Coast Guard/DEA boardings

[Dsanduril]

Originally Posted by SURV69

A few years back I read somewhere that the cadets are required to read(and learn?), a sort of creed imploring the CG to consider that when they stop an American vessel, they are stopping "free American citizens" ... it goes on to say that these "free American citizens", do not take kindly to being stopped or detained and that the CG needs to understand the spirit of the citizens they stop ... to treat them courteously and to get them back on their way as quickly as possible.

I don't know the full extent of this "creed", and I don't know where to find it

Quite some time ago this was the forward to the USCG Boarding Officer Training Manual:

Enforcement of Federal boating safety laws and regulations by the Coast Guard is a necessary part of our responsibility. An equally important function of the boating law enforcement officer is educating those persons who must follow the regulations. Ignorance of the law is no excuse, however, the Coast Guard has a moral, as well as a legal, responsibility to educate boatmen as to their obligations under the law. For many of these people, the primary source of information concerning recreational boating law is the U.S. Coast Guard boarding officer.

...

Boat examinations must be conducted in a courteous and dignified manner even in the face of open resentment. Firmness must be applied when necessary, but should always be applied in a respectful manner. Consider yourself an educator first, a patrolman second. If the need arises, use your big stick, but walk softly first. You will be better received and, most assuredly, your duty will be more pleasant.

Safe boating is best enforced through education.

[skipmac]

Originally Posted by surfprimal

And you would be wrong. 14 USC 89. see previous post a couple pages back.

I believe you are misreading the law if you think the USCG can board a US documented vessel in foreign waters without permission of the that country. US law ends where another country's border begins.

If you think otherwise consider this. Do you think the Russians would allow the USCG or any other US government body into their country to enforce a US law for example to board a US documented vessel anchored in a Russian harbor? The same applies to any other country in the world.

Yes there are countries that have given blanket permission for USCG boardings in that country's waters like the Bahamas, but that permission has to be given unless we want to invade a country against their wishes.

[a64pilot]

Originally Posted by Rustic Charm

From what I have just read, the Yangtze Patrol's ceased all together from 1945. It no longer is the case.

I know of only one situation in Australia where America's military can exercise some form of jurisdiction on Australian soil and that I have been told is that the Military Police from the US on Australian soil can take action against Amercian servicemen without local jurisidiction. Some sort of Federal agreement. Though I was told this back in the 90's by an Australian MP. Not sure it it's correct but that's what I was told. But, even then they need an Australian extradiction order to remove the said military person from Australia.

They are called SOFA'S which stands for Status Of Forces Agreement.
I'm sure they differ from one country to the next, Korea for example I don't think had arrest authority on a US Soldier. Germany I feel sure did.

[SURV69]

What i read, actually is like a reminder to the CG operatives that Americans fought hard for their freedom, are not supportive of heavy-handedness, should be given the proper respect and released to continue their activities as soon as possible ... it was pretty long.

My memory tells me that this has(had?), been required reading at the CG for maybe a hundred years or so.

It goes on to say American citizens do not like being stopped while enjoying themselves ... it goes on and on.

Anyway ... the bottom line is that someone of stature in the CG way back when, wanted CG cadets to understand the "psychie" of the Americans they'd be stopping.

About the anywhere in the world thing ... NO CG ship would be in any "enemy", waters without due authority, so it makes full sense that they could actually stop an American boat in an inland lake in China ... or Russia ... but the CG would have to be there ... somehow, and at this point and time no CG vessels would be in Russia or China without permission from Russia or China.

[Rustic Charm]

Originally Posted by SURV69

About the anywhere in the world thing ... NO CG ship would be in any "enemy", waters without due authority, so it makes full sense that they could actually stop an American boat in an inland lake in China ... or Russia ... but the CG would have to be there ... somehow, and at this point and time no CG vessels would be in Russia or China without permission from Russia or China.

I beg to differ it makes no sense what so ever. Just because one nation gives another nation permission to be present, such as on joint manourvers, does not in any way stand to reason that the USCG can then extend that privilage to policing it's own domestic laws such as in boarding American vessels to do safety, or other checks. Makes no sense what so ever

Of course, I think everyone would agree that the USCG can enter such waters in persuit of a suspect 'with consent' of the nation they are infringing on. no one seems to be disputing this.

