Coast Guard procedures

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Leo Ticheli

These are people who will risk their lives to save us; they are welcome on my boat anytime, anywhere.

The problem with allowing something bad because they did something good in a different time and place is it has limits but they are hard to define.

So you are OK if they search your boat any time.
- What if they damage said boat? Is that OK and you will pay for the repairs yourself because they save lives?
- What if they pilfered from some cash you had lying around?
- What if they injure your wife when the boat smashes into the side? Is it OK because she didn't die and they save lives?

Where exactly is the dividing line of the bad things they do before the fact that in another time and place they've saved lives?

Of course, since they aren't in the act of saving lives in the scenario described, there is no reason to accept bad behavior just because on another day they had good behavior.

Realistically, if they believe safety inspections save lives, the proper way to do it is to have scheduled inspections that you take the boat to and you don't get your annual registration papers until you pass. 99% of people once they buy and install the safety equipment won't remove it, so it would be far more effective than randomly pulling over 5% of boaters over a season...Conveniently the CG Auxilliary already does these checks, so all you have to do is accept their checks as official proof but while they imply the sticker will avoid a "safety inspection", there is nothing to back that up. If they decide to pull you over, you can point to the sticker all you want but they can still pull you over for a safety inspection.

But I firmly believe this is just a pretext for pulling people over without cause. Yes, they can get away with it and the courts have backed them up but the courts aren't always right. A stop purely for the purpose of safety inspections on a boat where no safety deficiency was outwardly visible is in clear violation of the 4th amendment even if the courts allow it.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by hellosailor

Driving a car is governed by state license laws. They usually require you to follow all directions from a peace officer, a designated flagman, and certain others.

Driving a boat? Governed by entirely different codes. And if you are on a navigable waterway, also governed by the US CFR, which give you the right to tell the officer "Yeah, not now dear." And that USCG officer? Is not a peace officer, they're either a military officer (in time of war only) with limited power over citizens in the US, or in time of peace, they're an administrative agent, with the limited power to enforce sections of US code.

"Black cat, white cat, all same, catch mice." [Chairman Mao].
Not in this case.

Actually, state law doesn't trump federal law. A state may not have any law or constitutional amendment about illegal search an seizure but the Federal 4th Amendment still holds true. You may have to follow their direction but if they do a search without cause and find something, they will run afoul of the 4th Amendment and it all gets thrown out. Hence the "safety inspections" that provide little if any safety benefit but create a "cause" to search the boat. The CG gets even more leeway as they can claim they are protecting the border and looking for smuggled contraband.

You can play semantics and say that the CG is not a LEO but if it quacks like a duck...

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by aeronautic1

So you’re driving home from the bar and a law enforcement officer (which the USCG is) wants to pull you over. You say, I’ll meet you in my drive-way 2 miles down the road.

If you can reasonably justify that it is unsafe to do so, I would slow down as much as reasonably possible, put the flashers on (to let them know I recognize they want me to pull over) and then pull off in the next driveway or other safe place.

It would be a pretty rare location where you need to go 2 miles to find a safe place to stop but even if you did, the 2-3 minutes of driving isn't going to significantly change any alcohol test results.

Unless there is something else going on, most LEOs aren't going to have an issue with it. I've worked with a few and most would much rather stand in a parking lot next to the car as opposed to 1ft from a semi going by at 70mph (they do it but it's not what they would prefer).

[30yearslater]

To add to the conversation, I was fuming over the costs for an FCC Voluntary Ship's Station License. The regional USCG Bureaucrat insisted that considering the cost of a boat the licenses shouldn't be an issue. $285.00 US for the Station and Operators licenses all to install a $135.00 radio. So good to know they can be so cavalier with someone else's money. This after he was squawking about people not registering their radio MMSI. I would have thought the CG might have protested raising the fees if it was about safety. Same crap I finally left the Army over. LIFERS. Of course we all know what USCG stands for! (Uncle Sam's Confused Group)

[zboss]

Originally Posted by Leo Ticheli

I've been boarded once and the Coast Guard guys could not have been more professional or respectful. These are people who will risk their lives to save us; they are welcome on my boat anytime, anywhere.

Fair winds,

Leo

In the period of 1 month we were stopped by the coast guard once to question if we were running an “air BNB”, a second time for a safety inspection, then a third time by the navy to tell us to move our boat (legitimately but not usually enforced) and once again by fish and wildlife for who knows what.

