Coast Watch USA

[Hud3]

Pelagic,

Maybe I'm under-estimating the risk of government intrusion, but after reading the proposal, it didn't seem out of line to me. Of course, once the bureaucracy gets going, who knows, but that's usually paperwork and screwups, not "military control", as some have implied.

[Pelagic]

We all hope you are correct!

[imagine2frolic]

Now that they know we are looking for them on the water. They will surely go someplace else. I DON'T NEED NO STINKING BADGE to snitch off a would be terrorist. I'd ram them if need be.

We are so vulnerable in so many different ways that it is ridiculous to begin an agency to hand out boating cards. Next it will be mall cards, or stadium cards, or, or, or you take a guess at what it might be.

Some good old profiling will do the job. Why go around searching little old ladies shoes with blue hair? When the possible culprit will be a 20 -40 year old Middle Eastern male? SORRY, I'll get off my soapbox now. I hope I haven't broken any rules

[Canibul]

Ve know vere you are! Ve haf our ways! Young troopers are coming to search your home for large tubes of toothpaste! In case you were planning to fly with them.

Approximately 3 years ago, when several armed Coast Guard, accompanied by two different groups of local law enforcement, running dark through the harbor, in their RIB, boarded our boat dockside, in our home port, without our invitation, along with approximately 40 other boats that day, and under the authority of Homeland Security, I somehow lost my belief that this was a practical security measure. As my wife sat in tears over the loss of her father only days earlier, the Coast Guard not only proceeded to dig through our boat, but one member of the team began to hassle me about my fire extinguishers being charged (He was finally told he read the guage wrong by one of his cronies and backed off).
Several justifications were presented, but no real reason was given for these boardings. Once confronted by the press, the Coast Guard did agree to make a concession for future dockside boardings and allow the boat owners to say no. They did point out that this was a favor as they can board any vessel, anytime. So, I ask you this, just how far do we allow this to go? At what point does the sacrifice of personal privacy, make you feel safer? At what point does it make you feel more afraid of those charged with your protection?
I invite anyone in support of this new legislation to explain to me why I should feel safer.

Oh, and if you read the highlighted section of the Small Vessel Security Strategy, on page 18 number iv, if this does not scare you, I really don't know what more to say.

[elcubanito]

Originally Posted by waterworldly

Hmmmmm. In Miami, a go-fast boat pulls up every couple of days loaded with Cubans, wet foot dry foot policy you know. Oh, that's right, they all voted for Bush . . . If you can't stop the smuggling of humans right under you nose, how can you stop anything from happening? Just another layer of bull for the scared masses.

Yup, and I was driving said speeboat.

[Chief Engineer]

If we become coast watchers do we have to have Aussie Accents and those cool hats. G'day Mate!!!

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by Hud3

Pelagic,

Maybe I'm under-estimating the risk of government intrusion, but after reading the proposal, it didn't seem out of line to me. Of course, once the bureaucracy gets going, who knows, but that's usually paperwork and screwups, not "military control", as some have implied.

Hud,
It is good to discuss this stuff and as it is only a proposal, we are all estimating - so some of us will over estimate and others will under estimate.
In the past I would agree that bureaucracy failures were not too hard to live with (just annoying); however from what others have posted and from press reports (the truth of which is hard to judge from a distance), there does appear to be a shift towards "military control" and this does worry some of us.
As to government bashing - well history does tend to show that governments remove (or limit) "freedoms" and impose "restrictions" (and rarely vice versa) - normally in the name of the "common good". Sometimes they get it right and other times they don't.

We have to keep a good eye on the proposals that affect us as boaters/sailors/yachties/cruisers etc.

BTW, I think it is very good that you bring a opposing (balancing) view to this debate.

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by Chief Engineer

If we become coast watchers do we have to have Aussie Accents and those cool hats. G'day Mate!!!

Yes Siree Bob, you sure do

[Steve Rust]

Originally Posted by Hud3

Are you saying that you'd stand by and do nothing if you saw truly suspicious activities, because the government is "intruding on our rights as boaters to boat without restrictions"?

I think you are the only one saying this. Sounds like a typical straw man argument more commonly used on Wing Nut Radio. You're not on the radio are ya Hud3?

Catamarans are more stable than trimarans or monohulls so would be more suitable for a launch platform. So let's keep our eye on those guys and report any suspicious Al Qaedamarans that you see.

[Chief Engineer]

to cook and carry our radios?

or nubile boy if you are a Sheila Coastwatcher?

Originally Posted by Chief Engineer

If we become coast watchers do we have to have Aussie Accents and those cool hats. G'day Mate!!!

[David M]

One question: How do you tell the white hats from the black hats? Seriously, what are we supposed to be looking for?

Do we look for people who in sailing school learned how to drive a boat but never learned how to dock a boat?

Are we supposed to be recording the position and time of boats that we see and then turn it over to Homeland Security?

We need a new government program like uh ...like we need a new government program

[Wotname]

And if the black hat slips in under our radar, does it becomes the boater's fault / responsibility - better get back to my insurance company and buy some more cover - opps, they have a clause saying something about not covering a black hat attack....

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by David M

One question: How do you tell the white hats from the black hats? Seriously, what are we supposed to be looking for? ...

Take a look at the DHS links I provided earlier. I think they answer your questions.

[Hud3]

Originally Posted by Wotname

Hud,
It is good to discuss this stuff and as it is only a proposal, we are all estimating - so some of us will over estimate and others will under estimate.
In the past I would agree that bureaucracy failures were not too hard to live with (just annoying); however from what others have posted and from press reports (the truth of which is hard to judge from a distance), there does appear to be a shift towards "military control" and this does worry some of us.
As to government bashing - well history does tend to show that governments remove (or limit) "freedoms" and impose "restrictions" (and rarely vice versa) - normally in the name of the "common good". Sometimes they get it right and other times they don't.

We have to keep a good eye on the proposals that affect us as boaters/sailors/yachties/cruisers etc.

BTW, I think it is very good that you bring a opposing (balancing) view to this debate.

Wotname,

Thanks for a very rational and well-stated post. You are a gentleman and a scholar!

Here's where I'm coming from. I was really having trouble understanding how so many posters in this thread came to the conclusion that the DHS proposal was going to lead to a militaristic takeover of our rights as boaters. Based on the comments made, I really don't think very many have taken the time to actually read the proposal.

I have a severe disadvantage in this discussion. All of my experiences with the USCG have been extremely positive. I've never seen anything but polite competence and a helpful attitude. This includes the USCG auxilliary, which handles a lot of the CG's non-enforcement duties. I'm hoping that Kai Nui's experience is an aberration.

So, based on my personal experience, I have a very, very difficult time visualizing the direly negative predictions of some others. On the other hand, I completely agree with your statement, "We have to keep a good eye on the proposals that affect us as boaters/sailors/yachties/cruisers etc."

Cheers,