Poll: Thais agree with pick-up seating ban - but few will obey entirely

[wirat69]

3 hours ago, billd766 said:

No but if you want an equal society there has to be some give and take.

As Orwell said "All Thais are equal.... but some Thais are more equal than others"!!!..... and so it was written 

 

 

[JAG]

2 hours ago, pentap said:

People carriers!

Are pick ups that much of a necessity?

I'm sitting at Jimmy's sports bar in Buri Ram, and can see countless pick ups passing by with nothing loaded into the flat beds.

More, for show than for the purpose pick ups are designed for.

The three or so hundred Baht which you have quite possibly spent in Jimmy's  Sports Bar this afternoon is probably a very large chunk, if not all of the daily disposable income of quite a number of the drivers of the older pick up trucks that you have observed passing by.

 

I'm not moralising on your drinking expenditure - that's entirely your own business, but perhaps you can see why just buying a "people carrier" is not an option for many?

 

This is the whole point - these regulations will effect disproportionately those who have no other option. .

[wgdanson]

2 hours ago, hansnl said:

No, they are not.

A ticket for speeding of 200 euro for a rich person is peanuts, for a poor person is more than half his weekly wages.

I know, I know, everybody is the same for the law, although I doubt that very much.

The fine for speeding in UK has just today gone up to 150% of your weekly wage if doing 51mph in a 30 zone or 101 on a motorway. Maybe something like that would work over here.

[jimster]

9 minutes ago, wgdanson said:

The fine for speeding in UK has just today gone up to 150% of your weekly wage if doing 51mph in a 30 zone or 101 on a motorway. Maybe something like that would work over here.

Oh no please don't make those kind of suggestions. Also, if the fines are too high they just won't be paid. Period.

 

Out of interest how much in Pounds are the speeding fines you speak of in the UK, just out of interest?

[Artisi]

It's either a yes or no answer,  but based on what? 

A full analysis of deaths in pickups needs to be undertaken looking at the number of deaths in relation to number of pickups on the road, number of people carried, distances travelled and number of deaths per accident. I wouldn't be surprised if the numbers were actually very low based on the above parameters. So is there a genuine case to answer. 

OK, limit it to 6 per vehicle with strict policing speed, alcohol and dangerous driving. 

[ttrd]

I believe that a temporary solution could be as a minimum to be able to carry "some" passenger behind require that it is mounted a CarryBoy which will prevent the passenger from felling off during minor accidents. 

https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=tNHHRORN&id=B0CC8ED2447F83123206C0AB4621D85F4344A6CA&thid=OIP.tNHHRORN_yDcjyrlCBE2lAEsDI&q=carryboy+for+trucks&simid=608054395735510401&selectedIndex=0&ajaxhist=0

[Chris Lawrence]

4 hours ago, billd766 said:

So much depends on where and when the poll was taken, who were the people polled and what questions were asked. You need to know what result you want before you ask any questions and who you are targeting.

 

If it was taken in the cities on middle and upper class Thais, then the result was predictable.

 

If the poll was taken on poor Thais in rural Thailand the result would be the opposite.

Or only enlisted military types? The poll's real influence is to promote the General's policy.

[wombat]

there are a few laws in my country i don't agree with....i still get fined if i don't obey them.

[Chris Lawrence]

1 hour ago, jimster said:

First of all, get off your high horse.

 

Secondly, what's wrong with Africa or the behavior of Africans? Their culture may be different to that of Thailand, the rest of Asia and the west, but that doesn't make them inferior. Each culture is unique. Respect them.

 

Thirdly, I see where you are going with your comment. You're another one of these "it's better in the west, why isn't the whole world like us?" types. Your arrogance and the implied imperialistic message sickens me.

 

Moreover, I don't think that Thailand can "learn" anything from the west in this regard. Westerners love their nanny state governments too much. There are so many dumbed down idiots who think that the government always knows the best solution to every problem.

 

You know what? They don't. Your average Thai is smart enough to know the risks of transporting passengers in the back of a pickup. If he/she drives normally and doesn't cause an accident or is not the victim of an accident, then nobody in the tray of a pickup will get injured or killed, period. Similarly, passengers can and do get injured and killed in accidents when sitting inside vehicles too. Having passengers in the rear of a pickup doesn't cause accidents. Accidents are caused by dangerous driving, fatigue, speeding, drink driving and driving against the flow of traffic. If these issues are addressed, then the accident rate will drop without needing to change the whole lifestyle of the Thai people.

 

If this law is implemented (though every few days the government changes it's mind) it will be a disaster for the Thai people and the economy. Pickup sales, particularly of 2 door extended cabs will plummet, the whole pickup manufacturing industry will likely suffer as a result. How will construction and agricultural workers get to work? Who will pay for the buses, vans and other types of vehicles necessary to transport these people to work and back home? Do you have any idea how much of a pain in the ass this will be for ordinary people?

