Jump to content

Senior army man denies trying to murder "pretties" in their car


webfact

Recommended Posts

Interesting that he knows that the gun used was his gun and that somehow he sold the gun used a long time ago????? Time travel proven or more Thai incredible excuses to explain away fault. I guess any excuse is better than none

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 90
  • Created
  • Last Reply
7 hours ago, Matzzon said:

And as an army guy, he do not realize the importance of changing the owner name on the weapon. I guess he had the best instructor in the world, or that he´s just thick as a brick. Another assumption would of course be, that the man might be telling some lies.

Soldiers do not keep up with the civilian laws regarding the transfer of firearms. But you are right, as a gun owner, as a man deemed to be intelligent enough to reach his rank, and as anyone with any sense, he should have known to document any forearm transfer. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

"There have been claims made elsewhere in the Thai media - and on the Facebook page of Manasvee - that the army man will try to use his influence to escape responsibility."  He's an enlisted soldier, his circle of influence is other enlisted personnel.  In other words, he has no influence. On top of that there are situations where your superiors are going to just advise you to bring your own rope; because, they are going to hang you. This is one of them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He obviously suffers from the sense of entitlement that carrying a firearm instills in the weak and insecure of the human race.

 

“I understand that you will soon be leavin' town

Don't try to call me when they finally run you down

Just give fair warning any time you come around

With a gun

 

With a gun

You will be what you are just the same”

 

Steely Dan  …. Circa; 1974

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, chama said:

Soldiers do not keep up with the civilian laws regarding the transfer of firearms. But you are right, as a gun owner, as a man deemed to be intelligent enough to reach his rank, and as anyone with any sense, he should have known to document any forearm transfer. 

Since when did possessing any level of intellectual quotient have anything to do with achieving the rank he reached 🤓🙏✌️😎

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, agudbuk said:

So did he name his friend?

A familiar story.  The friend's name was Noi and he doesn't know his real name or address but heard he has since returned to his home province.  No, he doesn't know which province that might be.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Senior army man".  What? The guy is an NCO, not even an officer - a sergeant major 1st class and sergeant major doesn't mean what it means in the British army, i.e. only one company sergeant major per company and one regimental sergeant major per regiment.  It just means any time serving sergeant. 

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

Soldiers do not keep up with the civilian laws regarding the transfer of firearms. But you are right, as a gun owner, as a man deemed to be intelligent enough to reach his rank, and as anyone with any sense, he should have known to document any forearm transfer. 

The Firearms Act says something like the provisions of this act do not apply to military and law enforcement officers using firearms in the course of their duties.  That exempts soldiers from needing permits for government owned firearms issued to them which they have to return to stores when not using on duty.  It doesn't permit them to carry unregistered firearms in public or discharge them at will.  I have a friend, a full general, who is a firearms enthusiast and he applies for permits every time he buys a new gun which is often. 

 

This sergeant's gun was obviously an unregistered one.   So he could not have registered the transfer, even if he really had sold it to someone, which is clearly not the case anyway.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, rkidlad said:

 

 

A very poorly written and confusing article.

 

Whether they were using their full beams or not, what does it matter? You don't go around shooting at people. This is a complete non-issue. 

 

Agreed on both counts but this full beam thing is a common cause of death in Thailand.  Someone was murdered in a similar case in Ubon (I think) a year or two ago.  The victim was shot dead with a shotgun a rural area by some trigger happy jerk who said he did it because he thought the guy had his full beams on which turned out not to be the case. 

 

After market light bulbs sold in Thailand are so bright that it is easy to get killed driving with them dipped.  One also has to be very careful not to put headlights on full beam by mistake without noticing.  Could be a death sentence.  What a country!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, What gun? firstly the police had to bullet does the have a return address on it? Plus if it is him in the CCTV. He just happen to have a Black pick up, and was there at the time? How unlucky for him. and the friend happened to be in the neighborhood with the gun too! 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...