"Richard Casady" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 10:31:54 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

Many people drift fish with the engine off. You are not NUC unless
you are disabled.

As you would have it, an abandoned boat is under command unless it is
also disabled. Interesting concept.

Casady


It's a ghost ship..

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 11:40:58 -0700, "Capt. JG"
wrote:

"Richard Casady" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 10:31:54 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

Many people drift fish with the engine off. You are not NUC unless
you are disabled.

As you would have it, an abandoned boat is under command unless it is
also disabled. Interesting concept.

Casady


It's a ghost ship..

There was the Marie Celeste. Classic case of under way, NUC.

Casady

Ho about I'm off on a cruise and I somehow manage to
destroy my prop on a rock? On the way home for the next several
days, I still have to run the engine to keep the batteries up and the
reefer cold.

Forgive my ignorance. Why do you want to keep reefer cold? Is that a
nautical term in this case?

richforman

On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 15:03:10 -0400, wrote:

You have no standing to make this claim about what the court would or
would not do. You are just blowing hot air. You've had plenty of
practice.

Capt Doggy, on the off chance you have a USCG rating, I think you need
to sign up for the refresher course.

On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 22:11:22 GMT, wrote:

You are now claiming to know (or possibly control?) what a court would or would
not do? I have two words for you: PUL EASE

Thank you. As it turns out I have an expert in the family.

On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 06:42:37 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 19:51:54 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 22:11:22 GMT, wrote:

You are now claiming to know (or possibly control?) what a court would or would
not do? I have two words for you: PUL EASE

Thank you. As it turns out I have an expert in the family.

Someone who knows what courts will do without even a trial? This is HUGE! Think
of all the time effort and money that can be saved now that we can replace the
entire legal system with someone in your family.

Gee! You have an expert in your family too? Here I was thinking that I
was the only one who was married to the Last Word in Everything. I
assume that my sympathy is reciprocated :-)

Bruce-in-Bangkok
(correct email address for reply)

On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 08:32:52 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 19:21:20 +0700, Bruce in Bangkok
wrote:

On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 06:42:37 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 19:51:54 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 22:11:22 GMT, wrote:

You are now claiming to know (or possibly control?) what a court would or would
not do? I have two words for you: PUL EASE

Thank you. As it turns out I have an expert in the family.

Someone who knows what courts will do without even a trial? This is HUGE! Think
of all the time effort and money that can be saved now that we can replace the
entire legal system with someone in your family.

Gee! You have an expert in your family too? Here I was thinking that I
was the only one who was married to the Last Word in Everything. I
assume that my sympathy is reciprocated :-)

Bruce-in-Bangkok
(correct email address for reply)

No, that was resident deity WayneB who is omnicient and omnipresent.

Aw, well I'm sorry that you don't have the experience of She Who is
Always Right. I'm not sure that WayneB can give you the full flavor of
the experience.
Bruce-in-Bangkok
(correct email address for reply)