 

Get it right. Laws are never made in the interests of ordinary citizens. They're made in order to increase government control. An extremely worrying worldwide trend that if remained unchallenged, will result in tyranny and slavery in decades to come. If Thailand becomes more like the west, it will cease being the country we know and love. I just hope I'm not alive then to see that happen.

Just off the boat?

[TKDfella]

4 hours ago, Laza 45 said:

I think it is sometimes forgotten that we are living in a developing 3rd world country... 1 pickup truck in a family is a luxury.. many can not afford more than a motorbike..  they know filling the back of the pickup is dangerous as they know 4 on a motorbike is dangerous.. but when that is all they have what else can they do?..  Things must and will change but this is a very difficult transition for many poor families to deal with..  they are not stupid... just poor...

While I might sympathize with this view we are talking about about a Law. It is not for people to pick and choose which Law to obey, rich or poor. If the majority disagree then it should be lobbied and petitioned for said Law to be changed. All the more important for a '...developing 3rd world country...' as you put it, to follow laws and form the basis of future progress otherwise there be lack of/no respect for Laws.

[jimster]

24 minutes ago, TKDfella said:

While I might sympathize with this view we are talking about about a Law. It is not for people to pick and choose which Law to obey, rich or poor. If the majority disagree then it should be lobbied and petitioned for said Law to be changed. All the more important for a '...developing 3rd world country...' as you put it, to follow laws and form the basis of future progress otherwise there be lack of/no respect for Laws.

Well that's what people in Thailand tend to do and I salute them for it. Some laws are just silly and the people don't want their rights and freedom taken away from them.

 

However, there was so much outrage with this law that the police decided it would make some consultations and consider it again in the future. I'm confused by this latest update because I think it was made perfectly clear that this law will NOT be entered into force for the time being, even though just a couple of weeks ago it was looking like the police wanted to enforce it but perhaps they underestimated the community backlash and impact it would have on the lives of people.

 

A 6 person limit riding in the tray, something like that may perhaps be a reasonable compromise. However, Thailand should not be in any rush to emulate any other country. It's situation is unique (how many countries in the world have as many pickup trucks on the road as in Thailand?) and to impose such a draconian, drastic change that is neither a cause of road accidents nor does it help to solve the problem of a high accident rate is just ridiculous.

 

Something more sane like recognizing that around 80% of all road accidents (including injuries and deaths) involve motorcycles and thus enforcing the helmet law would make more sense. Not only is wearing a helmet the law since many years and is sensible, it doesn't require a big investment or change in lifestyle. Already the vast majority of motorcycle riders in Bangkok wear helmets (around 80-90% or even more), nearly all owners of motorcycles also own a helmet even if they don't use it and it would help to bring down the road toll.

 

I'm baffled why they even decided to focus on pickup trucks to begin with rather than motorcycles. Seems like a rather bizarre thing to do, especially in light of the statistics I've just given.

 

Edited April 24, 2017 by jimster

[JAG]

While I might sympathize with this view we are talking about about a Law. It is not for people to pick and choose which Law to obey, rich or poor. If the majority disagree then it should be lobbied and petitioned for said Law to be changed. All the more important for a '...developing 3rd world country...' as you put it, to follow laws and form the basis of future progress otherwise there be lack of/no respect for Laws.

Lobbying and petitioning eh?

You do know how and by whom Thailand is governed right now?

[jimster]

9 minutes ago, JAG said:

Lobbying and petitioning eh?

You do know how and by whom Thailand is governed right now?

Doesn't make a difference. Some foreigners seem to have this impression that the current government is more authoritarian than previous governments but in reality it doesn't matter. Just like immigration changes for foreigners were made by the red shirt and then the yellow shirt administrations, the military government has continued this trend. Any future civilian government won't undo these changes. It's identical in the west. No matter if it's a conservative or liberal government in power, over time the government consolidates it's power and works from changes made by previous administrations. Consider for example the following: has any western government managed to overturn the policy of multiculturalism and replace it with pre 1960s or 1970s restrictions? For example, to make Europe European again? (e.g. France French, Germany German etc.) No. And no matter the government in power and how much they claim to work for the ordinary people, it will never happen, despite the rhetoric of some politicians. The ones who may actually be serious about it will never get into power.

 

Back to Thailand though - the government has already said it will back down on this rule. For now at least.

 

 

Edited April 24, 2017 by jimster

[jimster]

6 hours ago, darksidedog said:

I don't see the death toll coming down significantly, any time soon then. They're just crazy. 83% agree it is a good idea that will save lives, but they just don't care enough about their own lives to actually comply?

The English language OP contradicts entirely with the Thai language clip I just viewed. In that clip, 87% of pickup owners and 70% of other vehicle owners according to a NIDA poll agree that there need to be changes to the law. This means they disagree with the strictness of the law and want to see it either amended or scrapped as explained in the clip. If you don't understand Thai, please get a Thai speaker to explain it to you.

[TKDfella]

13 minutes ago, JAG said:

Lobbying and petitioning eh?

