chrisinth Posted May 30, 2017 Share Posted May 30, 2017 3 minutes ago, anotheruser said: Reading the full article all journalists have to do is "Journalists who feel they need to carry this stuff need to inform or contact the concerned authorities prior to travelling," junta spokesman Major General Werachon Sukhonhapatipak told AFP. So it seems they are aware of the issue and they should have made contact before hand. In that case the journalist really has nothing to cry about. If you don't feel like contacting Thai authorities simply fly through another country than Thailand. The question would be is this public knowledge to a journalist either in transit or on stop-over in Thailand? Or was that an on-the-fly comment from the Major General? The last journalist to be arrested I believe was actually reporting in Thailand and his vest was classified as a war weapon as he tried to head back to Hong Kong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sujoop Posted May 30, 2017 Share Posted May 30, 2017 (edited) It appears the origin of the law is likely to prevent 'just any person' (including criminals) from wearing body armour, thus the license/permit requirement and only allowing those showing practical need. In this case and others involving Journalists, he should simply be directed to get a permit/license prior to next entry and allowed to proceed. Not certain about airline rules regarding boarding with a bullet proof vest, or if having such a restriction, if the onus is on the airport/country at point of embarkation to enforce. Quote: In Australia it is illegal to possess body armour without authorisation in certain territories (South Australia, Victoria, Northern Territory, ACT, Queensland and New South Wales). In certain Canadian provinces (Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba and Nova Scotia) a license is required to possess body armour, though there are no such restrictions in the rest of the country. In the European Union, ballistic protection that is considered ‘for main military usage’ is restricted to civilians. In the United Kingdom, there are currently no legal restrictions on the purchase and ownership of body armour. In the United States it is legal to purchase and possess body armour, except for a few states: - In Connecticut, body armour can only be purchased in person, and cannot be purchased online, over the phone, or by mail; - In New York, a proposed ban of body armour for private citizens is currently debated; - In Kentucky, committing a crime while wearing or even owning body armour is a crime in and of itself; - In Louisiana, it is illegal to wear body armour on school property or on campus. https://www.safeguardclothing.com/uk/articles/body-armour-uk-law/ Edited May 30, 2017 by sujoop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anotheruser Posted May 30, 2017 Share Posted May 30, 2017 Just now, chrisinth said: The question would be is this public knowledge to a journalist either in transit or on stop-over in Thailand? Or was that an on-the-fly comment from the Major General? The last journalist to be arrested I believe was actually reporting in Thailand and his vest was classified as a war weapon as he tried to head back to Hong Kong. It simply doesn't matter. Ignorance of the law in most places isn't a defensible excuse. I guess it is possible he didn't hear of the other journalist who was arrested who was also working for China. The people he worked for should have known. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bangkok Barry Posted May 30, 2017 Share Posted May 30, 2017 I have lived in Thailand for nearly 25 years and have yet to witness any common sense. It really is remarkable that it is possible for it to be totally absent in a country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wakeupplease Posted May 30, 2017 Share Posted May 30, 2017 They did say anything in transit just the other day. Just trying to make cash from travelers any way they can its the new norm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PomPolo Posted May 30, 2017 Share Posted May 30, 2017 Maybe he was planning a trip to Pattaya? Sent from my C103 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Allen Posted May 30, 2017 Share Posted May 30, 2017 3 hours ago, stanleycoin said: A fair number of Thai Men are armed all the time in Thailand. But that's all ok !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Sounds good - A well-armed population is a polite population. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Lawrence Posted May 30, 2017 Share Posted May 30, 2017 Carrying luggage like this today on planes, should set you to think do I need to clear this in the countries I enter? Good start to the job if you can't get your equipment out of Bangkok? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tifino Posted May 30, 2017 Share Posted May 30, 2017 what was it that highlighted him? I'm trying to see if maybe there's a particuar 'colour' or something, apart from simply the shape of things: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wavemanwww Posted May 30, 2017 Share Posted May 30, 2017 Christ you have all missed the topic. He was wearing protective gear only. Why is that a fking crime. It's not attacking gear. He just passed the OHS (Occupation and Safety) laws in any civilised country. ISO 18001 which Thailand themselves use to promote company safety for it's workers at many of their companies! What a joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tifino Posted May 30, 2017 Share Posted May 30, 2017 ... it must have been the Kevlar Undies that dunnit!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
