Jump to content
BANGKOK 20 June 2019 22:31
webfact

Video: New Zealander collides with Thai motorcyclist going the wrong way on bridge in Rayong

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Catkiwi said:

No excuses for the clown riding in the wrong direction. Forget all of your investigations and just accept the fact that - that was the root cause of the incident. Contributing causes may include the Kiwi being pissed or tired or whatever but if the wrong direction clown wasn't doing what he has probably done a thousand times, driving in the wrong direction, there would have been no incident and he may have lived another day to ride in the wrong direction again. Case closed!!!

But but but

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Catkiwi said:

No excuses for the clown riding in the wrong direction. Forget all of your investigations and just accept the fact that - that was the root cause of the incident. Contributing causes may include the Kiwi being pissed or tired or whatever but if the wrong direction clown wasn't doing what he has probably done a thousand times, driving in the wrong direction, there would have been no incident and he may have lived another day to ride in the wrong direction again. Case closed!!!

 

So you would happily close a case involving a drunk driver just because the person they happened to kill this time would have died had they been drunk or not, very helpful for all the rest of us, its not like they would ever drink drive again, is it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This sentence explains it all:


The family of the dead motorcyclist do not intend to pursue the case. 

 

Until that chances I fear that Thailand will remain at the shorter end of the humanity stick. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

So you would happily close a case involving a drunk driver just because the person they happened to kill this time would have died had they been drunk or not, very helpful for all the rest of us, its not like they would ever drink drive again, is it?

I think you are missing my point so no need for any further comment from me.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Catkiwi said:

I think you are missing my point so no need for any further comment from me.

 

Wasn't your point that you felt there is no need for an investigation as it is clear that the motorcyclist was mostly to blame?  Mine is that even if the car driver is just 1% to blame, that blame should be noted and the driver, if necessary, charged so as to negate the chances of them making the same mistake in the future.

  • Confused 1
  • Sad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

Wasn't your point that you felt there is no need for an investigation as it is clear that the motorcyclist was mostly to blame?  Mine is that even if the car driver is just 1% to blame, that blame should be noted and the driver, if necessary, charged so as to negate the chances of them making the same mistake in the future.

The solution is in their own hands, if they insist on ghost riding so be it

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, oldlakey said:

The solution is in their own hands, if they insist on ghost riding so be it

 

I have no idea what that means.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

I have no idea what that means.

 

 

Thats not my problem

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

Wasn't your point that you felt there is no need for an investigation as it is clear that the motorcyclist was mostly to blame?  Mine is that even if the car driver is just 1% to blame, that blame should be noted and the driver, if necessary, charged so as to negate the chances of them making the same mistake in the future.

The guy came over a blind hill on the wrong side of the road 

I don't see how any blame can be attributed to the guy who was driving correctly 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ks45672 said:

The guy came over a blind hill on the wrong side of the road 

I don't see how any blame can be attributed to the guy who was driving correctly 

 

 

Any of the examples I gave previously; having been drunk, asleep, on the phone, etc.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Kieran00001 said:

 

Any of the examples I gave previously; having been drunk, asleep, on the phone, etc.

If he had been drunk or guilty of any shadow of negligence the BIB would not have ignored it  especially in a case where a Thai national died vs a foreigner

 

It's not like he is some Thai hi-so who will get special treatment like the Redbull kid.... 

 

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, oldlakey said:
13 hours ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

Wasn't your point that you felt there is no need for an investigation as it is clear that the motorcyclist was mostly to blame?  Mine is that even if the car driver is just 1% to blame, that blame should be noted and the driver, if necessary, charged so as to negate the chances of them making the same mistake in the future.

The solution is in their own hands, if they insist on ghost riding so be it

 

I still think that the point Kieran00001 is making on a 'case' basis is pointless as the blame and cause of the incident is impossible to mistake given the video evidence. 

