Legal Stuff

[Hudson Force]

Originally Posted by lostsheep

So, from what I'm gleaning here, boaters have virtually no protection guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. Any LEO can board you at their whim and have free rein to do whatever they want.
Most interesting. Not what one would expect from the Land of the Free.

...................... with the exception that you can still expect protection and rescue from the Coast Guard.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by lostsheep

So, from what I'm gleaning here, boaters have virtually no protection guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. Any LEO can board you at their whim and have free rein to do whatever they want.
Most interesting. Not what one would expect from the Land of the Free.

As my mother says " early risers get to lie on later ". If you believe your own propaganda its used to trample you. Become more cynical about patriotism. On this side of the pond if someone mentions patriotism , I look for someone doing something underhand. we've a bit more experience of being royally screwed ( so to speak) by our rulers telling us it was for our own good.

Many totalitarian regimes were created promising its citizens " safety" from some perceived threat.

To paraphrase. " those that would trace freedom for security ,deserve neither "

Dave

[kthoennes]

I will gladly trade every "safety" provided by the government, including boat rescues by the CG, if the gov't agrees to never grope my wife at an airport ever again. I mean that wholeheartedly, I'm not just being flip - but choices like that are long past.

I suspect the mods will think this has descended into politics, but that is really not it. How many threads have we had on official intrusiveness - probably a new one every day. Some posters will always have the same response, just saw it in the NZ thread - they save you all the time, SAR, you should all be grateful they save us from our childish irresponsibility - as if the price we have to pay for an active, vigorous search and rescue is to be utterly and gratefully submissive to every form of law enf.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by kthoennes

I will gladly trade every "safety" provided by the government, including boat rescues by the CG, if the gov't agrees to never grope my wife at an airport ever again. I mean that wholeheartedly, I'm not just being flip - but choices like that are long past.

I suspect the mods will think this has descended into politics, but that is really not it. How many threads have we had on official intrusiveness - probably a new one every day. Some posters will always have the same response, just saw it in the NZ thread - they save you all the time, SAR, you should all be grateful they save us from our childish irresponsibility - as if the price we have to pay for an active, vigorous search and rescue is to be utterly and gratefully submissive to every form of law enf.

+1. We rescue friend and foe alike.

[Sam Plan B]

I would like to participate in the discussion but, with the NSA & IRS reading, I shall remain silent.

[savoir]

Originally Posted by boatman61

LOL.... whoever came up with that propaganda... and when...??

It was some guy who wanted Americans to vote for him - worked too.

[savoir]

Originally Posted by kthoennes

Yeah, I really don't mean to be a cynical old curmudgeon but the day we started to grope and humiliate little girls, wives and grandmothers at airports and almost no one has the guts to object - well, let's just say that the last line of the US national anthem is mostly an empty phrase now. A quaint historical relic.

Did you know that the guy who established the Department of Homeland Security was the former head of the Stasi ? His name is Markus Wolf. Remember that as big brother DHS encroaches and touches up your wife or your daughter and you start to feel like there are spies everywhere.

Don't believe me for a second. Look it up and learn for yourself.

Did anyone ever see Wolf's name in a US newspaper? Think about the Stasi then think about the last month.

[John A]

We lost our freedom when our forefathers decided to band together and form a Union ruled by a majority of the people.

The majority of this union of ideals lost their freedom when they let special interest groups dictate what was best for the special interest groups.

It's terribly ironic that so many people from all over the world want to live in the US. And all we can do is bitch about everything instead of fixing the problems.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by John A

It's terribly ironic that so many people from all over the world want to live in the US. And all we can do is bitch about everything instead of fixing the problems.

Mainly people that are poor or trampled upon. However raise their prosperity , get them educated , good government etc, they won't want to go to the US anymore.

Millions from Africa want to try to gain entry to the EU too, the same politics at work

Dave

[Emmalina]

Originally Posted by boatman61

The basic fact is... the USA reserves the right to board any vessel anywhere it deems fit regardless of Constitutional or any other persons rights any where in the world it deems fit... whether you like it or not.. if you resist then force WILL be applied...
And thems the facts... like it or lump it..
That's the perks of being self appointed World Sheriff...

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by Emmalina

Actually all countries reserve that right in times of conflict. The guy at the time carrying the bigger gun at the time wins. ( and boards your boat )

Not so much the perks of being Sheriff, more the perks of having calibre

Dave

[Rakuflames]

Originally Posted by lostsheep

I was just wondering, since the Constitution of the US guarantees freedom from search and seizure without due process, specifically a warrant issued that describes the place to be searched and the items searched for, how does that interlink with the USCG and other LEO's like local sheriffs deputies boarding vessels within the US waters?
It's a question that's been nagging me for some time, as I often hear of USCG and LEO's boarding vessels for 'safety inspections' and searches w/o the requisite warrants.
Come on, legal seadogs, enlighten the landlubber!!

Article [IV]

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

It's simple. Public safety trumps personal rights. This is why truck drivers can be pulled over randomly to have their breaks inspected (the first time they did that, the results were abysmal and shocking) and why local law enforcement can do mass alcohol screenings on holiday weekends.