[jeremiason]

This comes up every year and the Cruiser Forum Lawyers jump all over it...

I would advise any boat Captain traveling in areas the USCG patrols to be very familiar with 14 USC 89.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/14/89

[Boatswain2PA]

I did 20 years as an operator in the Coast Guard, including command of two stations. I never did like the law enforcement portion of that career, and instead focused more on the search & rescue aspect, but I still had to do thousands of boardings over my career.

I'm also a keel boat and catamaran sailor (a classic Hobie 18)

Originally Posted by mikeod

To put it briefly. You do not have 4th amendment rights on the water.

Yes, you do.

However "boating" is considered a "regulated activity", so therefore this activity can be "inspected" by the USCG. This means checking for required items - PFDs, extinguishers, flame arrestors, and marine toilets.

So the USCG boarding officers can inspect your boat for these items. However they cannot "search" your boat, or your possessions, without probable cause.

What's the difference between "search" and "inspect"? It's a fine line. They can go below to look at your fire extinguishers, but can't go through your drawers or personal bags. If they go below to look at your fire extinguishers and see the joint sitting on the table, then you're busted because it was in an "open space".

Originally Posted by MarkJ

Quite often. And remember they confiscate your boat if they find anything. Remember any drug smoking guest on board leaves cannabis resin on every surface they touch. The oil lasts for months and a simple swab and there goes your boat. Some states may have legalised it but on a boat a whole nother story!

Not even remotely true. Yes, during the late 1980's congress passed the "zero tolerance" laws that allowed us to seize any boat for any amount of drugs, this never really happened. Instead, if we found personal use quantities of drugs we would give you a paper saying that we have seized your boat and you gotta show up in court...but we will let you use your boat until the court date.

Not to say the USCG/DEA doesn't seize boats because they do, but not for such scant amounts.

Originally Posted by lindabarzini

As a Libertarian, I strongly oppose anyone from the government to do a search without probable cause or a safety search; but I look at it from a realistic perspective. I have to either accept it, or don't buy a boat.

I'm a huge libertarian as well, and I always taught my crew that the Constitution was "the most important paper in the world", so they damn well better respect it. But, again, they can't do a "search without probable cause". They can inspect your boat for required gear.

Originally Posted by Rustic Charm

Whilst im aware that the US CG can search a US vessel even outside the USA, i seriously doubt they would have ANY authority in another soverign nation

Lets use Australia for example. Under what authority would ANY US law enforement authority have over its citizens in Australia?

A US documented vessel is a little piece of US sovereignty wherever it goes. If a murder happens on a US documented vessel while it is plying the inland waters of China, then US law applies.

Originally Posted by SURV69

A few years back I read somewhere that the cadets are required to read(and learn?), a sort of creed imploring the CG to consider that when they stop an American vessel, they are stopping "free American citizens" ... it goes on to say that these "free American citizens", do not take kindly to being stopped or detained and that the CG needs to understand the spirit of the citizens they stop ... to treat them courteously and to get them back on their way as quickly as possible.

I don't know the full extent of this "creed", and I don't know where to find it

I never heard of such a "creed". Furthermore, very few Cadets/Officers in the Coast Guard are operational anymore. They are virtually all bureaucrats. The vast, vast, vast majority of Coast Guard operators, especially those on the water, are enlisted guys. The Coast Guard is the only military branch that puts enlisted in total command of operational units.

Somebody said that you have the right to refuse a boarding if you feel it is unsafe. No, you don't. If you feel it is unsafe then you should certainly bring that up to the boarding team as they approach, but do NOT try to stop them from boarding. That will NOT work out well for you.

Better to just let them come, look around, and realize these are almost always undertrained kids who would rather be back ashore playing x-box than climbing over your gunnel.

Be nice to them, these guys are the part of the Coast Guard who works hard, and it is these guys who will push out into the storm to come get you if/when you get into trouble.

If any of them are unprofessional or discourteous, simply ask them how to contact their boss and follow up with a phone call or letter to their chain of command.

[SURV69]

"A US documented vessel is a little piece of US sovereignty wherever it goes. If a murder happens on a US documented vessel while it is plying the inland waters of China, then US law applies." ....Boatswain2PA

Okay ... tell me this ...

