The Japanese court system didn’t have any problems.
I don’t know what that means.
The conviction of Peter Bethune as cited above.
So the fellow who ran down and killed a fisherman is complaining about being run down by a whaler.
Seems to me that some folks should not go out on the water.
What does that have to do with our discussion here?
See post #1.
Edit: Hamsters got mad at me…see post below
We are talking about whether I can kill you because you were as asshole to me yesterday (or an hour ago if you prefer). Is that legal and is that ok by you?
So far it is nothing but spectacular dodging in this thread.
I’ve seen only the last two episodes of WW. What’s all this about how many “ships the Sea Shepherds have sunk”??
Literally? Figuratively?
Also: is my memory playing tricks on me, or did I see one of the SS crew, in the throes of shock and disbelief that their Badass Batboat got hit, wearing a watchcap that said “Sea Shepherds” AND “Prepare To Ram”??
If that’s really what I saw, it was unintentionally ironic. Or something.
.
You’re making a straw man so you have something to debate. The Ady Gil, a boat being driven by an anarchist pirate group known for boarding/sinking ships was actively making close runs against the whalers. Their boat is now at the bottom of the sea for their piracy efforts.
Breaking news…
This years catch of enviro-sympathy putang is expected to drop dramactically. However, some experts predict this years production of “badass” “escapes” death putang may increase…
Now, back to you Walter…
The point you are not getting is that “is that legal” is a nonsense question without specifying the law or legal system you are talking about. The events here took place in international waters. Various countries have various rules about which activities various people can engage in in various types of international waters. If you don’t specify which country you are talking about, then your question is meaningless.
If you don’t want to specify a legal system or a set of laws or standards, and you just want to talk about it in the complete abstract, then I will say that I do think it is perfectly fine for me to kill you if you are bothering me.
Actually, the maritime court simply ducked out on the issue by claiming that Japan was uncooperative.
I do not know whether the court had access to the two tapes (one from the Shepherds’ Bob Barker and one from the rail of the Shonan Maru No. 2), or whether they were even interested in seeing either tape, but both videos show the whaler changing course to hit the idling Ady Gil which was not “running at the whaling ship.”
The Shepherds are idiots with a long history of stupid stunts, but there was no “accident” in this particular instance.
It shows the whaling ship changing course, but you have no way of knowing if it was with the intention of hitting the Ady Gil. Given the amount of other opportunities both parties have had to ram each other, I’m fair certain that this one was accidental as the Ady Gil would most likely not have been hit if it hadn’t moved forward probably due to someone panicking at the helm seeing the big ship bearing down on them.
Fuck that, what the Japanese are doing is immoral and illegal. Saying they are killing whales for scientific research is complete bullshit and we all know it. Species of endangered whales (some severely endangered) have been found in canned whale meat for sale in the country.
Sure the Sea Sheperds are dumbasses half the time, but at least they are doing something about this issue. I find it slightly amazing how many people are against them, as if what the Japanese are doing is acceptable. I support their crazy ass antics because for gods sakes at least they are getting off their asses and doing something to stop the madness that is our world.
The Ady Gil was clearly visible. The Bob Barker scene opens with a view of the Shonan Maru’s starboard side which is the side on which the Ady Gil is cruising. Had the Ady Gil been moving at speed, the Ady Gil would have been required by maritime law to turn or stop to avoid a collision, but the tape from the Shonan Maru shows by the wake of the Ady Gil that it was not moving to a collision course. However, the Shonan Maru then turns to starboard so that the Ady Gil is directly ahead–a violation of law, then turns back to port. It might have been an “accident” in the sense that the Shonan Maru intended only to scare the Ady Gil and did not intend to actually make contact or intended to rock the Ady Gil with its bow wave, but the Shonan Maru was clearly in violation of law in its choice of maneuver.
But they’re doing something stupid, dangerous, and counter-productive.
I don’t see where a court has a whole lot of say when a high speed pirate ship try’s to board, divert, sink, or throw chemicals on another ship. Given that the larger ship is less maneuverable any ship that is struck by it has to be negligently close. Add in the pirate nature of the Ady Gil and you have justifiable reasons to crowd their attempt to board/throw chemicals with S turns. The fact that they parked their bat mobile next to the ship is their doing.
I see. And who is charging the Japanese with this crime? No one. Okay then. Laws that aren’t enforced aren’t much use, are they?
Immoral is your opinion. They are whales = big fish to the Japanese and all the others who hunt them.
If it is illegal then someone will charge them with it. No one seems to be doing so, so the legality of their actions is moot. And think about this if the issue is so important to you: You want to protest, but can’t make it to the Antartic? Go to Northern Canada and protest the Inuit. They also kill whales. They are lot closer to home if you want to get all up in arms about whales being killed.
Since the Ady Gil was to starboard, it should have the right of way regardless of its speed.
OTOH, in aviation the less-maneuverable type of craft has the right of way:
Sec. 91.113 - Right-of-way rules: Except water operations.
(a) Inapplicability. This section does not apply to the operation of an aircraft on water.
(b) General. When weather conditions permit, regardless of whether an operation is conducted under instrument flight rules or visual flight rules, vigilance shall be maintained by each person operating an aircraft so as to see and avoid other aircraft. When a rule of this section gives another aircraft the right-of-way, the pilot shall give way to that aircraft and may not pass over, under, or ahead of it unless well clear.
(c) In distress. An aircraft in distress has the right-of-way over all other air traffic.
(d) Converging. When aircraft of the same category are converging at approximately the same altitude (except head-on, or nearly so), the aircraft to the other’s right has the right-of-way. If the aircraft are of different categories –
(1) A balloon has the right-of-way over any other category of aircraft;
(2) A glider has the right-of-way over an airship, airplane, or rotorcraft; and
(3) An airship has the right-of-way over an airplane or rotorcraft.
However, an aircraft towing or refueling other aircraft has the right-of-way over all other engine-driven aircraft.
(e) Approaching head-on. When aircraft are approaching each other head-on, or nearly so, each pilot of each aircraft shall alter course to the right.
(f) Overtaking. Each aircraft that is being overtaken has the right-of-way and each pilot of an overtaking aircraft shall alter course to the right to pass well clear.
(g) Landing. Aircraft, while on final approach to land or while landing, have the right-of-way over other aircraft in flight or operating on the surface, except that they shall not take advantage of this rule to force an aircraft off the runway surface which has already landed and is attempting to make way for an aircraft on final approach. When two or more aircraft are approaching an airport for the purpose of landing, the aircraft at the lower altitude has the right-of-way, but it shall not take advantage of this rule to cut in front of another which is on final approach to land or to overtake that aircraft.
Since aviation right-of-way rules are based on marine right-of-way rules – at least they seem to be – I wonder how close the marine rules are to these?