Derelicts and Live Aboard Hulks

[justwaiting]

Originally Posted by knothead

When a boater, through negligence or disregard, drags anchor or chafes through their rode and damages or destroys property belonging to others, they should be held responsible.

I don't want to see any further restrictions on our freedoms, I just would like to see people holding themselves responsible for and taking more notice of the affects they have on others.
I would like to see more stress on communication, working together and reaching out to others rather than more laws.

It's only when we reach a point that we can rely on our own consciousnesses to achieve this, rather than on imposed regulations and restrictions, that we will reach harmony.

This is from a man who practices what he preaches. What the other thread missed is what Steve and the whole crew achieve was to clearly demonstrate that the boating community should not be held responsible for the actions of the minority. Yes there are issues but they need to be considered in a logical manner separating out the issues. We as a boating community should not be held responsible for the social problems which are the responsibility of the whole community. The crew that got the boat off the beach – the boat issue, it also showed that given a cause the boating community can be galvanised into action - some thing for politicians to think about.


What we need is to be in a position where those in power will listen - my guess that Steve & Co have created a situation where that local government will be more inclined to listen. It will now be harder for other interest groups to say that it is the problem with the boating community.

[DumnMad]

I understand the Swiss government can't even raise taxes or join the UN without a referendum.
They have low crime rates despite millions of immigrant workers and they have avoided wars.

[barnakiel]

Yeah sure our clean residents do not like those smelly boaties. The whole world should be white and use deodorants and dentists. Them derelicts should be penalized ... errrrr .... sounds familiar. Nazi, eugenics, what else?

The point is that smelly guy in his smelly boat has exactly the same right to be as the lawyer in her clean suit basking aboard their luxury yacht.

So that's that. Local residents do not like this or that. Bloody christian.

b.

[ohdrinkboy]

Originally Posted by barnakiel

Yeah sure our clean residents do not like those smelly boaties. The whole world should be white and use deodorants and dentists. Them derelicts should be penalized ... errrrr .... sounds familiar. Nazi, eugenics, what else?

The point is that smelly guy in his smelly boat has exactly the same right to be as the lawyer in her clean suit basking aboard their luxury yacht.

So that's that. Local residents do not like this or that. Bloody christian.

b.

As much as i don't like derelicts......barnakiel is right. Provided the smelly guy is not breaking any laws.

[senormechanico]

Originally Posted by DumnMad

I understand the Swiss government can't even raise taxes or join the UN without a referendum.
They have low crime rates despite millions of immigrant workers and they have avoided wars.

THREAD DRIFT ALERT !!
That's because every household in Switzerland is REQUIRED to have a weapon for self defense, and know how to use it.
What kind of idiot regime would want to invade a country where every single citizen was ready to blow you to smithereens if needed?

WHY AN ARMED CITIZENRY?

BTW, I once ran into a smelly, sweating guy in an old truck on Stuart Island in the San Juans.
We were looking for property for sale, and it was in an area of "off the grid" homes.
(actually the whole island is off grid but I digress).

He was wearing long underwear, driving an old American Motors Jeep with the driver's side door bent clear around to the front which he was holding it open with his left foot.
When he stopped in the road to challenge us, we told him we were looking for a property for sale.
All of a sudden, he was our best friend, told us to hop in and he'd take us to the property.
We found out he was a high powered lawyer in Seattle, flew his private plane to the island on the weekends and let his hair down. NO KIDDING!!! You should have seen him on a Sunday afternoon!

Just for fun, he had also cornered the market on propane deliveries for the island as well.

First impressions aren't always accurate...


This has got to be some kind of record for thread drift...

[micah719]

What the other thread missed is what Steve and the whole crew achieve was to clearly demonstrate that the boating community should not be held responsible for the actions of the minority. Yes there are issues but they need to be considered in a logical manner separating out the issues. We as a boating community should not be held responsible for the social problems which are the responsibility of the whole community.

I think the Swiss drift is that there are different kinds of communities, and different ways of handling things. The Swiss are closer to their Calvinist roots, whereas the USA has long since been shifted off theirs (Puritans?) because the benefit of neutralising the world's last cop is greater than unhorsing the world's best clockmakers. Take out the cop, and the clockmaker will be easy. The Constitution was supposed to safeguard liberty with its checks and balances, but has been repealed in all but name. The amendment about arms wasn't mainly for blasting burglars, it was to keep Unca Sam in line. The amendment about religion wasn't to make the nation antichristian, but to prevent state-imposed persecution of Christians or the imposition of a religion. Eugenics? Adolf and his national socialists took a lot of their race policies from....I won't mention the transatlantic country, but I will name the woman (Margaret Sanger) and her organisation (Planned Parenthood as it is know known) that figures large in the Shoah.

Yes, we're off track from derelicts on boats spoiling utopia....but digging closer to the root of the problem, rather than being distracted by the symptoms. And no, the Swiss haven't got the answer either.

[JRM]

Originally Posted by tager

The whole world is a plutocracy. Tell me that the government is of the people, by the people, and for the people, when the people get to make some important decisions!