connda Posted May 30, 2017 Share Posted May 30, 2017 5 hours ago, 11223344 said: I bet a machete is on the same classification level as a kitchen knife Just don't carry either one of them in your trunk or back seat. An if you live in rural Thailand, you can strap it to your belt and nobody is going to say a word. Not even the local BIB. Out in the sticks, it's assumed to be a tool, well, until it isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gk10002000 Posted May 30, 2017 Share Posted May 30, 2017 These items have been clearly discussed in recent years and any so-called journalist maybe should try reading the news and investigating a country before flying there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gk10002000 Posted May 30, 2017 Share Posted May 30, 2017 1 hour ago, wavemanwww said: Christ you have all missed the topic. He was wearing protective gear only. Why is that a fking crime. It's not attacking gear. He just passed the OHS (Occupation and Safety) laws in any civilised country. ISO 18001 which Thailand themselves use to promote company safety for it's workers at many of their companies! What a joke. It is a crime because it is against the law in that country. Case closed. Personal protection or not is irrelevant. It's the law, or whatever you call it in Thailand several coups in and several suspended constitutions later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lungnorm Posted May 31, 2017 Share Posted May 31, 2017 Stupid laws. I once had 6 of those mozzie zapper gadgets that look like tennis raquets confiscated by ozzie customs because they are clasified as electrical weapons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chip Allen Posted May 31, 2017 Share Posted May 31, 2017 When will western governments grow a pair of stones and DEMAND that Thailand rescind this law? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USPatriot Posted May 31, 2017 Share Posted May 31, 2017 Just another journalist not doing research Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Usernames Posted May 31, 2017 Share Posted May 31, 2017 58 minutes ago, Chip Allen said: When will western governments grow a pair of stones and DEMAND that Thailand rescind this law? Yes, Bwana. Now, Bwana. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lvr181 Posted May 31, 2017 Share Posted May 31, 2017 Sometimes "authorities" are like ostriches with their heads in the sand. Some critical quick thinking would be to quarantine the items until the reporter has cleared Immigration on departure and give the items back to him prior to boarding his onward flight. Geez, it's not rocket science! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stanleycoin Posted May 31, 2017 Share Posted May 31, 2017 20 hours ago, Brian Allen said: Sounds good - A well-armed population is a polite population. I some how think , its just dont work like that in Thailand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lvr181 Posted May 31, 2017 Share Posted May 31, 2017 1 minute ago, stanleycoin said: I some how think , its just dont work like that in Thailand. Or the U.S.A.? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swanny321 Posted May 31, 2017 Share Posted May 31, 2017 6 hours ago, Chip Allen said: When will western governments grow a pair of stones and DEMAND that Thailand rescind this law? To be fair to Thailand; if he'd ate a packet of pork scratching that morning in the UK and transited through a certain Islamic state with one found lodged in the tread of his boot; he'd probably of got a life sentence! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedtripler Posted May 31, 2017 Share Posted May 31, 2017 On 2017-5-30 at 1:46 PM, richard_smith237 said: This law seems a little unfair for those who require such equipment to carry out their profession safely. I'm not sure how easy it would be for a non-Thai to apply for a license for such items. A Journalist from Hong Kong faced the same issues a few years ago when reporting in Thailand. It would make a lot of sense for the Thai Authorities to act sensibly and offer registered journalists some leeway, or even adjust the law for registered journalists to register these items on arrival (and departure) to be used for their own safety. Its not hard, it easy... but when did common sense ever get in the way of some good old fashioned obstruction and awkwardness.... How could the police snipers shoot people who need shooting if they're wearing bulletproof gear? Some news is just not safe to put on tv Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tifino Posted May 31, 2017 Share Posted May 31, 2017 (edited) head shot and shoot 1st Edited May 31, 2017 by tifino Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Psimbo Posted May 31, 2017 Share Posted May 31, 2017 Thai police implement (stupid) law- Thaigeezers outraged. Nothing new here boys! By the way the vests are bullet RESISTANT not PROOF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedtripler Posted May 31, 2017 Share Posted May 31, 2017 56 minutes ago, tifino said: head shot and shoot 1st If you think Thai police could routinely make a head shot I don't know what to say... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tifino Posted May 31, 2017 Share Posted May 31, 2017 3 minutes ago, speedtripler said: If you think Thai police could routinely make a head shot I don't know what to say... maybe that is why they take him, alive... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webfact Posted June 1, 2017 Author Share Posted June 1, 2017 UPDATE: British journalist carrying flak jacket plates charged with arms possession in Bangkok BANGKOK (Reuters) - A British journalist was charged with arms possession on Tuesday after being arrested at a Thai airport for checking in flak jacket plates and gas masks, standard equipment for media heading into war zones and other hostile environments. Full story: https://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/985814-british-journalist-carrying-flak-jacket-plates-charged-with-arms-possession-in-bangkok/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben2talk Posted June 1, 2017 Share Posted June 1, 2017 (edited) On 5/30/2017 at 1:36 PM, Bluespunk said: So what do they expect a journalist to use in somewhere like Mosul. An amulet perhaps. Common sense is seriously lacking with regard to this "law". Rachel "worst case scenario" Harvey would have been in serious trouble if this law had been in force back in the day.... Perhaps common sense is also lacking in people who enforce it. It was widely believed that in England, the law requiring everyone to do Archery practice on Sunday was never repealed, yet the police do refrain from making arrests. I could understand that it might be questionable as a carry-on item, but checking in a purely defensive device is hardly applicable. What is the ulterior motive for applying this law in this context? Edited June 1, 2017 by ben2talk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
01322521959 Posted June 1, 2017 Share Posted June 1, 2017 3rd world thinking. Pathetic illogical decisionSent from my i-mobile_i-STYLE_219 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now