What you're saying, as I understand it, is that because dealing in contraband was not a criminal offence, but an infraction subject to a fine under the Excise Act, faced with the resistance on the river, the “criminal element” said, “Well, you know, we'll take our chances with bringing it in by road, and if we get caught, well, I guess there's a fine, and so on, but we're not going to jail.”
If I understand you correctly, you're suggesting that with a minimum sentence, they'll say now, “Well, you know, I'm not taking a chance by road, because obviously the risk of being caught crossing the border with a truck full of contraband is greater than the risk of crossing it over on the river.” They're going to come back to the river a little more determined than maybe before, because as you were saying at one point in your presentation, there's a certain element that may be not as hardened an element, for example, skilled people just looking for some extra money. They're going to vacate the whole process, and those who have nothing to lose will now say, “I'm not taking a chance at the road border. I'm going to go back to the river.” This is what is going to bring the problem back to the river. Is my understanding correct?