Cruisers yacht stuck on Gulfport beach in 4 feet of sand

[callmecrazy]

Originally Posted by lannen

Yes, it solves it for today, maybe tomorrow, and quite possibly for a month or two.

Sooner or later we will have to use tax dollars, at a higher rate, just to do this all over again.

*SIGH*

This is not the case. FWC clearly states that in the event the city/state takes action against a derelict, or unsafe, vessel. It will be done at the owners expense. (and it's also a crime to keep an unsafe vessel on the water with no intentions of fixing things)

At Risk Vessels


BTW: took all of 5 minutes to look this up

[hellosailor]

" It will be done at the owners expense. "
ROFL, crying. Oh yeah, once the tax money has been spent to do the job, they're going to, what, seize 10% of the man's non-existant assets to repay the taxpayers?

Get 10% of his monthly SSI seized to pay it back?

No, the taxpayers will pay for it. That what's taxes are for.

[David_Old_Jersey]

Originally Posted by lannen

Yes, it solves it for today, maybe tomorrow, and quite possibly for a month or two.

Sooner or later we will have to use tax dollars, at a higher rate, just to do this all over again.

*SIGH*

Or folks could sit on backsides - and wait for da Gubberment .

FWIW, for me this effort counts as part of my company's CSR (Corporate Social Responsibilty) programme - Overseas Aid for communities unable to help themselves .

[avb3]

Originally Posted by David_Old_Jersey

Or folks could sit on backsides - and wait for da Gubberment .

FWIW, for me this effort counts as part of my company's CSR (Corporate Social Responsibilty) programme - Overseas Aid for communities unable to help themselves .

Ouch, you do hit below the belt... lol.

[GordMay]

Greetings and welcome aboard the CF, rhprop.

Quite right.

Florida statutes 327 and 328 regulate the administration and enforcement of vessel registration and titling laws, as well as boating safety.
All motor vessels, documented vessels included, operated on state waters must be numbered and titled in Florida, except those used exclusively on private lakes.
A non-resident vessel which is already registered by another state can be operated in Florida waters for 90 days before Florida registration is required.

➥ http://taxbooks.mioinc1.com/Manatee/pg39-47.pdf
➥ Boat Titles and Registration
➥ Official Website Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles

[rhprop]

And all vessels over 26 feet with sleeping quarters MUST have a toilet and houseboats ( which the FWC have ruled this boat would probably fall under ) MUST have an operable MSD.

[Tripod]

Originally Posted by David_Old_Jersey

Or folks could sit on backsides - and wait for da Gubberment .

FWIW, for me this effort counts as part of my company's CSR (Corporate Social Responsibilty) programme - Overseas Aid for communities unable to help themselves .

David, one of these days I'm going to sail over there and buy you a beer. Of course the offer still stands if you get here first.

Regardless of how I feel about the "capt", I'd be there tomorrow just to get the boat off the Gulfport's public beach if I wasn't stuck speaking at a trade show on the other side of the state.

[callmecrazy]

Originally Posted by hellosailor

" It will be done at the owners expense. "
ROFL, crying. Oh yeah, once the tax money has been spent to do the job, they're going to, what, seize 10% of the man's non-existant assets to repay the taxpayers?

Get 10% of his monthly SSI seized to pay it back?

No, the taxpayers will pay for it. That what's taxes are for.

Actually, garnishing his SSi check is exactly what they would do. Why is that so hard to believe?

The taxpayers have already paid for it. Tax money gets allocated to funds and departments. It's there already, sitting (or possibly sitting in someones pocket). It's not like it's going to come out of your check or something. You won't even notice it happened.

[Celestialsailor]

Originally Posted by callmecrazy

This is not the case. FWC clearly states that in the event the city/state takes action against a derelict, or unsafe, vessel. It will be done at the owners expense. (and it's also a crime to keep an unsafe vessel on the water with no intentions of fixing things)

At Risk Vessels


BTW: took all of 5 minutes to look this up

Ya but as lannen stated. The police get burned out on this non-compliance stuff. The system only works as well as it's weakest link. If the owner of said vessel, the police or the judicial system fail to do the task they are tasked to do, nothing is resolved.

[Therapy]

Originally Posted by callmecrazy

It's not like it's going to come out of your check or something. You won't even notice it happened.

Not to take this thing political or anything but I have noticed a lot for a while now.

I am tired of paying for (most) others bad choices in life.

[callmecrazy]

Originally Posted by Celestialsailor

Ya but as lannen stated. The police get burned out on this non-compliance stuff. The system only works as well as it's weakest link. If the owner of said vessel, the police or the judicial system fail to do the task they are tasked to do, nothing is resolved.

All I'm saying is that if the community has such a big problem with this, they are the ones that should be doing something. Instead of sitting around waiting for the cops to 'do their job', it would be very simple to organize a petition and plenty of formal complaints. Law enforcement agencies are obligated to do their job, but if nobody is complaining, they certainly have better things to do than worry about some derelict boat.

You have the local police, then the FWC. If they are unhelpful, then you have the coasties to fall back on. 3 different agencies to kick in the butt.

PS: I'm not suggesting this. I truly hope Jay gets his act together after this rescue effort. I'm only responding the fact that this has apparently been many years of people being outraged, yet non-active.

[susanna reiter]

Originally Posted by Celestialsailor

Ya but as lannen stated. The police get burned out on this non-compliance stuff. The system only works as well as it's weakest link. If the owner of said vessel, the police or the judicial system fail to do the task they are tasked to do, nothing is resolved.

I know....but it appears the Gulfport law enforcement is "burned out" on all levels....check out the thread "We Are Being Terrorized" not so cool....

[Therapy]

Originally Posted by susanna reiter

I know....but it appears the Gulfport law enforcement is "burned out" on all levels....check out the thread "We Are Being Terrorized" not so cool....

Yea,
Pretty scary.

http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...zed-86356.html

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by callmecrazy

Actually, garnishing his SSi check is exactly what they would do. Why is that so hard to believe?...

Because it;s not legal.
As I understand it, Social Security cannot be garnished, except by the Federal government; per Section 207 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 407).

➥ http://www.socialsecurity.gov/OP_Hom...tle02/0207.htm

[ssanzone]

i am just pissing myself laughing over this thread jumping from dog **** covered decks to moderately obscure facets of SSI.

CF is like the best place ever!

-steve