South Korea Ship Disaster: Should Crew Members Be Sentenced to indirect Death?

-

a shipThe recent accident involving the South Korean ship highlights the great risk faced by ship crew members. The ship carrying young students capsized very close to the South Korean sea shores. They were about 400 passengers on board the ship and more than half of these passengers are presumed dead.  So far divers have recovered over hundred bodies from the ship.

The captain of the ship has been arrested and charged with offences relating to the abandonment of the ship. Four crew members were arrested today in addition to the captain. They too will face charges similar to those faced by the captain.

The justification for this prosecution is that the South Korean crew members have broken the taboo governing ship operations on the sea. Sea crew members are mandated to ensure that all their passengers have been evacuated from the ship in times of ship wreck before the crew members could try to flee from the disaster scene. In other words, crew members cannot run for safety in times of ship disaster leaving passengers behind. This is to ensure that crew members with good knowledge of ship rescue operations do not just flee when there is a ship wreck leaving inexperienced passengers to perish on the sea. But it also imposes indirect death sentence on crew members who are likely to die with passengers.

Sea crew members are not alone in this unfair treatment. Air crew members are bound by the same law as ship crew members. They cannot abandon their passengers in times of plane crash. Any air crew member defying this rule can be prosecuted for manslaughter.

Unlike sea and air crew members, the law protects health and social workers against potential life threatening situations. It is part of the code of conduct for the police, for example, to ensure that their life is not in danger before attempting to save a person in danger. In other words, it is permissible for a police officer to allow a person to die if attempting to rescue the victim could result in casualty for the officer. A police officer did just that a few years ago when he watch a boy drown in water. The officer could not jump in to help the boy because the officer was not in a swim suit.

If it is permissible for health and social workers such as the police to put their life first before that of victims in times of potential danger, why should sea crew members be expected to do the opposite? After all it is inevitable that some passengers cannot be rescued in times of sea disaster. What do you think? Do you think that the criticisms of the South Korean ship crew members can be justified? Do you think that the rule of engagement regarding ship disaster should be changed?

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Spanish Dog Fouling Law: Are Spanish Politicians Pursuing The Wrong Agenda?

-
Image
 Dog fouling Spain has some of the strictest laws regarding pets possession in Europe. One of its laws governing animal possession in Spain, for example, bans having exotic creatures as pets and requires dog, cat and ferret owners to declare their animals to the authority within three months of bringing them into the country. Until recently, however, Spain has no law nor sanction for failure to clean up after dog fouling in public places. It was up to dog owners whether to clean up such mess. This has now changed following the introduction of the dog fouling law. The new law states that the fine for any person failing to clean up after his or her dog fouling in a public place such as a park or kids play ground should be 1500 euros. The rationale for this legislation is to deter dog owners from leaving their dogs messing up public places such as parks. Regular visitors to parks can testify how the sight of such dog foul can be an eyesore. However, asking dog owners wh
Read more

Social Media Networks: Calls For Tighter Regulations

-
One of the most fascinating technological inventions of the twenty first century is the development of social media networks such as YouTube, Twitter, and Face book. These social media networks make it possible for people to meet new people and make friends, locate old friends and family members, or to form a relationship that can result in marriage. They also provide a platform in the form of advertising for conducting businesses. Despite these benefits provided by the social media networks certain things can go awfully wrong on the networks. The most recent example of how the social media network can be turned into a weapon of criminality is the case last week involving threatening rape and murder messages sent to a number of British women on Twitter. Feminists are attempting to use this incident to rally for support for tighter regulations on activities being conducted within social media networks. Is it possible to control activities within these networks? Having legislat
Read more

Marketing Tricks: How Many Times Have You Fallen Victim?

-
Image
 Fat free food Whereas business owners call them marketing strategies, none business owners regard them as marketing tricks. Regardless of what you like to call them, businesses cannot survive without marketing tricks. Marketing tricks are the flywheel that keeps businesses engine running. We tend not to be concerned about them because of our perception that we are familiar with them and can avoid them. However, a careful look at the marketing tricks used by businesses will reveal that many of us have fallen victims of them in the past and can still fall victim of the malpractice in future. Let us consider two of these popular tricks used in supermarkets. The first marketing trick used by retailers is relating to the slogan “75% reduced fat”. Items labelled 75% reduced fat are often displayed on supermarket shelves. Some of us who are conscious of our health tend to go for them to avoid consuming excess fat. Excess fat in the body is considered to be a risk factor for
Read more