This is an -- hic! -- outrage! I'l own this @#$%^*& line when I'm -- hic -- through with you!
Posted on 05/20/2006 10:20:08 PM PDT by Deek1969
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - The captain of a cruise ship docked in Seattle has been stripped of command and will be fired after he failed an alcohol breath test, a spokesman for Celebrity Cruises, said on Saturday.
The unnamed captain of the Mercury cruise liner was taken ashore on Friday after a Coast Guard inspector detected alcohol on his breath and he failed a test, according to a spokesman for the U.S. Coast Guard's 13th District Command in Seattle.
(Excerpt) Read more at today.reuters.com ...
So that's what the captain of the Exxon Valdez has been up to!
This is an -- hic! -- outrage! I'l own this @#$%^*& line when I'm -- hic -- through with you!
Somebunny spike the ship's petrol ?
Since time immemorial ship captains have been powered by rum, or by other distilled spirits if no rum was available. Thus it is just how it should be.
From the article:
Federal maritime law makes it illegal to operate a vessel in U.S. waters with a blood-alcohol content level above 0.04, which represents roughly what a 170-pound man might register up to three hours after consuming a 12-ounce beer.
Are we really talking about a "Drunken cruise liner captain"?
0.04? Damn, aftershave will do that. Or Binaca breath spray.
NUI
Navigating Under the Influence
Yeah, wouldn't it need to be a blood test?
I'd think, and by the time they drew it, he'd be OK.
Might be a selectively enforced rule that the cruise line uses when they need to get rid of an employee for other reasons.
The punishment, if this is the case, would be absurd.
Bad headline, but the story noted that it was a Coast Guard inspector that started the inquiry. A ship's captain is responsible for a lot of lives, and the rules are very strict. If the regulations are "no drinking while in command of a vessel", the cruise line probably has no choice but to cut him loose.
I just re-read the article. The article never says what the captain tested out at, only that it was a violation of Federal Maritime law to operate with over .04 level of alcohol. He could have been .04 or .1. In any event, as a ship's captain he had to know the law. Violation of Federal laws is a pretty quick ticket to losing your job, or the White House, if you're a democrat.
If he had just taken an Ambien and laid down for the night, he'd be OK. They might not have nabbed him for sleep-sailing if he didn't crash into anything.
"docked" in Seattle , This is the part that gets me. If the Vessel is docked, How can he be charged?
I would assume that they had SOME kind of suspicion that the guy had a "problem".
Quite frankly, if I were a passenger on that boat...OR on the crew of any of the huge container ships that ply the waters of Puget Sound...I wouldn't want a captain of anything that big who was anything other than stone-cold sober.
Is a captain on duty 24 X 7? Is he not allowed to have a glass of wine if he's off-duty and will be off duty for the next 3 or more hours?
The article doesn't provide enough data to know much of anything other than he was nailed for something. I would assume there was a valid reason, but still the article doesn't say much.
He's still captain, docked or otherwise.
Not anymore. BTW, I agree with the Coast Guard's call on this one.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.