DUI While at Anchor?

[w1651]

I think the lesson here is drink below and have breath mints available all the time. Other wise you will be subject to the cash cow that is DUI in Florida. Come on vacation and leave on Probation.

[rognvald]

There are two issues here: 1.) the legality of drinking aboard a vessel at dock or at anchor and 2.) the legality of the CG or law enforcement to board such a vessel. Irrespective of the real safety concerns of a drunk operator, boaters must accept that if they are boarded while drinking at dock or at anchor, there is a real possibility that an OUI may be issued. Once issued, whether found guilty or innocent, you will spend a great deal of money and will experience much grief and aggravation during the process. That is the reality and the power of the authorities. However, the real issue to me is that occurrences such as boardings of vessels, DUI checkpoints, and DUI traffic stops are indicative of an encroaching police state where citizens' personal liberties are gradually eroded until none remain and a country's population become a compliant mass of humanity: Sheeple. This has been the trend for the last 30 years, or so, and can also be witnessed in the suppression of free speech and the threat of lawsuits of those who have been "offended." I believe it is a natural consequence of the dumbed down masses where the majority of a country's population could not even pass an 8th grade Civics exam concerning, say in America, elementary knowledge of our Constitution, Bill of Rights and basic US History. But, water takes the path of least resistance and the flock will continue to grow as they go ba, bah, baaaaaaaaaaah. Good luck and good sailing. And, for further thought and amusement, take a look at some of America's finest.
https://youtu.be/SRkFDcX_72c

[dbeausoleil]

"Bottom line is that, despite what a lot of people think, the truth is that a police officer is just about the worst choice for questions about what is legal and what is not."

So...the discussion's gone in a lot of directions but as a cop, ship inspector, and someone that has actually boarded and arrested folks in Florida waters I can state the clearest line in the discussion is the above quote. A law enforcement officer alleges a law violation. It is passed to the courts and a judge to validate/invalidate the assertion. The officer has the advantage of being a professional witness (also why I never get picked for jury duty). In point of fact, a mooring field is a defined area, with permanent anchorages, for boats to shelter. Their moorings must not block passages from shore owners, or channels/navigational components. Anchoring is a temporary stop from harbor to harbor and must be effected safely. A 'cop', State, USCG or otherwise is not out to ruin someone's day on the water. Law enforcement will only become involved when observing unsafe behavior (swan diving from the rigging), or investigating an accident (dragged anchor/drunk owner, 4 boats damaged as a result). People are killed/maimed on watercraft regularly. I personally know a man that ran over his own son on a jetski with his 34' powerboat because he allowed the boy to jump the bow waves. He was cited. That's operating unsafely. If you drag anchor in a hurricane, life just sucks. Call your insurance company. If you drag anchor because you're clearly drunk and missed the fact that you deployed 20' of anchor line in 10' of water and the tide turned, and you destroyed someone's bow....yeah, I pretty much would have no choice but to site you for negligent operation and if you are belligerent, we'll be happy to do a sobriety check and a few vessel doc checks and safety checks. We can always find something. Cute blondes with big smiles get warnings, sometimes even when you KNOW they were texting, hit the rumble strip, flipped the car into a ditch but walked out unharmed and nothing destroyed but her car. It happens. We're human. But be loud mouth smart ass, argue, and we'll just keep writing. If you're really a jerk, we'll pull out handcuffs, then pepperspray, and escalation of force until you're in a choke hold or hanging yourself 3 days later in a cell. That happens too. Cop actions are to stop consequences from escalating. If they already have, we write it up and hand it off to the courts. That's their lane and why they get the big bucks...

Otherwise, it's pretty much do no harm, live and let live.


FYSA

[FSMike]

Evans - if law firms were always right there would be only one of them.

