News Forum - Expat gets hit in the head at Bangkok zoo, apparently for taking his mask off to eat

[HolyCowCm]

33 minutes ago, Stonker said:

Perfectly reasonable - when taking the photos the only people you're "in close proximity" to are your family, then you mask up afterwards.

See above.  You hardly need to be Einstein to work out the reason why.

Absolutely and a wonderful memory that lasts forever. For this one we had my wife's younger sister and her 5 year old daughter from Bangkok, my son, my youngest daughter, my oldest daughter who lives in Bangkok now, and my wife. Things like this you cannot put a price on and it is very well contained not dangerous to others. I give it an A+ even though for the nice picture in a frame was at a cost, but unbelievably only a cou-ple hundred baht. So all a win win and zero complaints.

[Stonker]

5 minutes ago, LoongFred said:

Was the head bopper Thai? I didn't read it was a Thai or another falang. Nevertheless it doesn't appear he was bopper very seriously.  Most  has got his feelings hurt. 

The bandage looks like it was more for effect than an injury. 

Apparently, although I think that's assumed from the Swede's Thai wife's post on facebook.

The "bandage" is totally for effect - being taped loosely to his hair it's not possibly doing anything at all.

[Stonker]

7 minutes ago, HolyCowCm said:

Absolutely and a wonderful memory that lasts forever. For this one we had my wife's younger sister and her 5 year old daughter from Bangkok, my son, my youngest daughter, my oldest daughter who lives in Bangkok now, and my wife. Things like this you cannot put a price on and it is very well contained not dangerous to others. I give it an A+ even though for the nice picture in a frame was at a cost, but unbelievably only a cou-ple hundred baht. So all a win win and zero complaints.

Jeez - you made sure you crammed enough of you into the picture to get your money's worth!

I'd get a copy done, though, as normally they use the cheapest possible print paper so rather than lasting forever they normally fade after a few weeks

[LoongFred]

4 minutes ago, Stonker said:

Apparently, although I think that's assumed from the Swede's Thai wife's post on facebook.

The "bandage" is totally for effect - being taped loosely to his hair it's not possibly doing anything at all.

Thanks, I know the article didn't say it was a Thai. So the wife is saying her wimpy husband was beat-up by a Thai enforcing the law. She's the one that needs to have some sense beat into her. 

[Fluke]

1 hour ago, RampantRabbit said:

do they tell covid  to  pose to or  just  not to spread whilst  photo is  being taken

Do you have any common sense ?

Can you not think about it and work it out for yourself ?

Two people posing for a photo together are likely to be friends and with each other , maybe even living together , so, there would be no need to them both to keep apart 

[HolyCowCm]

11 minutes ago, Stonker said:

Jeez - you made sure you crammed enough of you into the picture to get your money's worth!

I'd get a copy done, though, as normally they use the cheapest possible print paper so rather than lasting forever they normally fade after a few weeks

Nope, real glass, plastic frame and the picture quality is good. This looks to last a good long time into the future.

I even have pictures of my kids at Siam Park when they were 4 and 6 yrs old put onto plates that still are pretty good quality today. Only bad thing is the glue and so i need to reglue the back to the plate. But that is well over 15 years to date now.

[RampantRabbit]

22 minutes ago, Fluke said:

Do you have any common sense ?

Can you not think about it and work it out for yourself ?

Two people posing for a photo together are likely to be friends and with each other , maybe even living together , so, there would be no need to them both to keep apart 

you should be questioning a govt who says that two  people  in a  car should wear masks even if  married

[Fluke]

1 hour ago, RampantRabbit said:

wheres  any proof  for the entire  story?

When your local village headman came to visit your house in the village last week , he was lucky that you were in at home, rather than being in Bangkok watching a Dolphin show and noticing them selling snacks to the other  people watching the show . 

[RampantRabbit]

45 minutes ago, HolyCowCm said:

It is just a photo that is controlled to where the family who are together any how get to pose with no mask on for their family experience. The girls who take the pictures stay masked and again it is controlled and from my stand point is a good memory to have for now and the future. Small free one and the others offered at a price when you finish the zoo tour. I see no foul in this at all. And BTW, I was only charged the Thai going rate to get in.

ok so why do two  people in a  car (married as if marriage  has anything to do with it anyway) have to wear a mask? These are the govt rules here as  far asI remember and ridiculed when they announced it

[Stonker]

7 minutes ago, HolyCowCm said:

Nope, real glass, plastic frame and the picture quality is good. This looks to last a good long time into the future.

I even have pictures of my kids at Siam Park when they were 4 and 6 yrs old put onto plates that still are pretty good quality today. Only bad thing is the glue and so i need to reglue the back to the plate. But that is well over 15 years to date now.

... things have probably got a lot better since I last had anything like that done, many moons ago .

A pity he didn't have one of your plates handy to break over this guy's head ...

[Stonker]

3 minutes ago, RampantRabbit said:

you should be questioning a govt who says that two  people  in a  car should wear masks even if  married

Why? 

If there was an exception for those who are married, then you'd have to stop the car to check for a marriage licence ... instead it's a simple rule, easily checked, with nobody asking stupid questions like "define close proximity" or "define married".

[RampantRabbit]

1 hour ago, Stonker said:

if they do, then it's obviously for consumption when not "in close proximity to others", which is perfectly reasonable for everybody.

nah its  perfectly reasonable not to sell it  thus  removing the chance of  mask removal

[RampantRabbit]

17 minutes ago, Stonker said:

Why? 

