Visit our Popular Forums

fstbttms · 11-01-2016, 07:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fluer de Mer

‘Boat Bandit’ Arrested In String Of Boat Paraphernalia Thefts Â« CBS San Francisco

And this guy, who for all intents and purposes is in the same boat (no pun intended) as the Richardson Bay crowd- living aboard multiple POS boats, anchored-out in the Estuary, has been arrested numerous times for drug offenses and theft (including outboard motors.) But I'm sure he is simply an otherwise upstanding citizen who is simply down on his luck.

Jason Flare · 11-01-2016, 08:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by fstbttms

And this guy, who for all intents and purposes is in the same boat (no pun intended) as the Richardson Bay crowd- living aboard multiple POS boats, anchored-out in the Estuary, has been arrested numerous times for drug offenses and theft (including outboard motors.) But I'm sure he is simply an upstanding citizen who is simply down-on-his-luck.

If he has stolen other people's property he should be punished for it.

Has he been punished?

Eta: Maybe he's served his time.

fstbttms · 11-01-2016, 08:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jason Flare

If he has stolen other people's property he should be punished for it.

Has he been punished?

Eta: Maybe he's served his time.

Or maybe he hasn't. I have no knowledge about his situation other than I have seen him on the Estuary almost every day since he was released after the arrest documented in the article. That's not the point. The point is that some (if not many) of these liveaboards are not the law-abiding citizens you would have us believe they are. They are out there by choice. Because it's free. Because it's under the radar. Because it easy to hide illegal activity on a boat out in the middle of a big patch of water and your neighbors aren't any more interested in alerting the authorities to it than you are.

Jason Flare · 11-01-2016, 08:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by fstbttms

Or maybe he hasn't. I have no knowledge about his situation other than I have seen him on the Estuary almost every day since he was released after the arrest documented in the article. That's not the point. The point is that some (if not many) of these liveaboards are not the law-abiding citizens you would have us believe. They are out there by choice. Because it's free. Because it's under the radar. Because it easy to hide illegal activity on a boat out in the middle of a big patch of water and your neighbors aren't any more interested in alerting the authorities to it than you are.

Not true. Law enforcement need a warrant to search a land dwelling. They can board a boat without a warrant.

Your beef seems to be more with government than with the people you want relocated.

fstbttms · 11-01-2016, 08:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jason Flare

Not true. Law enforcement need a warrant to search a land dwelling. The can board a boat without a warrant.

Jeezus, is it possible for you make a salient point? What is it I wrote that is not true?

Jason Flare · 11-01-2016, 08:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by fstbttms

Jeezus, is it possible for you make a salient point? What is it I wrote that is not true?

For starters:

"Because it easy to hide illegal activity on a boat..."

fstbttms · 11-01-2016, 08:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jason Flare

For starters:

"Because it easy to hide illegal activity on a boat..."

So you (like others in this thread) make the point that because criminal activity hasn't been found by the authorities, none exists? Do you believe that the authorities are actually out there, searching boats?

Bwahahahahaha!

Jason Flare · 11-01-2016, 08:45

Besides, these people are terrible at hiding illegal activity. You see them out there almost every day and they line up their stolen outboards for photo ops.

You beef is with government not relocating these people to where someone else can see them.

Liam Wald · 11-01-2016, 09:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by fstbttms

What makes you think I don't like these people? I never said that, never inferred that. I simply want these people to abide by the rules, just like the rest of are expected to. They aren't exempt simply because you assume they are somehow disadvantaged.

And BTW- the whole point of this thread (which you clearly have not taken the time to read) is that the authorities are in the process of doing their jobs. And there are some few here who don't like that.

This is a very good point.
It is not about the person. It is about the persons behavior and accountability.
When individual or group behavior falls below the agreed upon standards (laws) and nothing is done by those appointed to hold the behavior accountable and modify it there is frustration.
A lack of action to bring the behavior back up to the agreed upon standard sends a message that the behavior is acceptable thereby giving permission to more individuals to participate in that very behavior.
Is this what sociologists refer to as "societal devolution"?

Jason Flare · 11-01-2016, 09:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Liam Wald

This is a very good point.
It is not about the person. It is about the persons behavior and accountability.
When individual or group behavior falls below the agreed upon standards (laws) and nothing is done by those appointed to hold the behavior accountable and modify it there is frustration.
A lack of action to bring the behavior back up to the agreed upon standard sends a message that the behavior is acceptable thereby giving permission to more individuals to participate in that very behavior.
Is this what sociologists refer to as "societal devolution"?

You get it. A civilized society would send the people paid to enforce the law out there with guns to relocate these people.

ETA: I only mention guns because I think it's unlikely the police are going to leave their guns behind during the relocation process.

In a really civilized society the police don't need guns and the objectionable people go wherever they're told by anyone who doesn't like them there.

fstbttms · 11-01-2016, 09:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jason Flare

You get it. A civilized society would send the people paid to enforce the law out there with guns to relocate these people.

The City of Sausalito and the RBRA have no responsibilty to "relocate these people." The anchor-outs are in violation of the current anchoring regulations in Richardson Bay and those who cannot comply with any future regulations (of which this thread is about) will be required to leave. Where they go is up to them. It's that simple.

BTW- I don't think you understand what the acronym "ETA" means.

Jason Flare · 11-01-2016, 10:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by fstbttms

BTW- I don't think you understand what the acronym "ETA" means.

ETA - Definition by AcronymFinder

fstbttms · 11-01-2016, 10:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jason Flare

ETA - Definition by AcronymFinder

And which one of those 100+ definitions are you using?

Jason Flare · 11-01-2016, 10:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by fstbttms

The anchor-outs are in violation of the current anchoring regulations in Richardson Bay and those who cannot comply with any future regulations (of which this thread is about) will be required to leave.

So, in the script I'm going to write I need a judge to order the lot of them to stay there until LE (Law Enforcement) can get to the bottom of the stolen antique outboard motor ring. Then we break for a CM (Commercial Message.) After the commercial the people who don't like to see these people wring their hands over the irony of wanting them out of RB (Richardson Bay) and held accountable for their crimes at the same time.

Do you really think anyone's going to pull up anchor and go somewhere else?

And what about Wrong's assertion that the authorities have no authority?