After a while, it’s not just the USCG that gets to you, it’s the whole law enforcement racket.

I would add... just because the police are protecting us on land doesn’t mean I am happy about them entering into our house and searching for smoke detectors and escape ladders.

[hellosailor]

"Actually, state law doesn't trump federal law. "
Sorry guy, that's a matter of "States' Rights" and except for those areas where the Fed has been specifically given sovereignty? The states are still sovereign and superior. That's why the USCG can't enforce regulations on your local duck pond, but it can enforce them on your *designated* navigable waterways. And why the USCG can't give you a ticket for breaking a red light, but your local "peace officers" can.
Chairman Mao once said "Black cat, white cat, all same, catch mice." And while that can be true, there are still times when they are not the same. With the USCG it can get even more complicated, as they are administrative agents in time of peace, but military forces in time of war. And despite the War Power Act and other weasel dances, there hasn't been a formal war involving the US since Congress, which has the exclusive power to declare war, did for WW2.

On not stopping for two miles? I could be on the ICW needing to run bridge openings before dropping anchor for the night...and like a railroad train, I can't stop for 1/2 hour and still make those openings. "Sorry, Captain, but you're welcome to join me for a drink after we drop the hook in a couple of hours." Or, I'm heading north from the Battery, making the six mile run past HellsGate into the Sound, and I need to make slack water at the Gate. "Sorry Captain, not now."
Kinda scary to see USCG boats with twin machine guns uncovered and manned....when the background is Manhattan, and there's simply no safe way to fire those guns.

30-
Has it really gone back up to $285 just to get a VHF license?? It was $75 for ten years my first time round, and I remember it went up more than double, but I thought they had come back down after the highs?
We can thank Ronald Reagan for that, by law the FCC fees (and ll federal fees) are supposed to be justified by the cost of the program they support--but the FCC conveniently has refused to say why it costs them so much money to issue a number and keep it on file for ten years. I suppose a FOIA request followed by a lawsuit could knock that back down to maybe $25, if anyone is motivated.

[dtmays]

To quote an article on SailFeed:

"The U.S. Coast Guard Boarding Policy:
Title 14 section 89 of the United States Code authorizes the U.S. Coast Guard to board vessels subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, anytime, any place upon the high seas and upon any waterway over which the United States has jurisdiction, to make inquires, examinations, inspections, searches, seizures, and arrests. The U.S. Coast Guard does not require a warrant to conduct search, seizures, arrests over any United States Waterway or high seas. The U.S. Coast Guard also have full legal law enforcement power on any land under the control of the United States, as needed to complete any mission" (https://www.sailfeed.com/2012/10/coast-guard-boardings-and-your-fourth-amendment-rights-part-1/").

As a former Coast Guard officer, I know this to be correct. The law was originally established, I believe, way back when the Coast Guard was the Revenue Cutter Service. The intent was to guarantee that the Service could make sure that all the duties that the U.S. government had coming was paid. In the early years of our country, that did not always happen (nor does it today). At any rate, the Coast Guard has a giant exception to normal due process requirements.

[Leo Ticheli]

Originally Posted by Jason Flare

Nice. Do you show them your internet browsing history while they’re there?

Why, yes; I always invite them to view my browsing history and my socialist, commie, Buddhist, atheist, liberal, hippy, beatnik flags. And... even though I'm pretty sure someone's out to get me, I'm not paranoid.

We encounter petty officials whenever we travel, and, with the possible exception of the TSA when they have ripped through cases of very expensive motion picture cameras, I've found that being polite and respectful results in being well treated.

I won't elaborate on the, "strawman argument."

Fair winds,
Leo

[danielamartindm]

I don't know the CG rules about this, and I don't really even care what they are. Someone on that CG vessel made a bad call. Your request to have them accompany you to sheltered waters was entirely reasonable. Absent evidence of a crime, for that captain to put your vessel and his own crew in jeopardy (and end up damaging your vessel) to me was unconscionable. Someone could have been killed.

[Jason Flare]

Originally Posted by Leo Ticheli

Why, yes; I always invite them to view my browsing history...

Fair winds,
Leo

I don’t believe you.

