U.S. Coast Guard boarding experience (not typical i dont think)

[Stu Jackson]

Originally Posted by robgrant1

When is a boat not a house

All the time.

Besides the fact that the words are spelled differently and that they meant two different things, the US CG rules are in the CFR, IIRC.

[Training Wheels]

I've only been boarded once, and they were very polite. Asked where the best place to come aboard would be. Spent most the time relaxing in the cockpit talking about sailing.

I'm probably wrong, but my understanding is they can board you anytime for a "safety check", but they have to have probable cause to search your boat.


Sent from my iPhone using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[FamilyVan]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Thanks FV, that's what I thought. From similar discussions I've learned that our American friends can be arbitrarily stopped and searched on the water; no probable cause is required. Apparently their 4th amendment rights don't apply on the water, or there is some sort of CG exception ... I dunno. Anyway, it's good to see Canadian authorities still have to have at least a minimal pretext to stop and search its citizens.

Yes ... Canadians, VOTE!

I think a major difference is in Canada the Coast Guard doesn't have any regulatory authority over shipping. Its all handled by Transport Canada, who's inspectors have considerable authority to enter or "board" a ship for inspection purposes. However, TC doesn't have the broad criminal enforcement authority as the USCG. So the US has a funny arrangement where they have a regulatory authority which is also a law enforcement agency.

Sent from my XP7700 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[Aquadome]

What right does a foreign flagged pleasure boat have to refuse the Uscg from boarding? What if sailing outside 3 or 12 mile limit?

[SniperSailor]

Originally Posted by Stu Jackson

Not at all.

Try the stupid "Patriot Act."

Your rights are completely gone.

On land, now, too.

Ben Franklin ain't chucklin' anymore.

This.

But long before the "Stupidity Act" we were involved in a war that failed before it started, the war drugs.

Face it, politicians dont give a flying tinker's damn about your rights. They care about padding their pockets.

And a cop, is a cop, is a cop, is a cop, no matter what uniform he may be in.

[rognvald]

"This is such an utter disregard for historical accuracy, it boggles my mind.

A "slippery slope" generally means something bad just got started.

This practice of boarding has been going on since the 1790s." StuJackson


Stu,
I thought I made it quite clear that I was referring to recreational vessels. The vessels you mention, historically, were as I described them in my post: "domestic/commercial/foreign vessels." Not too many yachties in Boston Harbor in the 18th century. In regards to the term "slippery slope," it doesn't mean that something bad just got started but rather that a seemingly insignificant/significant series of events can lead to something larger--usually worse. The "Description" section in the following definition should explain it in greater detail. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope I hope this is clearer for you. Good luck and good sailing.

[Stu Jackson]

So, have you read the link I provided earlier in #62? It answers your questions, over & over again.

Originally Posted by rognvald

"This is such an utter disregard for historical accuracy, it boggles my mind.

A "slippery slope" generally means something bad just got started.

This practice of boarding has been going on since the 1790s." StuJackson


Stu,
I thought I made it quite clear that I was referring to recreational vessels. The vessels you mention, historically, were as I described them in my post: "domestic/commercial/foreign vessels." Not too many yachties in Boston Harbor in the 18th century. In regards to the term "slippery slope," it doesn't mean that something bad just got started but rather that a seemingly insignificant/significant series of events can lead to something larger--usually worse. The "Description" section in the following definition should explain it in greater detail. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope I hope this is clearer for you. Good luck and good sailing.

[Olde Chief]

Snore. I am not aware of any training manual that says that the boat Coxswain is to aim for boats chain plates midship. My training in that area, I was to approach another boat with caution (with just enough speed to maintain steerage way) so as not to damage the boat that needed to be boarded (that also applied to my boat).


As for reasons for boarding another boat at sea, many are very old and date back to the days of the Revenue Cutter Service, around 1790, and since then the Government keeps changing or giving the USCG new jobs and responsibilities. to the point they are hard to keep up with. Like myself in 25 years I served with the Treasury Dept., the Dept. of Transportation, and the Homeland Security, and supported the FBI and DEA.


Anyhow back to boarding of vessels mainly comes under the rules applying to SAFETY at SEA, which were established after several ships were sunk with great loss of life back around the early days of steam powered vessels. Because of this the USCG and the CG belonging to many other countries may stop and board your boat, to determine its safety first and look for contraband second.


Hope this helps you understand the CG's responsibilities,

[rognvald]

Originally Posted by Stu Jackson

So, have you read the link I provided earlier in #62? It answers your questions, over & over again.

Thanks for the link, Stu. However, it doesn't change my opinion in regard to these type of searches of recreational boaters. It is, I believe, absurdity and Fascism in its purest form and one more step (slippery slope) to an erosion of our rights as Americans. We also experienced this(as you mentioned) in the idiocy of the Patriot Act--an unconstitutional safety net for a nation of Sheep.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by FamilyVan

I think a major difference is in Canada the Coast Guard doesn't have any regulatory authority over shipping. Its all handled by Transport Canada, who's inspectors have considerable authority to enter or "board" a ship for inspection purposes. However, TC doesn't have the broad criminal enforcement authority as the USCG. So the US has a funny arrangement where they have a regulatory authority which is also a law enforcement agency.

