to have passengers sitting in the back especially on highways where the speed limit (which is to high) is abused.

Look what happens in a rear ender on a overpass the passengers get flung out and over the barrier, happened in BK not long ago.

The video posted yesterday was horrific showing the pickup make a slight swerve and overturn throwing the overloaded passengers on the back everywhere.

I think Thais get a special price on pickups as the are regarded as farm vehicles.

Time to give a subsidy on 6 or ten seater vans for the poor.

 

It is ridiculous for Thai Rath to say that pickups should have the back enclosed by law.

It is stupid of them to say this law is an insult to the poor, this law will save lives if enforced, angry Thais show no respect for safety of lives over this.

The motor bike situation needs to be addressed seriously as well as it scares the hell out of me to see babies and children with no protection. 

 

Seriously the government needs to lower the speed limits and get some speed cameras out there along with real traffic police.

 

[Eric Loh]

Evidently the problem lays with the poor who can't afford the car nor making seats and roof for their pick-up. The real problem is that poverty is widespread and the wealth pie is not evenly distributed. With 7.1 M Thais still living in poverty and another 6.7 M vulnerable to falling back into poverty especially in NE, North and deep south, the solution to the problem is not about the ban but it is all about closing the income inequality and lifting the income of the poor. Lifting average pay and creating more opportunities for earning a good income through better education and economic development in those provinces that have been neglected for too long. This is where the increase of military budget for submarines and tanks have all gone wrong and blatant disregard for the poor and that's really a slap for Thailand's poor. 

[LotusBoy]

Boo Hoo Hoooooo

 

Is it only people that are banned in the back of pickups? What about the monthly sick buffalo? Can he still travel to hop-i-tal? 

[elgordo38]

7 minutes ago, kiwikeith said:

 

The centre of gravity changes when a pickup is loaded on the back especially with ten people standing on the back it becomes a suicide vehicle.

It is suicide to have passengers sitting in the back especially on highways where the speed limit (which is to high) is abused.

Look what happens in a rear ender on a overpass the passengers get flung out and over the barrier, happened in BK not long ago.

The video posted yesterday was horrific showing the pickup make a slight swerve and overturn throwing the overloaded passengers on the back everywhere.

I think Thais get a special price on pickups as the are regarded as farm vehicles.

Time to give a subsidy on 6 or ten seater vans for the poor.

 

It is ridiculous for Thai Rath to say that pickups should have the back enclosed by law.

It is stupid of them to say this law is an insult to the poor, this law will save lives if enforced, angry Thais show no respect for safety of lives over this.

The motor bike situation needs to be addressed seriously as well as it scares the hell out of me to see babies and children with no protection. 

 

Seriously the government needs to lower the speed limits and get some speed cameras out there along with real traffic police.

 

Sad to say but human beings are now collateral damage not just in war but in real life. If it comes to collateral damage vs money spent and enforcement you know yourself which side wins. 

[Dagnabbit]

I think that if it is to be enforced they really need to look into how they enforce it. While I cringe when I see a loaded pick-up flying down the highway as the article alluded to what is the option for these people? mini buses, vans, normal buses even the trains aren't safe in Thailand and certainly no more safe than people travelling in a pick up. I do believe it will effect the poor particularly in rural areas and will lead to more people 4 and 5 upping on motorcycles or overloading the family saleng. Again neither option is safer. This week I have been getting my farms ready. Everyday I have had 8-10 people in the back of my truck to get them where they are going. The other option would have been 2 or 3 trips round numerous villages and then out to the farm. On longer journeys what's the solution you take 10 pick ups off the road with @7 in the back that's another 70 people who are now going to be travelling on the roads in modes of transport realistically not much or potentially less safe than the one they are being dissuaded from. If people want to travel in the back of a pick up I think it should be allowed. Unless of course they are going to simultaneously clean up every other shitty illegal thing that happens here that makes it so dangerous to travel on the roads.

 

Perhaps if you paid these people more, they could get themselves to your farm.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[gwynt]

18 hours ago, DavisH said:

At least now I can get my wife to wear the seat belt in the back lol

 

Everyone who travels in my car wears a seat belt or the car don't move. 

[SpeakeasyThai]

1 hour ago, DavisH said:

I'm even allowed to drive her car lol.....and get the privilege of filling it with petrol too. I'm a spoiled git. 

I would love to know how many miles to the gallon you get for personal use. I had a girlfriend who used to let me use her car, a small Mitsubihisi Mirage that was as about econominal as an old 1970's Jaguar. Oddly enough i left her and my wallet is now a lot more healthier not driving her gas guzzling Mirage! Lovely girl.

