Visit our Popular Forums

hellosailor · 15-06-2015, 10:08

"Unlicensed operation at sea is not illegal, even for flagged vessels."
The simple analogy is that therefore, you can commit murder at sea without fear of prosecution, because you are in non-territorial waters.

It IS the same thing, the same laws, the same logic. The fact remains that as a citizen of some country (unless you are formally a "stateless person" unclaimed by any sovereign) you are still bound by the laws of that country, regardless of where you may be. As a US citizen, or a Ukranian citizen, or an Elbonian, if you are on the high seas you are still subject to the laws of your own nation. And if your nation says "You need a radio license to use that radio, dude." then you still need a radio license, or you are subject to prosecution according to any applicable national and international enforcement agreements and laws.

Now, if you're a little gray alien with big black eyes....as long as you crash landed on the high seas, you can probably phone home. Well, if you can find a phone out there.

mstrebe · 15-06-2015, 10:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by hellosailor

"Unlicensed operation at sea is not illegal, even for flagged vessels."
The simple analogy is that therefore, you can commit murder at sea without fear of prosecution, because you are in non-territorial waters.

It IS the same thing, the same laws, the same logic. The fact remains that as a citizen of some country (unless you are formally a "stateless person" unclaimed by any sovereign) you are still bound by the laws of that country, regardless of where you may be. As a US citizen, or a Ukranian citizen, or an Elbonian, if you are on the high seas you are still subject to the laws of your own nation. And if your nation says "You need a radio license to use that radio, dude." then you still need a radio license, or you are subject to prosecution according to any applicable national and international enforcement agreements and laws.

Now, if you're a little gray alien with big black eyes....as long as you crash landed on the high seas, you can probably phone home. Well, if you can find a phone out there.

It's not at all the same thing. U.S. Citizens are subject to U.S. criminal law everywhere in the world. That's criminal law, and that only became the case in the 1980s--used to be you could do things that were illegal in the U.S. in foreign countries as long as it was legal in the foreign country. This particular expansion of U.S. jurisdiction was passed by congress in order to prosecute those who travel to commit sex crimes.

Operating a HAM station without a license is not a crime. It's a violation of FCC rules, referred to as "an infraction" (a term that designates a civil misuse of a license such as a drivers license, rather than a crime), and their only remedy is to issue a fine --to licensed operators--. They don't even have the legal authority to issue a fine if you aren't licensed, they have to apply for a court order to force you to stop. Furthermore, according to its charter the FCC specifically has jurisdiction only within the territory of the United States.

Totally different ball game. Jurisdiction is a really important concept. The ARRL doesn't have jurisdiction in international waters over U.S. citizens or U.S. flagged vessels, and neither does the FCC. Congress could make unlicensed operation of a HAM radio at sea by a U.S. citizen or flagged vessel illegal, because it has jurisdiction over those two entities, but has not done so. Why? Because it's not important, and because it reduces safety of life at sea if people feel like there's some reason why they shouldn't transmit on a particular band.

Now, if you'd like to link to the law you're citing which gives the FCC jurisdiction over U.S. citizens worldwide, or vessels flagged at sea, I'll happily retract. But the FCC's mandate is very specific to the territory of the United States in its charter.

No, all laws aren't the same. Your analogy is like saying that because driving over 80 is illegal in the U.S., an American on the Autobahn is still subject to that limit.

hellosailor · 15-06-2015, 10:44

"Operating without a license is not a crime. It's a violation of FCC rules, "
Actually, no. The "FCC rules" have no effect until they are codified in the CFR, and the CFR are binding federal laws. Criminal, civil, administrative, doesn't matter much. The USCG is an administrative agency, except in time of war. And when they board you, that's not criminal either. That's administrative, typically under CFR.

By all means, argue the point. Same way the "tax deniers" argue the federal income tax is illegal so they don't have to pay it. Hmmm...Or was that the reason the feds went and wreaked mayhem and murder at Ruby Ridge? A lot of good that argument did.

mstrebe · 15-06-2015, 10:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by hellosailor

"Operating without a license is not a crime. It's a violation of FCC rules, "
Actually, no. The "FCC rules" have no effect until they are codified in the CFR, and the CFR are binding federal laws. Criminal, civil, administrative, doesn't matter much. The USCG is an administrative agency, except in time of war. And when they board you, that's not criminal either. That's administrative, typically under CFR.

By all means, argue the point. Same way the "tax deniers" argue the federal income tax is illegal so they don't have to pay it. Hmmm...Or was that the reason the feds went and wreaked mayhem and murder at Ruby Ridge? A lot of good that argument did.