Originally Posted by estarzinger

----
The actual law is: "-----When the owner or operator is aboard, an officer may board a vessel with consent or when the officer has probable cause or knowledge to believe that a violation of a provision of this chapter has occurred or is occurring. ----

As you noted, the above is the actual law (without any bold type).
Things such as boarding to inspect heads, placards, etc., are exceptions to the law.

USCG personnel being on board other law enforcement vessels is an established practice to legitimize the other LEOs right to board a vessel.
Aside from that, I do not think that the USCG has the power to delegate federal authority to a state. The USCG personnel must be present.
Of course I'm not a lawyer specializing in constitutional law, that's just my opinion.

I am not familiar with the "community care doctrine". If you could offer me a citation from the Florida statutes I would be thankful.

[SURV69]

Originally Posted by hamburking

I won't comment on the legalities, but I do have to agree...somebody onboard needs to be sober and in charge, even at anchor. Aside from dragging, there could be fire, fuel leak, collision, man overboard, or any number of things that would require a sober response.

I sail alone, or with my young children, so I keep sober the whole time, not a drop on board. When I crossed the ocean, I was often the only one sober on the boat. I didn't touch a drop till we were safely and securely docked in Antigua.

But how can it be that someone, on board, who is NOT sober, is "legally", worse than having NOBODY on board ... and let's not kid anyone DUI's can be had with a few beers ... one does not have to be so drunk as to be incapacitated in any way.

All the possible calamities you mentioned are possible with no one on the boat?

I think, what's missing here is that a drunk captain/owner on board is worse than nobody on board.

Maybe the captain were to go swimming(if legally drunk swimming is allowed), instead of sleeping it off.

Maybe, if the water depth less than nose high, a drunk captain should just walk to shore and sleep it off on the beach?

I'm not trying to attack anyone, I'm just saying this law is to some degree nonsensical ...BTW, this is also EXACTLY the way this law would be enforced in Ohio laws too.

A drunk, sleeping it off in a car ... parked and no keys in the ignition is the same way ... yet, it's legal to sleep in a car and it's legal to leave the car.

This is possibly nothing more than shutting down a potential argument by a drunkard to use the "excuse", of just sleeping in the car, or not actually sailing or boating.

I'm also willing to bet that this is not a law that is often enforced unless another questionably "legal", situation arises ... like a rich land-owner 300 feet away, or music playing a little too loud.

The problem is, the law is the law, as written and if you pi$$ someone off the laws that are never used, will now be abused and used.

[rognvald]

"But be loud mouth smart ass, argue, and we'll just keep writing. If you're really a jerk, we'll pull out handcuffs, then pepperspray, and escalation of force until you're in a choke hold or hanging yourself 3 days later in a cell." dbeausoleil


Well, if this new mystery "contributor" is not a troll, I think his comments above exemplify my remarks in my last post. Give some people a uniform and a badge and they believe they have carte blanche to trample on your civil rights. . . especially when you're a "loud mouth, smart ass," and "argue." Remember folks, these are the employees for which your tax dollars are paying.

[charliegrau]

I looked up the florida statute. The key is the definition of "operate" which requires you to be underway or under tow. Read it at www.leg.fl.us title XXIV chapter 327.02(30). So it doesnt look like you should have a problem if you are having a sundowner.

[Cadence]

I doubt under the initial circumstance a ticket would be issued unless someone was making a spectacle of themselves.

[Udacha]

Originally Posted by w1651

I think the lesson here is drink below and have breath mints available all the time. Other wise you will be subject to the cash cow that is DUI in Florida. Come on vacation and leave on Probation.

That sums it up nicely.