[diehard60]

2 hours ago, gabruce said:

One issue I have with this law, and many of the commenters is the belief that they know better than someone else and so they need to tell stupid people what they can and cannot do and make them do what they are supposed to do.

well someone has to tell them, the cops sure as hell don't. And they (the cops) see it. And are too lazy to do anything about it - in the rural areas and small Ampors

[TheFishman1]

TIT

[ratcatcher]

19 hours ago, mercman24 said:

one paragraph says it all, "everyone knows it is illegal to travel in the cargo bay of a pick up,  whats the cost of a pick up now a days ,1-5 million ?? for a "poor" family"  same old story flaunting the law for years, same as "poor" families buying  30,/ 40,000 baht scooters and cant affford helmets.

"...whats the cost of a pick up now a days ,1-5 million ??"

It may well cost B1.5 million if the buyer wants a top of the line Toyota  4 x 4 loaded.  The problem is that in rural areas and many towns, usually one of the family members owns a low to mid priced  truck and all the others pile in when a local trip is needed. At Songkran hundreds of thousands of Thais pile into the pickup owned by the luckiest family member or friend and head back to their town and villages up-country for a few days. They put their lives in the hands of someone who may not be a responsible driver and hope for the best.

Toyota prices below.

http://www.toyota.co.th/en/model/hilux_revo_double_cab

[Stargeezr]

Why is the PM  so hated by you expats, and why is Mr. T such a hero when he bouht his way into power.

Yes corruption was alive and well with Mr. T in power, and also his bught in sister, yet so many think  that

was a true democratic government. Do not forget all the generals before Mr. T, and their working and then

switching out to yet another general, that was the past.  Don't any one of you want  a  true democratic

government who was not bought into power, because I certainly do,  and  I do not care if the present

PM has to remain in power for a couple years longer.  The pickup enforcement may be hard on the poor

but, to limit the back to 5 or less people would be a good start. Cleaning up the mini van and the over

tired and over worked drivers would also help.  Keeping up with not enforcing the laws will keep the death

and injury levels as high as they are today, and no one really wants that.

Geezer

[Muhendis]

It is not a slap in the face for the poor. That is a troll attempt from Thairath because there is nothing to stop an employer from making a Songthaew available for ferrying his workers to and from site.

[JGV]

It is hilarious to read about poor people with only their pick up to provide services

The same pick up costs 2 to 300,00 Baht - wow so poor

The issue is about safety on the roads and yes it is only one example of potential danger but stop using this argument that it hasn't been enforced for years and people are aware of the risks - what about children do they know the risks

Enforce the law and Songram comes once a year so save up for a bus ticket

I am fed up of these pathetic excuses to avoid law enforcement

[Eric Loh]

16 minutes ago, Stargrazer9889 said:

Why is the PM  so hated by you expats

I like him better if he was elected.

[PatOngo]

Expect to see five people on a mo-cy more frequently from now on.

The wealth of the poor is not likely to improve any time soon!

Edited April 7, 2017 by PatOngo

[Cranky]

What a nonsensical debate.  If people want to sit in the back of a pick-up, let 'em, same as crash helmet enforcement, or 6 to a motorbike, or riding the wrong way up the road to save a few kilometres, or riding motorbike taxis on the pavement, or totally knackered buses belching out the equivalent pollution of 100 cars or, or, or etc. etc..  

 

There is no rule-of-law in this country, only a system of fines and bribes, practically ALL 'laws' are applied in this manner.  Let's take something trivial, like murder for example, seems fairly straightforward to get out of that with enough dosh.  Rape and Double Murder, easy to pass the buck on that one.  Responsible for wiping out a minivan full of people, community service, but sentence ignored.  

 

Minivan drivers must be laughing with the 'law' focussing on something else for now.

[TKDfella]

'...But everyone has accepted that it is not enforced. To suddenly announce that it would be enforced is unfair, especially to the poor...' Unfair? No one thought it unfair to re-enforce old immigration laws for expats. In my view, there are two options; if police don't wish to enforce it then lobby to have it scrapped; don't want to scrap it, then enforce it.

[thesetat2013]

Hard to believe that TV  is calling this a top story. 

Even harder to swallow is that Thairath is using the poor me card. 

If it is the law, then it should be followed regardless until the law is changed.  The fact that anyone can go but a car or motorcycle without a license to drive, that the police cant even enforce a stupid helmet law, nor any other related driving laws. Makes this about the dumbest article I have read in a while.  

Why is it that Thais continually make it use excuses for not doing something the way it should be? 

It seems the news also is encouraging this sort of irresponsibility. 

So what if it wasn't fully enforced before. This is a police issue, not a loor thais problem.. The poor thais driving should have been aware of this law before and been following the law during their driving history. 

Thai Rath should be ashamed of themselves for allowing this to be in print. 

[csabo]

  Pick coconuts all day then get hit with a fine on the way home. Gets harder and harder to raise a monkey family here.