[14murs14]

Originally Posted by 30yearslater

To add to the conversation, I was fuming over the costs for an FCC Voluntary Ship's Station License. The regional USCG Bureaucrat insisted that considering the cost of a boat the licenses shouldn't be an issue. $285.00 US for the Station and Operators licenses all to install a $135.00 radio. So good to know they can be so cavalier with someone else's money. This after he was squawking about people not registering their radio MMSI. I would have thought the CG might have protested raising the fees if it was about safety. Same crap I finally left the Army over. LIFERS. Of course we all know what USCG stands for! (Uncle Sam's Confused Group)

Just to be clear, you do grasp the fact that the FCC oversees radio station licenses, not the Coast Guard. And that they're two completely separate agencies in different departments. So not only wouldn't the "regional USCG bureaucrat" have anything whatsoever to do with the price you pay for that license but the protest of a GS-11 in the Coast Guard is going to have not a bit of impact on the FCC. I'm not sure what's a greater danger to the Republic, mindless bureaucrats or anti-gubmn't haters who have no understanding of the government they love to hate but don't have any trouble pontificating about it!

[14murs14]

Originally Posted by zboss

In the period of 1 month we were stopped by the coast guard once to question if we were running an “air BNB”

I'm calling BS on that one. Let me know the station and the date, I'm giving them a call.

[14murs14]

Just to clarify for all you sea lawyers out there, the Coast Guard’s primary law enforcement authority comes from 14 USC 89 (passed in 1949) which states, “The Coast Guard may make inquiries, examinations, inspections, searches, seizures, and arrests upon the high seas and waters over which the United States has jurisdiction, for the prevention, detection, and suppression of violations of the laws of the United States for such purposes, commissioned, warrant and petty officers may at any time go on board of any vessel subject to the jurisdiction, or to the operations of any law, of the United States, address inquiries to those on board, examine the ship’s documents and papers, and examine, inspect, and search the vessel and use all necessary force to compel compliance . . .”

There very specifically isn't a clause that says you can ignore the Coast Guard for your convenience to make a bridge lift or a tide. You can certainly point out that you'd appreciate an expedited inspection for that reason, however given the tone I see here I can also tell you that although it's unprofessional it's just human nature that if you're an a-hole spouting off about your "rights" you're not going to engender a favor that isn't legally required.

Coast Guard personnel are accountable for behaving in a safe manner. I'm not sure how many more times I can say this, but there's no need for all this "crowd coverage of the supposed horrible behavior that you postulate might exist somewhere sometime with a Coast Guard crew" being discussed here. When a single one of you can honestly tell us you called a station Officer in Charge when you saw something ill advised happening and got less than a professional response then you can start in with the breathless defense of your "rights" against the jackbooted thugs. Until then, please do us all a favor and keep in mind the old saying, better to remain silent and be thought a fool then open you mouth and remove all doubt.

So much misinformation and misdirected outrage at straw man scenarios on this thread, a bit sad really.

[Nicholson58]

We sailed Lake Michigan out of Muskegon for several years and cruised to the North Chanel and Lake Superior. We had a class B AIS and the annual spring courtesy inspection sticker applied. We were never stopped or boarded. They know who we are and that we are in compliance. That makes us a waste of time. They were Jonny on the spot when boats Overloaded with teenagers and no PFDs in sight headed across Muskegon Lake.

They are absolutely liable for all damage they cause. This has been enforced many times. Do not fear these guys. I have found them quite reasonable and professional. For the most part, the CG does not bother many boats unless on some training exercise for new crew. The greater worry is the local Mounties who think they can board without probable cause. They made that mistake once too often in Ohio and pissed off a congressman. The guys we found spooky were Homeland Security in their 900 HP RIB with machine guns and MIB holding automatics, no numbers and no identification.

[a64pilot]

It what all has happened since 911 that is the problem, local sheriff riding around in a black RIB with an MP5 and ballistic vest. I saw that at Cape Canaveral.
CBP “hiding” under the bridge in Clearwater displaying no lights. What idiots, with their lights on, they just looked like another CC, lights out, think they stood out? Homeland Security Boats, CBP high powered RIBs. South of Jacksonville
Why and when did we get this many water cops? What could they possibly be doing, and why do they need $100,000 1200 HP boats to do it in? That is a tremendous amount of money in fuel to run a 1200 HP CC.
It’s not the USCG.
God forbid you have a fire or think your sinking, would you call the CBP? FWC? Homeland Security?