Well, the decisions aren't made by robots, at least, not yet. By plutocracy I assume you mean that the government is of the money, by the money, and for the money. The people with the gold, make the rules. Guess who likes to live on the waterfront? When it's you vs. the yacht club, guess who wins? I'll guarantee that if the mayor and city council aren't members, they receive a healthy chunk of contributions from there. Your issue is that "the people" disagree with you. Almost all of them. Even those without lots of gold.

We recently moved from one section of the harbor to another, from a transient slip in the high rent district over to the place where you don't need a key to get into the restrooms. Personally, I like it better. A much better scene. It's "dumpier" according to a yacht club member, but we've found it's actually safer for our stuff. The Derrels out in the anchorage like to steal more from the higher end side. We haven't locked our kayak or paddleboards since we've moved, and neither does anyone else around us.

Here's an idea you might want to ponder... boating and boat ownership are not rights (in USA). They are privileges. Free anchoring isn't a right. You are subject to the sovereignty of the territorial authority anywhere remotely close to land. Be glad they've allowed you free use of their territory to date. However, you can be as free as you want 200 miles out. If you don't like the rules, move. No-one is stopping you. Go where there are no other people, and no-one will bother you. Crap in the water all you want. But you'll have to give up the access to all the infrastructure and services that government you rail against provides for you. Like fresh drinking water from the tap.

The real problem here is that there are a few derelicts that are ruining it for everyone else. Not everyone who lives aboard is a Derrel. In our area they're a small minority. But they draw a lot of attention. They use an inordinate amount of services, none of which they contribute to. Municipal governments dislike them because they're expensive, a blight, steal, and most importantly they tend to run off the tourists who bring in the dollars.

I'm no saint, but I'd venture that I do more direct action to assist the homeless than a lot of folks here. It's not altruistic, I'm paid to do it. I see the entire spectrum, from the mentally ill to the family that just lost their house to the lazy bums who think they're "free." The problem with simple solutions are that you penalize the family more trying to punish the bum. Same with the anchoring restrictions. You end up punishing the cruiser by trying to run out the derelicts. The Derrels just ignore the order anyway, just like they ignore every other rule, law, and social more.

Then some ambulance chaser who's doing his court appointed pro bono work from his seventh DUI takes up the torch for 15 minutes and everything ends up costing ten times as much, taking ten times as long, and in the ensuing frustration the non-boaters (you can call them "the people" or "the majority") just say, "screw it, ban everything."

It's not right, but it is what it is.

JRM

If you took a land Derrel and had him park his cardboard box in the front yard of the average American blue collar neighborhood and start crapping on their lawn, do you really think their reaction will be any different?

[rebel heart]

JRM - total agreement

It's not about being rich either. At this point in my life I think a mariner has three things going on:

- takes care of his boat and crew
- looks out for the same of other people
- takes care of the water that allows him to do any of it

You could do all that with $10K/year or $1,000K/year. Picking up trash from the waterfront just because you see it, understanding the problems others have and how you can help: stuff like that. Mariners get my respect, some dude on a boat is just some dude on a boat.

[Nemo55]

Seems to me that we have two distinct cultures anyway, The Land Dwellers, and The Mariners, its also quite obvious to me that the rights of the land Owners/Dwellers should stop at the waters edge, and the rights of the Mariners begin.
I'm talking about making policy which affects the Boating Public.
And to some degree those inbetween who live on land but use boating for recreation only.
But to do this would be like trying to herd cats, since most Cruisers are a transient lot, but it could be done.
What JB said about land derrels in a blue color neighborhood would depend on direct action by the residents themselves, harder than it sounds for sure.
I also have had a background of working with the poor and indigent along with the drug plagued, and could tell stories which would turn dark hait to bleach white, and i know what is involved in taking action as i have stated in previous posts.
But to cure these ills of our society we needs as must, temporarily suspend the rights of those who are proven to be Non Responsible (tricky) and force them into some form of proper treatment, and until such a time as they can prove independent enough to allow back into society.
Its either this, or banning them to the furthest reaches of our cities and towns.
Until such a time as we choose direct action we will always have this problem of Drug crazed or Handicapped homeless on our hands.
Building Jails is not the answer,and has never been the answer, but taking responsibility for those who will not, or cannot do it for themselves is a plausible solution.
Knothead took such a step at no small cost to himself, and Aye,,there's the Rub isnt it??? Cost!!!!!!

[rebel heart]

I don't think you'll find a lot of love for essentially banishing bums into the desert to live off the land (ie: die in large percentages).

[Brob2]

[/QUOTE]

Originally Posted by Nemo55

I also have had a background of working with the poor and indigent along with the drug plagued, and could tell stories which would turn dark hait to bleach white, and i know what is involved in taking action as i have stated in previous posts.

My brother has spent some time (as a social worker) acting as a liaison/advocate for the downtown East side with St.Pauls. I have heard some of those stories.

