$100K in Drugs Found on Cruise Ship

[boatman61]

Thats why I only like to sail with folks I know... where I know who may enjoy the odd puff or two... or have the tendancy to go over the top with alcohol...
Those people I can control... and they respect my wishes when on board...
But what I can't control I avoid.. the last minute crew member picked up in a port after a short meeting where they "seemed such a nice guy/gal.."
You can searh as many bags as you want... but the human orofices can carry $K's of drugs... insert just before you join the boat... pop it a few hours later when everyones relaxed..
Your dead in the water if stopped...
Its something I worry about everytime I get a delivery job from somewhere like S.Spain, or maybe Turkey... WI... back to the UK... is this the 'one' thats been well packed....

[David M]

I am pretty certain the founding fathers of this country would have been against the government seizure of property before it is determined by trial the innocence or guilt of the accused. The fact is we do not have a speedy trial system and such property could be held by the government for years.

Also, where in the Constitution does it say the government has the right to seize property for being guilty of a crime? The Constitution covets property rights for the individual, especially land rights. The Constitution was written to protect us from a government assuming authority it was never granted, by the Constitution itself in the 10th Amendment.

I can understand the guilty spending time behind bars or paying a monetary penalty or both, but the seizure of property for being found guilty seems wrong. Yes, I realize this is the precedent.

[Minggat]

Originally Posted by David_Old_Jersey

I would also argue that a simple recreational boat owner / skipper does in practice have a greater degree of control over both what crew or passengers are allowed to come onboard and over what they do when onboard.

Not to say that the skipper will use this ability - but that is his choice.

Please understand. I am not saying that the cruise line should be sweating the possibility of loosing their ship. What I'm saying is that we should not be sweating the certainty of loosing our little boats.

As far as "skipper does....have... control"...

Really? There is some truth there somewhere. But not sure what "in practice" means.

In truth, the cruise line likely would have a policy that crew would just accept. Something along the line of "WILL BE SEARCHED". Which goes well beyond what most skippers I know would impose on crew. We trust that when we ask questions, we wil get honest answers. Bad crew count on that trust, and that they WON'T be searched.

So, the only way "in practice" for the private skipper would work would be to forwarn crew that they will be searched. As a skipper/owner, I'm not thrilled about the idea, but... in order to make your statement true, I would have to. Which really isn't a bad idea.

Tell your crew to go thru their stuff themselves in front of you. When the bag is emptied, they hand it to you and you go over it. But remember, they may/probably be better at hiding it that you are at finding it. That's why TSA proceedures have gotten to the point of "enhanced pat down".

You sure you wanna go there?

What's the point?

The law needs to be tweaked to make sure that only the guilty are punished. No brainer.... IMHO

Thank you David M for putting it so well. From your statement, we should be able to assume that the law needs no tweaking. That's the sad part.

[KiteRider]

Originally Posted by David M

I am pretty certain the founding fathers of this country would have been against the government seizure of property before it is determined by trial the innocence or guilt of the accused. The fact is we do not have a speedy trial system and such property could be held by the government for years.

Also, where in the Constitution does it say the government has the right to seize property for being guilty of a crime? The Constitution covets property rights for the individual, especially land rights. The Constitution was written to protect us from a government assuming authority it was never granted, by the Constitution itself in the 10th Amendment.

I can understand the guilty spending time behind bars or paying a monetary penalty or both, but the seizure of property for being found guilty seems wrong. Yes, I realize this is the precedent.

I agree. I also doubt the founding fathers would support the drug war at all.

On a side note, it's annoying how articles and the cops always inflate the value of the drugs in a bust. That is about 10k in cocaine, nowhere near 100k.