The crazy thing about FL is it does matter where you are. If you are in salt water it will usually be the Coast Guard, sometimes marine patrol. If you are on fresh water it will be County Sheriffs Dept. and things can very A LOT from county to county. I was in Lake county, FL and a good friend of mine has a marine repair shop and marina, he did all of the maintenance for the Sheriffs Dept. and I got to know the officers. As a side note, sometimes I would take the Sheriffs boats for test rides, it's kinda fun to see a friend on the lake and turn on the blue lights. I also had a neighbor/friend a couple houses down from me that was a Deputy and had Sheriffs party's there once in a while and I got to know quite a few of the Deputies and things are not fair, their job it to write tickets. The Sheriff at the time was brought up on all kinds of corruption charges and lost his job. So the big problem is that the officers write a lot of tickets and the bad ones you need to hire a lawyer and that usually cost $$$$$

[SURV69]

what ... making a spectacle of themselves?

is that like a door being a jar?

[Cadence]

Originally Posted by SURV69

what ... making a spectacle of themselves?

is that like a door being a jar?

You know a big eyeglass or some sort of ass.

[w1651]

Originally Posted by rognvald

"But be loud mouth smart ass, argue, and we'll just keep writing. If you're really a jerk, we'll pull out handcuffs, then pepperspray, and escalation of force until you're in a choke hold or hanging yourself 3 days later in a cell." dbeausoleil


Well, if this new mystery "contributor" is not a troll, I think his comments above exemplify my remarks in my last post. Give some people a uniform and a badge and they believe they have carte blanche to trample on your civil rights. . . especially when you're a "loud mouth, smart ass," and "argue." Remember folks, these are the employees for which your tax dollars are paying.

Is standing up for your rights arguing? Or is it giving law enforcement a hard time? Sounds like everything is open to interpretation. I had a freind get his 2nd DUI a while back. He said there were 55 people at the courthouse that morning and 77 after lunch. All had DUI's. That's a cash cow at 10,000 a person. (And I am not defending his actions either just stating a point)
We all know that steering anything while intoxicated is wrong and down right unsafe. I have had my act clean and sober for three years now. But I still will argue that a DUI specification of 0.08 is ridiculous and anything under it is still under the influence. I can break the law if I gargle with scope with this law.

[S/V Illusion]

Originally Posted by rognvald

"But be loud mouth smart ass, argue, and we'll just keep writing. If you're really a jerk, we'll pull out handcuffs, then pepperspray, and escalation of force until you're in a choke hold or hanging yourself 3 days later in a cell." dbeausoleil


Well, if this new mystery "contributor" is not a troll, I think his comments above exemplify my remarks in my last post. Give some people a uniform and a badge and they believe they have carte blanche to trample on your civil rights. . . especially when you're a "loud mouth, smart ass," and "argue." Remember folks, these are the employees for which your tax dollars are paying.

Since when has reckless endangerment become your 'civil right'?

That statute, or its equivalent in many states, provides law enforcement the authority to protect people from their own stupidity. I'd rather vest such authority in them rather than leave it to lots of the moron boat operators about whom we routinely complain about here.

Your civil rights don't trump that of others.

[cwyckham]

Originally Posted by hamburking

I won't comment on the legalities, but I do have to agree...somebody onboard needs to be sober and in charge, even at anchor. Aside from dragging, there could be fire, fuel leak, collision, man overboard, or any number of things that would require a sober response.

I sail alone, or with my young children, so I keep sober the whole time, not a drop on board. When I crossed the ocean, I was often the only one sober on the boat. I didn't touch a drop till we were safely and securely docked in Antigua.

I totally agree. I generally have a one drink limit for myself when I'm away from the dock.

I don't care what other people drink as long as they don't make asses of themselves, but things happen on boats sometimes and I want to be able to deal with it well if it does.

[Cadence]

Originally Posted by S/V Illusion

Since when has reckless endangerment become your 'civil right'?

That statute, or its equivalent in many states, provides law enforcement the authority to protect people from their own stupidity. I'd rather vest such authority in them rather than leave it to lots of the moron boat operators about whom we routinely complain about here.

Your civil rights don't trump that of others.

Did you read the OP? At anchor, grilling and have a drink at the end of the day didn't sound like reckless endangerment. I do agree about the cop having every right if someone is exhibiting reckless endangerment or lipping off if it's a toss up situation.