 

[tigermoth]

What in the name of hell is the matter with these people. Seat belts now enforced in all seats of a vehicle yet people numbering up to 20 allowed to travel in the back of a pickup completely unrestrained. No wonder this country has the 2nd highest road toll for deaths in the world. Unfair to the poor, total bullshit. It must be some form of population control that the govt. follows. There are usually small children in these pickups as well. For the sake of these peoples lives enforce the rule. It will not inconvenience the poor it will just become a normal part of their lives which they have had to adapt to, just like getting dressed every morning or having to work for a living.  It will save countless lives and family suffering.

[EnlightenedAtheist]

16 hours ago, robsamui said:

Once again it's all upside-down and back-to-front. Thais seem to have an entirely off-the-wall thinking set about everything, compared to the rest of the world. Some people might even say they don't have much common sense.

The aim of the exercise is safety on the roads. The General has clearly stated this. And because international statistics show that seat belts save lives, that's what he's banging on about, this time around.

Similarly, the more people in the back of a pick-up, the higher the centre of gravity and the more unstable it becomes.

 

However the single biggest cause of road injuries in Thailand is neither of these things. It's drunk driving. 

 

And, no, putting up alcohol prices won't fix this.

 

It can only be addressed by hard and consistent work by the police - actually DOING something on a regular basis - not just testing drivers for alcohol on public holidays or after they've had a crash, but randomly, all the time, in the day as well as the night, stopping vehicles and testing for alcohol and drugs.

 

But it's easier to count heads in a pickup, isn't it. (As long as it's not double figures and the police run out of fingers to count on.) It doesn't require hard and continued work, day in and day out. It'll put too much strain on the police, having to actually do a job of work like this.

 

So, once again - exactly like the annual vow to reduce road deaths at New Year and Songkran, which has no effect at all as every year the death toll rises - we have another wild idea about safety that doesn't address the heart of the matter, or even come anywhere near it.

 

If Thailand wants to pick up on safety ideas from Western nations so it can look good to its neighbours, let's begin with the essential basics and work to train a police force to uphold those - then when they are in place and established and are being enforced,  maybe we can add the refinements and fine-tuning later.

 

That's the way it's done everywhere else.

 

It's only common sense, after all 

 

I agree. 

 

I wonder if you would suggest for heavy suspension of licences at first. I think a light licence will be seen as a warning. The money acquired should be used for anti-alcohol programs and AA programs perhaps, but govn't gets a lot of revenue from the sale --consumption of-- alcohol, as I am sure you know. That is one problem. However, if there are fewer accidents, there will be less of a need for more doctors and nurses which require taxes to pay though. It is the drinking and the driving that is the issue. How about regular and frequent scheduled public a/c buses (not unsafe songthaews) with schedules clearly defined at every stop, hiring songthaew drivers. Maybe the numbers won't add up, but they might.

[MorristheRunt]

44 minutes ago, thesetat2013 said:

Hard to believe that TV  is calling this a top story. 

Even harder to swallow is that Thairath is using the poor me card. 

If it is the law, then it should be followed regardless until the law is changed.  The fact that anyone can go but a car or motorcycle without a license to drive, that the police cant even enforce a stupid helmet law, nor any other related driving laws. Makes this about the dumbest article I have read in a while.  

Why is it that Thais continually make it use excuses for not doing something the way it should be? 

It seems the news also is encouraging this sort of irresponsibility. 

So what if it wasn't fully enforced before. This is a police issue, not a loor thais problem.. The poor thais driving should have been aware of this law before and been following the law during their driving history. 

Thai Rath should be ashamed of themselves for allowing this to be in print. 

Hey you, you not understand, you not Thai

[moe666]

It hasn't been that long ago that multiply people riding in the back of pick-ups was just fine in the US especially the southwest. It isn't the people riding in the back who cause the accident but the guy in the front right seat

[ResandePohm]

19 hours ago, johng said:

Seat belts in pickup trucks is the last in a very very long list of laws that need enforcing...maybe they can start with enforcing the laws
about seizing power at the point of a gun and.....ooh I forgot.

johng I agree with you entirely. Many here TV moan incessantly about the nanny states they have left behind but here they are all now wanting the nanny state in Thailand telling people what they can and cannot do. Yes we all know that it is dangerous to ride in a pickup without safety belts but in Thailand everyone had the choice to take that risk if they wanted to. That is the whole point of not having the nanny state here. It allows the freedom of choice which is so lacking in Farangland. The Health and Safety laws in the UK are beyond belief. They do not allow any freedom of choice and take away any requirement for common sense.

If you consider it dangerous to ride in the back of a pickup then don't do it. Leave others to make their own judgement on the matter.