If Ted Cruse was born on an American document vessel, while in Canada, would he be considered having been actually born in America?


Just had to ask ....

[Rustic Charm]

Originally Posted by Boatswain2PA

I did 20 years as an operator in the Coast Guard, including command of two stations. I never did like the law enforcement portion of that career, and instead focused more on the search & rescue aspect, but I still had to do thousands of boardings over my career.

I'm also a keel boat and catamaran sailor (a classic Hobie 18)

Yes, you do.

However "boating" is considered a "regulated activity", so therefore this activity can be "inspected" by the USCG. This means checking for required items - PFDs, extinguishers, flame arrestors, and marine toilets.

So the USCG boarding officers can inspect your boat for these items. However they cannot "search" your boat, or your possessions, without probable cause.

What's the difference between "search" and "inspect"? It's a fine line. They can go below to look at your fire extinguishers, but can't go through your drawers or personal bags. If they go below to look at your fire extinguishers and see the joint sitting on the table, then you're busted because it was in an "open space".

Not even remotely true. Yes, during the late 1980's congress passed the "zero tolerance" laws that allowed us to seize any boat for any amount of drugs, this never really happened. Instead, if we found personal use quantities of drugs we would give you a paper saying that we have seized your boat and you gotta show up in court...but we will let you use your boat until the court date.

Not to say the USCG/DEA doesn't seize boats because they do, but not for such scant amounts.

I'm a huge libertarian as well, and I always taught my crew that the Constitution was "the most important paper in the world", so they damn well better respect it. But, again, they can't do a "search without probable cause". They can inspect your boat for required gear.

A US documented vessel is a little piece of US sovereignty wherever it goes. If a murder happens on a US documented vessel while it is plying the inland waters of China, then US law applies.

I never heard of such a "creed". Furthermore, very few Cadets/Officers in the Coast Guard are operational anymore. They are virtually all bureaucrats. The vast, vast, vast majority of Coast Guard operators, especially those on the water, are enlisted guys. The Coast Guard is the only military branch that puts enlisted in total command of operational units.

Somebody said that you have the right to refuse a boarding if you feel it is unsafe. No, you don't. If you feel it is unsafe then you should certainly bring that up to the boarding team as they approach, but do NOT try to stop them from boarding. That will NOT work out well for you.

Better to just let them come, look around, and realize these are almost always undertrained kids who would rather be back ashore playing x-box than climbing over your gunnel.

Be nice to them, these guys are the part of the Coast Guard who works hard, and it is these guys who will push out into the storm to come get you if/when you get into trouble.

If any of them are unprofessional or discourteous, simply ask them how to contact their boss and follow up with a phone call or letter to their chain of command.

Thank you for your well thought out replies.

But in relation to my postering, If a murder occurs on a U.S boat in our waters, it is Australian Law that applies. I suspect the chineese would view it the same.

And don't think for a moment you can enter chineese waters on your boat and smoke dope, locked away in the privacy of your cabin and you would be not be breaking chinese law

An Australian death that occurs 'anywhere' overseas can still be subject to an Australian inquest, but thats a long way from claiming australian law applies. And i suspect its the same in the US.

Australia now has laws, that if certain offences occur overseas (child abuse), you also commit an Australian offence and when finishing the penalty that any other nation imposes, you may and most likely will be charged again fir the same offence when returning home. Perhaps the U.S has similar laws. But i very much doubt murder would be one of them.

[SURV69]

This is what I've read(on some site somewhere), to be "required" reading by Coast Guard cadets....

“They will always keep in mind that their countrymen are freemen, and, as such, are impatient of everything that bears the least mark of a domineering spirit. They will, therefore, refrain, with the most guarded circumspection, from whatever has the semblance of haughtiness, rudeness, or insult. If obstacles occur, they will remember that they are under the particular protection of the laws and that they can meet with nothing disagreeable in the execution of their duty which these will not severely reprehend. This reflection, and a regard to the good of the service, will prevent, at all times a spirit of irritation or resentment. They will endeavor to overcome difficulties, if any are experienced, by a cool and temperate perseverance in their duty--by address and moderation, rather than by vehemence or violence.” - Alexander Hamilton, Letter of Instructions to the Commanding Officers of the Revenue Cutters, 4 June 1791.