Originally Posted by Nemo55

But to cure these ills of our society we needs as must, temporarily suspend the rights of those who are proven to be Non Responsible (tricky) and force them into some form of proper treatment, and until such a time as they can prove independent enough to allow back into society.
Its either this, or banning them to the furthest reaches of our cities and towns.
Until such a time as we choose direct action we will always have this problem of Drug crazed or Handicapped homeless on our hands.
Building Jails is not the answer,and has never been the answer, but taking responsibility for those who will not, or cannot do it for themselves is a plausible solution.
Knothead took such a step at no small cost to himself, and Aye,,there's the Rub isnt it??? Cost!!!!!!

Your comments are so true and the conundrum then summed up completely in the last word. Folks don't want those folks in their back yard (and neither do I) but it takes money, laws that are enforceable and enforced, and a place to put them to reduce the problem, or as you say, take responsibility for the situation. But that requires more taxes and more restrictive laws.

Many and probably most of these people have a mental illness. Years ago we put them in institutions, the likes of which are now mostly closed and now derelict tourist sites or torn down. Now most of those people who would have been institutionalized there are instead on their own long enough to commit crimes resulting in their incarceration, are looked after by their families, or are homeless, whether living in abandoned boats or houses. Some now are able to function on their own with the advances in psychiatric meds and therapy, but then again some can't handle the side effects of the drugs and quit them, only to later take their frustrations out on movie goers, their family, or whatever.

With the system we have on either side of the 49th parallel the situations of those who are, for example, Paranoid Schizo or Bi Polar with significant dysfunction differs vastly depending upon the wealth and support of the person's family. If a family doesn't have the money, few jurisdictions can provide proper help. As societies we don't provide enough treatment options, doctors, living allowances, or support services for these folks, and it's getting worse, not better. Best dredge up some space in the mooring field 'cause we'll need it.

Until we pony up the bucks and spend them appropriately, applying laws to move them someplace else is just rotating the tyres when you have a flat. Despite what we might think and what they might say few mooring or viaduct squatters want to be there; they are there because they don't have the survival tools not to be there.

[Nemo55]

Yeah,
It still gives me the frights sometimes if i dwell to long on it, I used to look down on all of them until a good friend who was also the Director of the Organization i worked/volunteered for taught me how to really see them for the first time.
What an eye opener, these days my stomach could not handle what i did back then, i find that i cannot even relate what it was truly like to others who wish to know, because it would always turn out that they would tell me "Enough" or just walk away.
I know i may sound harsh in some of my observations and possible solutions, but they are born out of experience and not just wool gathering.
And to those who do not understand,, i cannot blame them because if they truly knew, Ignorance is Bliss.

My brother has spent some time (as a social worker) acting as a liaison/advocate for the downtown East side with St.Pauls. I have heard some of those stories.
Your comments are so true and the conundrum then summed up completely in the last word. Folks don't want those folks in their back yard (and neither do I) but it takes money, laws that are enforceable and enforced, and a place to put them to reduce the problem, or as you say, take responsibility for the situation. But that requires more taxes and more restrictive laws.

Many and probably most of these people have a mental illness. Years ago we put them in institutions, the likes of which are now mostly closed and now derelict tourist sites or torn down. Now most of those people who would have been institutionalized there are instead on their own long enough to commit crimes resulting in their incarceration, are looked after by their families, or are homeless, whether living in abandoned boats or houses. Some now are able to function on their own with the advances in psychiatric meds and therapy, but then again some can't handle the side effects of the drugs and quit them, only to later take their frustrations out on movie goers, their family, or whatever.

With the system we have on either side of the 49th parallel the situations of those who are, for example, Paranoid Schizo or Bi Polar with significant dysfunction differs vastly depending upon the wealth and support of the person's family. If a family doesn't have the money, few jurisdictions can provide proper help. As societies we don't provide enough treatment options, doctors, living allowances, or support services for these folks, and it's getting worse, not better. Best dredge up some space in the mooring field 'cause we'll need it.

Until we pony up the bucks and spend them appropriately, applying laws to move them someplace else is just rotating the tyres when you have a flat. Despite what we might think and what they might say few mooring or viaduct squatters want to be there; they are there because they don't have the survival tools not to be there.

[Tellie]

Originally Posted by Therapy

Hey.....











Sorry......
















Can't do that.

Well I don't want YOU to stop cause you're the only one who reads and responds to my posts!

[defever]

what pisses me off are the "boats" (no mast/boom/anchor lights/motors) that are dragged into the little bay where we live aboard by some skiff, throw out a 5 gal. bucket filled w/ cement (their "anchor") and leave IN THE MIDDLE OF HURRICANE SEASON, DUHHHH!!!!

of course they have no insurance so when the wind pipes up and the act like a pinball ball, they aren't responsible for the damage (no money), YOU ARE!!

these aren't liveaboards, they are litter and should not be allowed on the water...hey, jus' my opinion...

[sailorboy1]

Originally Posted by ohdrinkboy

As much as i don't like derelicts......barnakiel is right. Provided the smelly guy is not breaking any laws.

or anchored next to you ............... come on admit it

I can not believe the amount of govt hate, class hate, society hate, rules regardless hate, excuses, "not me", and other thread drift this thread has had.

In fact I'm amazed it hasn't been closed (that would be CF mod hate).