Same thing on the water. The Coast Guard has determined certain safety items we must all have, such as some way to signal an emergency (flares), pfds for everyone, a throwable, an audible signal, etc. Their standards are quite minimum (I don't think they require any kind of radio on smaller boats -- personally I think that should be on the list).

I keep a notebook on my boat with things like proof of insurance, copy of title/registration, etc. -- and I also put in that notebook evidence of the courses I've taken. The only time I was stopped by the CG I was in my PFD with the boat netted, and I think they just figured there was no point to getting on the boat. they talked to me enough to (I think) make sure I was sober and sent me on my way.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by Rakuflames

It's simple. Public safety trumps personal rights.

Yes but in that simple statement lies the seeds of despotism and totalitarianism. It must always be counter balanced by other rights that the individual can access to control abuse or excessive use of such powers

But ultimately in a free and open society we have to accept that public safety cannot be guaranteed nor attempted if in doing so , such freedom is restricted. Better to loose some innocents then condemn a whole nation to investigation

Dave

[ElGatoGordo]

So MUCH to say...but this thread's life will be VERY short!

If you said you were leaving LEAVE...we won't miss you. If you say you won't come DON'T!! We'll be just fine.

If you don't like what's going on or what the rules are...what have YOU done to CHANGE IT?

If you WANT to be here and don't WANT to participate in change...then STFU!

Personally I fully support the CG's role as our first (only?) line of defense on our water borders, and if you think they should have to have a warrant...just ask how the hell they’re supposed to get a warrant to stop a freaking BOAT?!?!?!?!?!?! Unlike a house it won't be there in a few hours. If we want to change the rules for "safety inspections", I could go along with that.

Finally, I was boarded Tuesday AM coming from Galveston to Clearlake. It was Homeland Security, not CG. I was in a major shipping lane, pointed towards the busiest port in the country in terms of foreign tonnage, alone, on a 32 foot catamaran easily capable of carrying enough explosives to do some serious damage. Chris and David (the officers) were courteous, good natured conversationalists, and DAMN THOUROUGH! If I'd had anything illegal they would have found it. We sailed together for 30 minutes, never even slowed me down, I just had to adjust the AP a few times. When they looked in my cooler I told them to help themselves. Then added “to the water” ;-) I thanked them for their hard work and I'm DAMN WELL GLAD they are out there.

I did my time in the Navy keeping our nation safe, and they deserve the EXACT same respect. The war came to our borders a long time ago, deal with it.

[UWOA]

Originally Posted by ElGatoGordo

So MUCH to say...but this thread's life will be VERY short!

If you said you were leaving LEAVE...we won't miss you. If you say you won't come DON'T!! We'll be just fine.

If you don't like what's going on or what the rules are...what have YOU done to CHANGE IT?

If you WANT to be here and don't WANT to participate in change...then STFU!

Personally I fully support the CG's role as our first (only?) line of defense on our water borders, and if you think they should have to have a warrant...just ask how the hell they’re supposed to get a warrant to stop a freaking BOAT?!?!?!?!?!?! Unlike a house it won't be there in a few hours. If we want to change the rules for "safety inspections", I could go along with that.

Finally, I was boarded Tuesday AM coming from Galveston to Clearlake. It was Homeland Security, not CG. I was in a major shipping lane, pointed towards the busiest port in the country in terms of foreign tonnage, alone, on a 32 foot catamaran easily capable of carrying enough explosives to do some serious damage. Chris and David (the officers) were courteous, good natured conversationalists, and DAMN THOUROUGH! If I'd had anything illegal they would have found it. We sailed together for 30 minutes, never even slowed me down, I just had to adjust the AP a few times. When they looked in my cooler I told them to help themselves. Then added “to the water” ;-) I thanked them for their hard work and I'm DAMN WELL GLAD they are out there.

I did my time in the Navy keeping our nation safe, and they deserve the EXACT same respect. The war came to our borders a long time ago, deal with it.

Got to agree with ElGatoGordo....

As for the legalities ... prior to the establishment of the Department of Homeland Security, the US Coast Guard was a part of the Department of the Interior, except in time of war -- that's declared war -- when it becomes part of the US Navy. As such one of the primary purposes of the Coast Guard was to secure the maritime borders of the United States. As a result of this important duty all vessels are subject to inspection on demand by the Coast Guard in the same fashion that all persons entering the United States at airports or land border crossing points are subject to inspection of all items carried. Again, LIKE IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT (ICE), who can search any vehicle in proximity to the border WITHOUT WARRANT under the inspection authority vested in the agency by law, the Coast Guard can perform the same task on the coastal and tributary waters of the United States ... that's where they get that power and why the warrant requirement does not apply.

The inspection authority passed to the Department of Homeland Security when the Coast Guard, ICE and Border Patrol were transferred to that Department. Other police agencies do not have the authority to board a vessel absent a warrant except in certain circumstances, most notably to insure compliance with registration requirements or they observe a violation of law in which case landmark legal cases identify their authority to conduct limited searches and/or because the vessel is a mobile entity (see Carroll v. United States and Chimel v. California). The problem arises when local and state officers are not properly trained and conduct boardings for other reasons that do not include invitation by the vessel owner/operator. Unless suit is filed and followed to completion for damages and/or a favorable ruling such boardings will continue.

When you have deep pockets ... fight them in court.