QUOTE:
Guard P&I Club has issued a circular about the risk and contractual complication from drug smuggling for their members.
END QUOTE
The above mentioned circular applies to TIME CHARTERED vessels. In such contracts(NYPE , Boxtime) there are clauses containing strct and very well defined responsibilities of Owners/Managers & Time Charterers regarding such issues like drugs , stowaways and cargo claims.
The vessel in question is not a time chartered vessel it is owned by an entity as described in previous post (source Gisis) and chartered through demise/bareboat charter to MSC , who may or may not use 3rd party entities for crew management and technical management , leaving the rest to themselves .
Having said that, they are not exonerated ( at least theoretically) from responsibility . How about vicarious responsibility ?
I have not forgotten but wanted to adhere to KISS principle as shelving and âonionsâ are well known techniques to avoid responsibility.
By the way. My memory is a bit foggy but was not FOC concept hatched in USA?
Just out of curiosity I did some math here. 20 000 kgs can be converted to 800 bags ( 25 kg) each. 1 person to carry it from A to B needs at least 1 minute what translates into two minutes both ends. That is 1600 minutes = 26.7 hrs - do not believe ship master slept that long. With 10 people ( abt 45% of the crew) hauling bags will surely last less .
There is a herring fisheries in northern BC but the population eats them in a civilized manner, out of cans.
This tangent clearly belongs on a different thread.
The war on drugs is a failure, has been for 50 years. Decriminalize the stuff. Sell inspected drugs in registered pharmacies to what ever person wants to use them. Take the money spent on the failed drug war and offer treatment to addicts. Portugal did not go that far but they have a good drug policy that is successful. As long as there is not a legal way for people to alter there state of mind, for whatever reason, the criminal element will fill the void and get rich doing so. See prohibition for a lesson in that. Mexico and other countries have been absolutely corrupted by drugs the US citizens seem to demand. Funny thing is the opioid and now fenytal epidemic in the US was started by the legal drug companies with their doctor accomplices and who have been found guilty but you donât see any of their CEOs sharing a prison cell with El Chapo There are two money making industries in the drug war. The ones that manufacture, import/sale and the ones that purport to stop them. Itâs a symbiotic relationship that will never end. Itâs all about the money for both of them.
I wholeheartedly agree, however, merely decriminalizing drugs doesnât solve the problem. Few addicts are capable of supporting themselves financially and would continue to steal to buy drugs even if they were legal. The solution would then be for the government to provide the delibitating drugs free of charge and since most addicts are homeless and would still need to steal to feed themselves, also provide them with free food and housing. How many working Americans would support the tax increases necessary so the government could supply a growing class of millions of non-productive residents with all of the above on their path of slow-motion suicide.
There is no perfect fix but the billions spent each year on the failed war on drugs if redirected could be a big help in treating addicts as well as housing them temporarily No one has suggested providing drugs free of charge. The end of prohibition didnât mean one could get free booze. A change in law could put the importers out of business and stabilize governments. Trillions of dollars have been spent already on a losing cause so no tax increase needed. My suggestion is look at how other countries handle the problem, many are more successful than the US and donât spend anywhere near as much money.
Itâs a very complicated question but it is obvious that what has been done for over 50 years is a failure and is extremely expensive. The average working American might want to try something less expensive that produces better results.
As I posted, I wholeheartedly agree that decriminalization is a positive step but I am merely pointing out that it is only one of many needed to solve a complicated crisis. As to your reference to 20âs era prohibition, the addictive effects of alcohol and those of heroin or fentanyl are not on the same scale.
The most glaringly obvious step in at least significantly reducing the flow of illicit drugs is imposing better southern border security but itâs clear the current administration has no intention of doing so. I bailed out of a promising career with CBP because I could not in good conscience participate in the game of three card monte Washington was playing on the border and immigration in general 20 years ago l. Itâs only gotten much worse.
California decriminalized Marijuana and now the
âlegalâ stores are crying because of the taxes and illegal trade outpaces them 3 to 1. How is that âfairâ?
Doesnât bother me I moved to FloridaâŚoh yeah Florida man.