You do know how and by whom Thailand is governed right now?

Well, I was going to mention that but it does seem that the PM wants to keep 'people happy' (hence his recent relaxation of said law), if you see what I mean. As such it might be even easier for him to directly change that law since it might not have to go through he usual 'red tape'.

 

[worgeordie]

"A public opinion poll has shown that Thais are generally in agreement with plans to prohibit sitting in the back of pick-ups."  say those with CARS.

 

Its going to take a long long time for this to happen, look how long they have been drumming it into motorbike riders to wear helmets,

regards worgeordie

[khwaibah]

Just now Front page Bangkok Post. 3 dead 14 in hospital. Surin.

[just.a.thought]

So 63% did not pay attention during drivers education......time to take a look at how people learn to drive

[Jasonron]

As some mentioned the poverty of the people is a major factor.. lower and middle income families can't afford to have more vehicles.. the other major and primary factor is the limited transportation facilities available to

many of the interior areas in almost all the provinces.. my gf's house is 100 km from Phitsanulok in Nakhon Thai district.. from the district the village is nearly 20 km near the foot hills of the petchabun mountain range..there are  a limited number of buses that go to Nakhon Thai.. however there is no transportation to the village.. the main source is the own transportation.. most poor villagers don't have any vehicles.. they either request their neighbors or sometimes pay them to pick and drop from... this goes the same with most villages and provinces .. in case of emergencies what would such people do ?? They are at the mercy of their neighbors to travel from one place to the other.. 

 

[trogers]

6 minutes ago, Jasonron said:

As some mentioned the poverty of the people is a major factor.. lower and middle income families can't afford to have more vehicles.. the other major and primary factor is the limited transportation facilities available to

many of the interior areas in almost all the provinces.. my gf's house is 100 km from Phitsanulok in Nakhon Thai district.. from the district the village is nearly 20 km near the foot hills of the petchabun mountain range..there are  a limited number of buses that go to Nakhon Thai.. however there is no transportation to the village.. the main source is the own transportation.. most poor villagers don't have any vehicles.. they either request their neighbors or sometimes pay them to pick and drop from... this goes the same with most villages and provinces .. in case of emergencies what would such people do ?? They are at the mercy of their neighbors to travel from one place to the other.. 

 

What did their parents and grandparents do?

[kensisaket]

Obviously a poll of "Yellow Shirts".  

[trogers]

1 hour ago, Artisi said:

It's either a yes or no answer,  but based on what? 

A full analysis of deaths in pickups needs to be undertaken looking at the number of deaths in relation to number of pickups on the road, number of people carried, distances travelled and number of deaths per accident. I wouldn't be surprised if the numbers were actually very low based on the above parameters. So is there a genuine case to answer. 

OK, limit it to 6 per vehicle with strict policing speed, alcohol and dangerous driving. 

 

Analyze this...

[DrTuner]

I guess there was a reason caning was introduced in Singapore. Seems to have worked.

[NickJ]

Pick ups help with population control. I say bring in the big American ones with V-8,s

[JAG]

1 hour ago, TKDfella said:

Well, I was going to mention that but it does seem that the PM wants to keep 'people happy' (hence his recent relaxation of said law), if you see what I mean. As such it might be even easier for him to directly change that law since it might not have to go through he usual 'red tape'.

 

Well yes it might,

 

On the other hand those lobbying and petitioning may be invited for an "extended discussion without coffee" by the local military. If they use social media to lobby or petition then of course there is alwaysthe risk of the computer crimes act....

[kokopelli]

Thailand or  America??

[dinsdale]

9 hours ago, webfact said:

A Nida Poll found that some 83% of respondents broadly agreed with the new rules

83% of how many "broadly" agreed? I don't care if you agree with this "new" regulation or not but really, who was polled and how can they say 83% agree without showing the sample. I'm fairly sure I could do a poll where this figure would be totally reversed. 

[Artisi]

2 hours ago, trogers said:

 

Analyze this...

Not hard to analyse, just outright stupidity. 

How about analysising the pickup crashes that don't result in any deaths. 

Edited April 24, 2017 by Artisi

[trogers]

24 minutes ago, Artisi said:

Not hard to analyse, just outright stupidity. 

How about analysising the pickup crashes that don't result in any deaths. 

Same can be said for those passenger vans...wait for the analysis before acting on them...

[billd766]

5 hours ago, TKDfella said:

While I might sympathize with this view we are talking about about a Law. It is not for people to pick and choose which Law to obey, rich or poor. If the majority disagree then it should be lobbied and petitioned for said Law to be changed. All the more important for a '...developing 3rd world country...' as you put it, to follow laws and form the basis of future progress otherwise there be lack of/no respect for Laws.

 

I almost agree with you that it is not for people to pick and choose, however if you are rich then the laws will probably not apply to you. If the laws were applied equally to everybody from the lowest to the very highest I could agree with you.

 

In reality most motoring laws are not enforced anyway.