[Dsanduril]

The sovereign territory notion is complete and utter BS. In fact, the opposite it true, a documented vessel is subject to both US and foreign laws when traveling in foreign waters.

When moving maritime law enforcement from the domestic to the international realm, the complexities multiply dramatically. There are three basic international principles which govern a state’s ability to assert jurisdiction over a vessel or over areas of water. First, under international law, the flag state, the nation in which a vessel is registered, has the obligation to regulate and ensure the safe and lawful operation of a vessel flying its flag. The second principle is that all nations have an equal and untrammeled right to navigate on the high seas (termed the freedom of the high seas). To ensure this principle of the freedom of the high seas, international law generally prohibits, with certain carefully delineated exceptions, any nation from asserting jurisdiction over foreign vessels on the high seas. Thus, unless one of the few exceptions is applicable, a vessel on the high seas is said to be subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the flag state. Finally, the third principle is that a vessel in the territorial waters of a state other than its flag state is ordinarily subject to the concurrent jurisdiction of the coastal state and the flag state (emphasis added); the nature and extent of the coastal state’s jurisdiction vary with the particular circumstances. Warships and other government vessels entitled to sovereign immunity are not subject to this concurrent jurisdiction.

Diplomats, embassies, and warships get this kind of immunity, but your documented vessel is not a warship unless is has been commandeered by the government.

[Boatswain2PA]

Originally Posted by Rustic Charm

Thank you for your well thought out replies.

But in relation to my postering, If a murder occurs on a U.S boat in our waters, it is Australian Law that applies. I suspect the chineese would view it the same.

And don't think for a moment you can enter chineese waters on your boat and smoke dope, locked away in the privacy of your cabin and you would be not be breaking chinese law

An Australian death that occurs 'anywhere' overseas can still be subject to an Australian inquest, but thats a long way from claiming australian law applies. And i suspect its the same in the US.

Australia now has laws, that if certain offences occur overseas (child abuse), you also commit an Australian offence and when finishing the penalty that any other nation imposes, you may and most likely will be charged again fir the same offence when returning home. Perhaps the U.S has similar laws. But i very much doubt murder would be one of them.

ALL federal US laws apply to US documented vessels, no matter where they are. Of course enforcing those laws may be difficult if, for example, a crime was committed on a US documented vessel within Chinese territorial waters. US law enforcement may not be able to get there to enforce the law, but the law still applies.

Regarding your Australian example - crimes can have multiple jurisdictional authorities. If a murder occurs on a US documented vessel in Australia, then both the Australian authorities as well as the US government would have jurisdiction.

[Boatswain2PA]

Originally Posted by Dsanduril

The sovereign territory notion is complete and utter BS. In fact, the opposite it true, a documented vessel is subject to both US and foreign laws when traveling in foreign waters.



Diplomats, embassies, and warships get this kind of immunity, but your documented vessel is not a warship unless is has been commandeered by the government.

Not sure if this was in response to me, but let me clarify: You are absolutely correct. My analogy of a US documented vessel being a piece of US sovereignty was intended to portray the fact that US law always applies there. Host nation laws also apply within territorial waters (with significant restrictions on vessels engaged in innocent passage or force majure).

[Rustic Charm]

Originally Posted by Boatswain2PA

ALL federal US laws apply to US documented vessels, no matter where they are. Of course enforcing those laws may be difficult if, for example, a crime was committed on a US documented vessel within Chinese territorial waters. US law enforcement may not be able to get there to enforce the law, but the law still applies.

Regarding your Australian example - crimes can have multiple jurisdictional authorities. If a murder occurs on a US documented vessel in Australia, then both the Australian authorities as well as the US government would have jurisdiction.

Absolute rubbish the U.S has NO jurisdiction in Australia. none! Not without Australian approval..

[Rustic Charm]

Originally Posted by Boatswain2PA

Not sure if this was in response to me, but let me clarify: You are absolutely correct. My analogy of a US documented vessel being a piece of US sovereignty was intended to portray the fact that US law always applies there. Host nation laws also apply within territorial waters (with significant restrictions on vessels engaged in innocent passage or force majure).

What law, or laws, are you specifically referring too?

If your suggesting that all US laws apply to a person on their US flagged vessel, no matter what the country they are in is just bunkem