If there was an exception for those who are married, then you'd have to stop the car to check for a marriage licence ... instead it's a simple rule, easily checked, with nobody asking stupid questions like "define close proximity" or "define married".

But its  ok for a  family  outing to all remove masks  for a  photo, it  all makes so  much sense and surely  they would  have to also prove they were  married otherwise  mask should stay  on same as yer car  rules you mentioned

Edited December 13, 2021 by RampantRabbit

[RampantRabbit]

9 minutes ago, Fluke said:

When your local village headman came to visit your house in the village last week , he was lucky that you were in at home, rather than being in Bangkok watching a Dolphin show and noticing them selling snacks to the other  people watching the show . 

he hasnt been here last week he  announced some crap  like this  about 12  months ago for the  last  burning season

[RampantRabbit]

34 minutes ago, Fluke said:

Do you have any common sense ?

Can you not think about it and work it out for yourself ?

Two people posing for a photo together are likely to be friends and with each other , maybe even living together , so, there would be no need to them both to keep apart 

yeah but do you  have any common sense as im pointing out that in a  car two  people married  HAVE to wear a mask, yet here at the zoo two  married  people dont have to for a photo

[Fluke]

7 minutes ago, RampantRabbit said:

ok so why do two  people in a  car (married as if marriage  has anything to do with it anyway) have to wear a mask? These are the govt rules here as  far asI remember and ridiculed when they announced it

The rule stated that anyone outside their home must wear a mask , although people driving alone in their car were exempt from wearing a mask , of course the nit pickers were picking holes in that rule and looking for an angle to yell abuse 

[RampantRabbit]

3 minutes ago, Fluke said:

The rule stated that anyone outside their home must wear a mask , although people driving alone in their car were exempt from wearing a mask , of course the nit pickers were picking holes in that rule and looking for an angle to yell abuse 

ive already STATED that one person doesnt have to in a  car, Im questioning why two  marrie d people and more judging  by the photos at safari world  can remove a mask but once in a  car they MUST BY LAW all wear a   mask

[Stonker]

11 minutes ago, RampantRabbit said:

ok so why do two  people in a  car (married as if marriage  has anything to do with it anyway) have to wear a mask? These are the govt rules here as  far asI remember and ridiculed when they announced it

What part of "You have to mask up when in a car regardless of whether you're living together / the same family or not to avoid delays for everyone else and make checks quicker and simpler  -  it's obviously impossible to know without stopping a vehicle and checking every ID if those in a car are all living together, so to speed things up and simplify things it's a blanket rule for everyone." did you not understand or do you have any rational disagreement with?

There are hardly any such checks, but if there were and the law was applied then why "married"?

What proof?

Legally or just a religious blessing?

Civil partners and LGBT couples?

Only parents or children too?

What about children living away, visiting parents or each other?

The permutations are endless, so the simple solution is the best - everyone.

[Fluke]

6 minutes ago, RampantRabbit said:

yeah but do you  have any common sense as im pointing out that in a  car two  people married  HAVE to wear a mask, yet here at the zoo two  married  people dont have to for a photo

Car journeys are inside to the extreme , two people sitting very close together in a small enclosed space for a prolonged period of time, could be for ten hours + sat together .

   Taking a mask off in the zoo  for a quick photo would be outdoors and for a few seconds , which would be minimal risk , compared to a car journey which would be a severe risk 

[Stonker]

12 minutes ago, RampantRabbit said:

But its  ok for a  family  outing to all remove masks  for a  photo, it  all makes so  much sense

Well ... yes it does make so much sense.

Just not to you.

[RampantRabbit]

On 12/11/2021 at 7:20 PM, Fluke said:

Of course you were , coincidences do happen and people  never lie  and you went to the dolphin show last week and had a bite to eat there 

Making the whole  thread a  pack of  lies  really then

[RampantRabbit]

Just now, Stonker said:

Well ... yes it does make so much sense.

Just not to you.

and? it  makes  no sense to remove a  mask for any reason at  all and they shouldnt be  selling   food either and if having a photo ( not at all necessary or  needed) is a  reason to remove a  mask for even 1  second then it  really does make no sense, no sense at  all.

[Fluke]

1 minute ago, RampantRabbit said:

Making the whole  thread a  pack of  lies  really then

No, I do believe that the Swedish guy in the story went to the Dolphin show last week in BKK , although I am highly doubtful that you also went there to the Dolphin show in BKK last week , like I don't really believe that you did go there 

[RampantRabbit]

6 minutes ago, Stonker said:

What part of "You have to mask up when in a car regardless of whether you're living together / the same family or not to avoid delays for everyone else and make checks quicker and simpler  -  it's obviously impossible to know without stopping a vehicle and checking every ID if those in a car are all living together, so to speed things up and simplify things it's a blanket rule for everyone." did you not understand or do you have any rational disagreement with?

There are hardly any such checks, but if there were and the law was applied then why "married"?

What proof?

Legally or just a religious blessing?

Civil partners and LGBT couples?

Only parents or children too?

What about children living away, visiting parents or each other?

The permutations are endless, so the simple solution is the best - everyone.

you  aint getting  this are you, so in a  car two  people  have to wear masks, according to you beacause its  too  difficult to prove they are  married........BUT at safari world two  people who may or  may  not be married  can remove their masks for a photo, there is  no sense in it

[RampantRabbit]

7 minutes ago, Stonker said:

Well ... yes it does make so much sense.

Just not to you.

so are the family holding their breath while  the photos  are  being  done