7/28/2003: 1951 Chevy Truck-Raft

[warch]

Oh. The other crap might hit it.

[elSicomoro]

Originally posted by dave
The point is that something might hit it, retard.

Yeah, and they might also hit a 50-foot whale, dingleberry.

...whereas if they sink it, it's not going to get hit.

Also, I think a whale is probably not as hard as a 1951 Chevy Truck.

[elSicomoro]

Of course it makes sense to get rid of it somehow. I'm not sure destroying it was the best thing to do, but I'm not a mariner.

As far as the damage the truck could inflict on a boat, it would depend on the size of the boat. It could probably take out a pontoon or a motorboat...maybe a cutter? But a huge merchant ship? I doubt it.

And I don't think the "hardness" of a whale would necessarily matter. If a deer can total a car, imagine what a whale could do to a boat or ship.

Whales aren't as hard as deer.

[Griff]

Originally posted by dave
Whales aren't as hard as deer.

Somebody needs to read Moby Dick.

[arz]

[beavis and butthead snickering]

He said "Moby."

[/beavis and butthead snickering]

[pegusitas]

This was posted today on CNN's Offbeat News site:

"The Cubans who converted a 1951 Chevy pickup into a boat and sailed it to within 40 miles (65 kilometers) of Florida last week got another truck and drove it to the U.S. Interests Section on Wednesday to try a new -- and legal -- bid to go to the United States."

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/americ....ap/index.html

-Alex

[Griff]

Originally posted by arz
[beavis and butthead snickering]

He said "Moby."

[/beavis and butthead snickering]

Sometimes a harpoon is just a harpoon.

[xoxoxoBruce]

After all, we can't just have '51 Chevy pickup trucks floating around, unattended, in our coastal waters, can we?

If the crew hadn't been illegally shanghaied it wouldn't be an issue. All they had to do is tell them to turn around because they wouldn't be allowed to land in the U.S..:p

[quzah]

This is a rather interesting topic if you think about it. What exactly would be the violation here? Let's assume they actually made it into waters where America legally had a prayer, because what they did is outright wrong. You cannot board, sink, or capture some other craft in international waters just because you feel like it. Danger or no, it's not your property, you have no legal right to capture, board, or do shit, to anything in international waters.

But let's assume they actualy were in "our coastal waters". (Some one needs to pay attention here, 40 miles out is NOT "our coastal waters".)

1) What right does the coast guard / navy have when it comes to randomly boarding vessels? Can they just because they feel like it?

2) Equate this to a boatload of Canadians tooling around in a vessel. Who says they can't hit port and put around whatever town they like? Are you required to immediately visit the customs office or something, just because you happen to have entered port?

3) What consists of a viable sea-worthy vessel? Who gets to decide that I can't float my Ford pickup around? People make rafts out of all kinds of shit. If I tie a bunch of logs together, that's fine for me to cruise around with, but if I use a Ford, I can't?

I still say there's no way in hell that that would fly were they to do it to some rich American who had lawyers. So if you're bored, rich American, grab a pickup and some oil drums, tow it 40 miles out, turn around and head towards shore and let me know what happens.

Quzah.

[Hubris Boy]

Originally posted by quzah
Who gets to decide that I can't float my Ford pickup around?

I suppose the Coast Guard gets to decide.

I imagine that one could make the argument that the truck-raft full of Cubans in the middle of the Florida Strait were being rescued, not arrested. Their subsequent return to Cuba was the natural (and desirable) conclusion of their rescue. Because it would be racist and wrong of us to assume that the occupants of the truck-raft were attempting to enter the United States illegally, wouldn't it?

Or, as an alternative, one could argue that the captain of the CG vessel suspected that the truck-raft full of Cubans in the middle of the Florida Strait was engaged in piracy which, according to Admiralty law, is jus gentium and falls under the jurisdiction of any interested warship. In which case, he was well within his rights to board and seize the vessel in question.

Or, as yet another alternative, one could argue (in a wrong and racist sort of way) that a truck-raft full of Cubans in the middle of the Florida Strait must surely be attempting to enter the United States illegally, and that the captain of the CG vessel was acting reasonably the prevent the commission of a crime. And besides, the captain and crew of the Coast Guard cutter probably get tired of fishing the dead, bloated Cubans that didn't make it out of the drink, and they thought it might be nice to come back with some survivors for a change.

Take your pick.

Unless, of course, you'd have us believe that the truck-raft full of Cubans in the middle of the Florida Strait were simply out for pleasant days' sailing (as so many Cubans are wont to do), and that they were planning to turn and head back for Havana once they'd finished their lunch under the bright yellow tarpaulin?

Originally posted by quzah
(Some one needs to pay attention here, 40 miles out is NOT "our coastal waters".)[/b]

I believe, actually, that via some treaty (I don't remember which), nations are allowed to claim something like 200 miles of water surrounding them. As I recall, the United States claims 50. If that's the case, then yeah, 40 miles out could be considered our coastal waters.

I still say there's no way in hell that that would fly were they to do it to some rich American who had lawyers. So if you're bored, rich American, grab a pickup and some oil drums, tow it 40 miles out, turn around and head towards shore and let me know what happens.

Of course it wouldn't. They're citizens. They pay taxes. They're <b>supposed</b> to be in the country. You think the Coast Guard would turn them around?

That being the case, if they got caught, I'm certain they'd get a citation or whatever the hell is supposed to happen when someone floats a truck into the country.

[Griff]

There was a thread on this freaky anarchist site which I visit but don't post on. They were fantasizing about buying an oil tanker as an offshore platform for various capitalist gambling and dope growing operations. They were pretty concerned with transport in and out of coastal waters but few of them recognized that they really couldn't set up shop anywhere but way into the Pacific and way off normal traffic routes otherwise they're going down. On the other hand, setting up in such a place might put your operation outside the reach of the RIAA.

[xoxoxoBruce]

That being the case, if they got caught, I'm certain they'd get a citation or whatever the hell is supposed to happen when someone floats a truck into the country.

Unregistered watercraft plus probably safety violations, within 200 miles.