Ah, that makes sense. Thanks FV.

I've been approached on the water exactly twice while sailing Canadian waters of Lake Superior. The first time was local law enforcement out of Thunder Bay (OPP perhaps?) and the second was by a joint Border Service/RCMP patrol.

The first case their "probable cause" was the fact that I wasn't wearing a lifejacket. They didn't board us, just informed me an inflatable was not a lifejacket unless worn. Luckily I had standard jackets as well, so they waved goodbye and we were off.

The second case happened in a pretty remote part of the Lake. I think they were cracking down on Americans who come across without clearing in. In any case, as soon as they saw our flag and license numbers they got all smiley. The RCMP officer then started to chat us up. Turns out he was a fellow sailor and was interested in our Aries windvane. Just rode beside us for a while asking questions about the vane, then said goodbye.

A very Canadian experience indeed ;-)


Why go fast, when you can go slow

[natraps116]

Originally Posted by Robin3

AT least this time the OP did not try his 'repelling pirates techniques' as portayed in a previous thread recently where when approached by suspect fishermen had his crew standing by with an M1 in hand and racked to scare them off. Now that would have made for a nice little money making U tube video with the USCG being cast in the role of the aggressors.

Good thing your following what I post so closely, my mission is successful, be sure to subscribe as well! . I hope you bring cookies and good manners when your approached at sea. And FYI we did have the M1A ready and they saw it. The coast guard understood our concern completely, and were not bothered by the fact we were ready to defend ourselves at 4am in the middle of no where. Jokes on you.

[belizesailor]

Originally Posted by grantmc

I'm a Kiwi so no expertise in American law, but I understand that the Fourth Amendment prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures and requires any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause. Cool, BUT!

...

People like to rant and quote the constitution, but usually totally omit, or are not even aware of the relevant, case law precedents.

For example, what is the definition of such a vague term as "unreasonable"? You have to consult the case law for how the courts have interpreted that term.

Bottom line: the Coasties ARE well within their legal right to board you.

[mramoo]

I have read all the post in this thread, it seems to me that almost everyone has missed the fact that the OP happened in INTERNATIONAL WATERS..... An area of this planet that no country has jurisdiction... and that includes the USCG.

[FamilyVan]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Ah, that makes sense. Thanks FV.

I've been approached on the water exactly twice while sailing Canadian waters of Lake Superior. The first time was local law enforcement out of Thunder Bay (OPP perhaps?) and the second was by a joint Border Service/RCMP patrol.

The first case their "probable cause" was the fact that I wasn't wearing a lifejacket. They didn't board us, just informed me an inflatable was not a lifejacket unless worn. Luckily I had standard jackets as well, so they waved goodbye and we were off.

The second case happened in a pretty remote part of the Lake. I think they were cracking down on Americans who come across without clearing in. In any case, as soon as they saw our flag and license numbers they got all smiley. The RCMP officer then started to chat us up. Turns out he was a fellow sailor and was interested in our Aries windvane. Just rode beside us for a while asking questions about the vane, then said goodbye.

A very Canadian experience indeed ;-)


Why go fast, when you can go slow

RCMP/GC task force= MSET Marine Security Enforcement Team.

Its an unfortunate way of spending tax dollars, but absolutely essential for maintaining positive trade relations with the US. It was started in 2003 in response to the events of 2001. 3 x 140 ft ships patrolling the great lakes for terrorists? Silly, but not as silly as joining the second gulf war would have been, so a worth while trade off. US was playing hard ball with Softwood Lumber tariffs at the same time too.

As Old Chief pointed out so expertly above, the whole thing is a little bit complicated. Like the USCG, the CCG has a lot of buns in the oven.

The mixed LE/Regulatory/SAR (+ other) responsibilities of the USCG might seem odd, But TC is just as odd, the same agency enforces acts pertaining to Marine, Aviation, Rail, International Bridges, Federal Highways, so we have funny stuff going on too.


Sent from my XP7700 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[Rustic Charm]

[QUOTE=belizesailor;1939705]People like to rant and quote the constitution, but usually totally omit, or are not even aware of the relevant, case law precedents.

For example, what is the definition of such a vague term as "unreasonable"? You have to consult the case law for how the courts have interpreted that term.

Bottom line: the Coasties ARE well within their legal right to board you.[/QUOTE]


I'm accepting of the 'bottom line' here. It seems if your American, then the USCG can stop and board you anywhere. Pretty similar to Australian situation too. And in fact I 'think' it's the same with most nations.

But, what get's me is the boarding parties right to start drug testing, taking swabs with what appeared to be very little suspicion or cause? Not even in Australia do our authorities have that ability. And you guys are from the 'land of the free' and all that stuff. I mean, in some of our states (Tasmania e.g) if your driving a car, police can randomly drug test you with a cheek swab and of course alcohol test. And they can randomly alcohol test on water as well, but I'm not conscious of any authorities that can do so I open water.