OPINION

Helmet zone

Re: "Just hop across," (BP, Sept 22).

Every morning, I walk past a vocational college where teachers stand outside greeting arriving students. Many students arrive by motorbike, either driving their own or as passengers. I have yet to see a single student wearing a helmet on arrival, and the teachers out front never remark on this.

I'd like to propose to governor Chadchart that he implements a 100% helmet zone across all education campuses in the BMA (schools, colleges, universities). Over a period of a month, for example, students would be required to arrive and leave wearing a helmet, or to purchase one on the spot if not.

Companies such as Yamaha and other suppliers of adult and child-sized helmets could set up heavily discounted helmet stalls on campus as part of their corporate social responsibility -- what better CSR than to instill a life-saving habit from childhood?

They could also do an exchange programme where they offer a discount on new helmets in exchange for old, damaged helmets. As the traffic police seem unwilling to enforce any helmet-wearing regulations, let's turn to alternative solutions to make helmet wearing the norm.

Re: "Let's debate LM," (PostBag, Sept 17).

As always, I agree with Burin's comments about lese majeste. If we look at the great leaders in history (Abraham Lincoln, Martin Luther King, Gandhi and so on) we'll see they were not great because no one could criticise them.

Quite the contrary. Nor do historians claim that these people were perfect. (Lincoln, in particular, didn't even come close.)

It's been said that if Jesus was the son of God then it's no big deal if he was perfect because he was born that way.

But if he was born an average human being and rose to greatness by relying on his human talents and morality then that would truly be impressive.

Greatness is not about being perfect and beyond criticism. It's about achieving great things despite the fact that you're not.

Re: "Putin mobilises more troops for war," (BP, Sept 22).

Putin's latest speech was a clear sign that Russia is losing on the battlefield.Putin looked rattled.

He made really baffling statements about holding sham referendums, inside a war zone, and in regions where Russia holds little over 60% of the territory.

He mentioned that they were fighting Nazis. That is another Russian propaganda favourite, totally fabricated, a complete fantasy.

Putin sounded desperate when he announced a "partial" mobilisation of 300,000 troops, something he has always said he would not do, due to the lack of public support.

He repeated terrifying veiled nuclear threats, adding this time that he wasn't bluffing.

Putin sounded like a desperate dictator whose army has been badly mauled, and who is fast running out of military options.

Re: "Let's avoid Thaksin," (PostBag, Sept 21).

To "an expat in Thailand" who wrote, "In a truly democratic country people do not nominate and elect those from the same family".

Examining countries' governments around the globe would show the expat that many countries do exactly that.

What is the difference between his supposition of family and a dubious cabal?

Both are "families", good or bad.