[Knocker33]

19 hours ago, Artisi said:

An interesting statistic would be the total number of deaths resulting from pick-up accidents compared to buses, vans and taxis, would think pick-ups would be well down the list. 

But as usual,  the powers that be shoot off mouth before putting brain in gear thinking what appears as a simple fix will cure all the road deaths - how about drink drive, speed, stupidity, not road worthy etc. 

I was just thinking the same.Over 70% of deaths on the road involve bikes.

And probably the next highest is mini vans and buses, yes there are probably deaths caused by travelling in pick ups but you will never stop them doing it .This is not Europe  ,UK or America where you have to put a hard hat and safety jacket to take a dump nowadays 

[richard_smith237]

6 minutes ago, ResandePohm said:

johng I agree with you entirely. Many here TV moan incessantly about the nanny states they have left behind but here they are all now wanting the nanny state in Thailand telling people what they can and cannot do. Yes we all know that it is dangerous to ride in a pickup without safety belts but in Thailand everyone had the choice to take that risk if they wanted to. That is the whole point of not having the nanny state here. It allows the freedom of choice which is so lacking in Farangland. The Health and Safety laws in the UK are beyond belief. They do not allow any freedom of choice and take away any requirement for common sense.

If you consider it dangerous to ride in the back of a pickup then don't do it. Leave others to make their own judgement on the matter.

While I agree that there are plenty of other perhaps more pressing issues, I disagree that the poor have freedom of choice. 

 

The poor are not afforded the freedom of choice for their choice is not informed. They are innocently ignorant and therefore indifferent to the dangers facing them.  For many, education specifically where safety is concerned is extremely poor.

 

The use of the phrase Nanny state in this context is fundamentally flawed... this is about saving lives. Those critical of the idea to improve safety and using the 'Nanny State' as a negative argument seem not to recognise the number of unnecessary deaths which could be avoided, or they do and just seem not to care for they misunderstand this who 'freedom of choice' idea (addressed above as not being a true freedom when those who may be affected are ill informed or uneducated).

 

The Thai authorities have failed to improve road safety, they have also failed to provide viable alternatives for many of those who may be effected especially outside of the main towns and cities. 

 

However, in Bangkok and other major cities and towns around Thailand there are viable transport options available. Of course, these options are by no means as convenient as a car, but neither is taking the bus or a train in our Western countries when compared to simply getting in the car.

 

Thus, making the alternatives a better option also includes law enforcement, lives will be saved. This is not the nanny state, it is the start of a government caring for the welfare of those who may otherwise succumb to their innocent ignorance where safety on the roads is concerned.

 

As such, a multifaceted approach is required on all fronts - consistent enforcement, improvement and better public transport options, education (particularly safety in this case)....  

 

.....Of course, for some this is the 'nanny state'... but they could equally use the 'nanny state' as an argument against any form of civilisation....

[Hereinthailand]

Whatever happened to freewill and choice ? I dont believe in people riding in the back of trucks but if others wish to take the chance who am I to tell them no ? We have been shopping for a pickup lately, with this new law the extended cab model is def off the list now. Making the car payment is enough I wont be making numerous others to certain people.

[ALFREDO]

22 hours ago, mercman24 said:

one paragraph says it all, "everyone knows it is illegal to travel in the cargo bay of a pick up,  whats the cost of a pick up now a days ,1-5 million ?? for a "poor" family"  same old story flaunting the law for years, same as "poor" families buying  30,/ 40,000 baht scooters and cant affford helmets.

What?

Cost of a new Pick up starts at 55o.ooo.- up to 1.300.000 - Baht,  You do not know facts. 

 

Also the Pick ups are mostly not new and the owners of the Pick up let other family members or friends or just paying passengers drive with them - for free or for some sum.

 

The people sitting behind on the Pick up are usually not the OWNER lol,  just others who cannot afford there own vehicle. 

 

Comedown from your high horse and start thinking before giving such a lame statement.  

 

Thai Rath - wrote it right - maybe read there first, then post!  

 

[ALFREDO]

1 hour ago, tigermoth said:

What in the name of hell is the matter with these people. Seat belts now enforced in all seats of a vehicle yet people numbering up to 20 allowed to travel in the back of a pickup completely unrestrained. No wonder this country has the 2nd highest road toll for deaths in the world. Unfair to the poor, total bullshit. It must be some form of population control that the govt. follows. There are usually small children in these pickups as well. For the sake of these peoples lives enforce the rule. It will not inconvenience the poor it will just become a normal part of their lives which they have had to adapt to, just like getting dressed every morning or having to work for a living.  It will save countless lives and family suffering.

I wish you to be reborn as a really poor Thai and can go now where as you would only get a seat behind  on a Pick Up, but that is not possible anymore. 

So buy some Lao Khao and get drunk, all the time. lol