They are codified in the CFR--as a civil infraction of a licensed use, not a crime. The only punishment is a civil penalty and a cease-and-desist court order, both of which are civil, not criminal.

The U.S. claims Extraterritorial Jurisdiction _ONLY_ for criminal matters, specifically:

"The US -->Criminal<-- Code asserts the following items to fall within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States, much of which is extraterritorial in nature:
:: The high seas and any other waters within the admiralty and maritime jurisdiction of the United States and out of the jurisdiction of any particular State, including any vessels owned by US persons that are travelling on them.
:: Any US vessel travelling on the Great Lakes, connecting waters or the Saint Lawrence River (where that river forms part of the Canada–United States border)
:: Any lands reserved or acquired for the use of the United States, and under the exclusive or concurrent jurisdiction thereof
:: Any island claimed under the Guano Islands Act
:: Any US aircraft flying over waters in the same manner as US vessels
:: Any US spacecraft when in flight
:: Any place outside the jurisdiction of any nation with respect to an offense by or against a national of the United States
:: Any foreign vessel during a voyage having a scheduled departure from or arrival in the United States with respect to an offense committed by or against a national of the United States
:: Offenses committed by or against a national of the United States in diplomatic missions, consulates, military and other missions, together with related residences, outside the US
:: International Parental Kidnapping Crime Act

That's it. Nothing else. No civil matters whatsoever. Federal criminal jurisdiction and federal civil jurisdiction are two entirely separate areas of law. In fact, tax cheats have been moving out of the United States and effectively getting away with it forever. It's in the news all the time. Why? Because it's a civil matter and extraterritorial jurisdiction doesn't apply, nor does extradition.

Just because "it seems like it's the same as tax avoidance in Idaho" or "Murder is the same thing as keying a Mike" doesn't make it true.

hellosailor · 15-06-2015, 11:17

So the US citizens, living abroad and failing to report overseas bank accounts to the IRS and being taken to task for that, are violating criminal law? Not just the tax code? (Which is administrative law, isn't it?)

mstrebe · 15-06-2015, 11:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by hellosailor

So the US citizens, living abroad and failing to report overseas bank accounts to the IRS and being taken to task for that, are violating criminal law? Not just the tax code? (Which is administrative law, isn't it?)

Correct. Tax code is civil law, but there are numerous specific crimes that Congress (NOT the IRS) has made criminal. Bear in mind that these overseas tax cheat laws were only recently made criminal as well.

The IRS has the ability to create civil and administrative rules and to levy civil fines within prescribed boundaries. Just as with the FCC, numerous government agencies are empowered to write their own rules, issues their own licenses, and even create their own infractions of rules. None of it is criminal. Only Congress (and the various states) are empowered to elevate an act to the level of a crime. Government agencies are not empowered to create criminal law on their own.

ka4wja · 15-06-2015, 17:13

Okay, two things here!!

1) Actually, this is a common misunderstanding....

Quote:

Originally Posted by hellosailor

John-
Isn't there an additional monkeywrench in that some countries require a ham station and a marine ssb station, both aboard the same vessel, to be fully separate in all equipment except for the ship's power supply?

This only applies to commercial vessels required to carry specific radios, such as a MF/HF-DSC-SSB radio for GMDSS compliance...this does NOT apply to pleasure boats, where the all HF radio equipment is voluntary....
(the FCC has clarified this in the past, for the USCG, for those questioning the wording of Part 97....unfortunately I don't have an on-line reference to post a link to, and as such I feel most here will just argue the point....and this is NOT my intention...)

2) Now, please excuse my bluntness....
But, in my opinion, you all have gone completely around the bend!!

I mean, a very nice Swiss gentleman who is getting ready to go cruising with his family, first thru the Med, and eventually across the Atlantic.....asked a simple, polite question, and you all are now arguing about ridiculously inane things such as not needing licenses and no laws apply at sea!!!
Seriously???

I'm embarrassed to even have my postings in this thread....if I could go back and delete them, I would....and I'd just send the info to "5nomads" in a PM...

So, to "5nomads", my apologies for this behavior....and to the rest of you, I'm out'a here (unsubscribing)!!

John

dgz3 · 16-06-2015, 18:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by 5nomads

Is it possible (technically and legally) to make a sea to shore communication between SSB and ham equipments?

A family member of us, a ham operator in his distant past, is playing with the idea of buying a ham radio and installing an antenna at his home with the the goal to be able to stay in touch with us while we are on the water. Is this feasible? Are there any shared frequencies? Taking into account that we have an icom 802 on board, what radio should he get? And what antenna length would give him the best chances of reaching us?