 

However, from a perspective of preventing further incidents the point Kieran00001 makes carries validity in that should the NZ driver have been found to be driving under the influence of alcohol or other 'skill altering' substances, or proven not to have been driving with due attention, or any other issue which may have resulted in his potential to react, then any potential finding of an investigation may act as a preventative measure towards further incident. 

 

In this case its clear there was no opportunity for avoidance, but that may not always be the case. 

 

It is for this reason that I now understand why Kieran00001 has been so stubborn with his comments. He is right. If involved in an incident and if an investigation were to 'find something' which could prevent another incident and is handled correctly we are all potentially in a safer place when on the roads.

 

There is a bigger picture. Its clear the outcome and blame (morally and legally) would not be altered in this case, but there exists the potential to prevent further 'grey area' incidents from future occurrence. 

 

I believe this to be the point Kieran00001 has been trying to make, but in the light of forum weighted opposition (myself included) the light of his argument has not been given the opportunity to shine in balanced minds. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by richard_smith237
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

I still think that the point Kieran00001 is making on a 'case' basis is pointless as the blame and cause of the incident is impossible to mistake given the video evidence. 

 

However, from a perspective of preventing further incidents the point Kieran00001 makes carries validity in that should the NZ driver have been found to be driving under the influence of alcohol or other 'skill altering' substances, or proven not to have been driving with due attention, or any other issue which may have resulted in his potential to react, then any potential finding of an investigation may act as a preventative measure towards further incident. 

 

In this case its clear there was no opportunity for avoidance, but that may not always be the case. 

 

It is for this reason that I now understand why Kieran00001 has been so stubborn with his comments. He is right. If involved in an incident and if an investigation were to 'find something' which could prevent another incident and is handled correctly we are all potentially in a safer place when on the roads.

 

There is a bigger picture. Its clear the outcome and blame (morally and legally) would not be altered in this case, but there exists the potential to prevent further 'grey area' incidents from future occurrence. 

 

I believe this to be the point Kieran00001 has been trying to make, but in the light of forum weighted opposition (myself included) the light of his argument has not been given the opportunity to shine in balanced minds. 

 

 

 

 

 

Well any death should be investigated, but this is Thailand not the real world

Thousands of investigations each year 5555555 OK if you say so

It sounds like you are expecting actions from the Thai authorities akin to what happens in a nanny state

If the population want to continue to hasten their own demise who are we to interfere

As I have said "SO BE IT"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

I still think that the point Kieran00001 is making on a 'case' basis is pointless as the blame and cause of the incident is impossible to mistake given the video evidence. 

 

However, from a perspective of preventing further incidents the point Kieran00001 makes carries validity in that should the NZ driver have been found to be driving under the influence of alcohol or other 'skill altering' substances, or proven not to have been driving with due attention, or any other issue which may have resulted in his potential to react, then any potential finding of an investigation may act as a preventative measure towards further incident. 

 

In this case its clear there was no opportunity for avoidance, but that may not always be the case. 

 

It is for this reason that I now understand why Kieran00001 has been so stubborn with his comments. He is right. If involved in an incident and if an investigation were to 'find something' which could prevent another incident and is handled correctly we are all potentially in a safer place when on the roads.

 

There is a bigger picture. Its clear the outcome and blame (morally and legally) would not be altered in this case, but there exists the potential to prevent further 'grey area' incidents from future occurrence. 

 

I believe this to be the point Kieran00001 has been trying to make, but in the light of forum weighted opposition (myself included) the light of his argument has not been given the opportunity to shine in balanced minds. 

 

 

 

 

 

All the above is true but really only has any impact where changes made by law or are given as ideas for improvement will have attention paid to them by the majority of drivers/riders.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, oldlakey said:

Well any death should be investigated, but this is Thailand not the real world

Thousands of investigations each year 5555555 OK if you say so

It sounds like you are expecting actions from the Thai authorities akin to what happens in a nanny state

If the population want to continue to hasten their own demise who are we to interfere

As I have said "SO BE IT"

??

Stop posting what I'm posting at the same time.

??

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...