Sent from my GT-I8190N using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

Really. some pretty intense "rule followers" here. Some of you guys must be a real hoot to travel with!

And i don't think anyone actually answered the guy's question. My two cent's worth;
for simplicity's sake i think his family member in israel should buy the same radio; an ICOM 802. It's a good rig, and many hams use them. From shore.
I'm not qualified to advise on what antenna he should set up in israel. But the antenna on the boat will likely be a backstay wire. particularly if he's running the usual ICOM tuner. I have talked with a couple cruising hams who used tuners that would tune the whole rig with good results. But they didn't have kids on board... Others I have met have run dipoles. A good instal and good ground plane are probably more important than anything else.

I would trade calendars with certain days and times marked for attempts to contact, keeping the propagation tables in mind for frequency (channel) selection.

I would not give a single moment's thought to the legalities of any of it. Who exactly is going to care? Does anyone seriously think that the instant he keys up a military attack chopper will materialize overhead, and an Amateur Radio License Inspector Enforcer will fast line down, HK in hand, to inspect licenses and radios?
As long as someone says some letters and numbers, NOBODY is going to be listening, checking licenses or care. The land based operator should probably renew his license, just in case his neighbors complain.

**Jim Cate** · 16-06-2015, 19:18

Quote:

I would not give a single moment's thought to the legalities of any of it. Who exactly is going to care? Does anyone seriously think that the instant he keys up a military attack chopper will materialize overhead, and an Amateur Radio License Inspector Enforcer will fast line down, HK in hand, to inspect licenses and radios?
As long as someone says some letters and numbers, NOBODY is going to be listening, checking licenses or care. The land based operator should probably renew his license, just in case his neighbors complain.

In the absolute sense, this is likely correct... any sanction being applied is quite unlikely.

But one reason that ham radio has survived all these years in the face of a lot of spectrum hungry commercial interests is simply that we have self-policed our activities. And yes, this involves following the rules, even though that is considered silly by folks like you and may involve inconvenience to the individual.

Advising others to flaunt the rules is very bad form IMO.

jim

El Pinguino · 16-06-2015, 19:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by dgz3

I would not give a single moment's thought to the legalities of any of it. Who exactly is going to care? Does anyone seriously think that the instant he keys up a military attack chopper will materialize overhead,.....

In Israel? yes... a fair chance ....

Countries in that part of the world take un-authorised transmissions quite seriously..

dgz3 · 16-06-2015, 21:09

And i still say.... ridiculous.

He has a license from UK. She has a license from Switzerland. Their friend in israel is a licensed amateur.

And you seriously think MOSAD is going to sledge hammer his door in for broadcasting in the clear, unencrypted voice conversations about the weather and the grand kids and sailing in the Med on a legal amateur band with his legally administered call sign?
They'll die of boredom in ten minutes listening in on that.

And Jim, all due respect, I never suggested "flaunting" the rules. My God! let's not have any flaunting here! I just think that three licenses between them are probably enough to cover a couple of yachties chit chatting a few minutes a day.
And if the radio police do pull them over mid Atlantic, they can plead ignorance.
Unless they have unpaid library fines. They'll be in BIG trouble then.

I agree with ka4wja
Much ado about nothing.

**Jim Cate** · 16-06-2015, 21:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by dgz3

And i still say.... ridiculous.

He has a license from UK. She has a license from Switzerland. Their friend in israel is a licensed amateur.

And you seriously think MOSAD is going to sledge hammer his door in for broadcasting in the clear, unencrypted voice conversations about the weather and the grand kids and sailing in the Med on a legal amateur band with his legally administered call sign?
They'll die of boredom in ten minutes listening in on that.

And Jim, all due respect, I never suggested "flaunting" the rules. My God! let's not have any flaunting here! I just think that three licenses between them are probably enough to cover a couple of yachties chit chatting a few minutes a day.
And if the radio police do pull them over mid Atlantic, they can plead ignorance.
Unless they have unpaid library fines. They'll be in BIG trouble then.

I agree with ka4wja
Much ado about nothing.

Why yes, they do have three licenses between them. however, the yottie does not have a ham license, so suggesting that he use ham frequencies is indeed flaunting the amateur radio rules. If you are suggesting that they use marine SSB bands, then the Israelite ham will be flaunting the marine rules. I don't know anything about how Israel deals with such, but they have a reputation for stringency in many things.

you, sitting behind your computer, have little to loose with your advice. The guys actually doing it have an admittedly small chance of penalties being levied. I still think it is bad advice.

And it NEVER pays to mess with a librarian...

Jim