Coastguard Harassment - ?

[Stu Jackson]

When I was out to see the America's Cup boats last Monday, the CG stopped me on the way back home. They'd stopped a big motor yacht first, then peeled out to leave the channel, and slowly crept up behind me on my starboard quarter. I just turned when I saw them close and waved and said, "Good afternoon." They asked if they could board and I said "Of course." Then they asked if I had a recent safety inspection. I said, "Yes, just last year. I have it done every year at the Catalina Rendezvous, which is coming up next month, so yes, it was within the last year, my sticker is on my mast on the other side."

"OK, have a nice day," and off they went.

Years ago I was boarded, again on a Monday, in our C25. When the youngsters boarded they asked for all sorts of placards, none of which were required on a boat without an inboard engine. They learned more from me...

A few years ago the CG was stopping folks in the shipping channel, as a huge freighter was coming out. They "missed" the boat that was impeding the freighter, and the pilot on the freighter got on the VHF and dressed down the CG.

Takes all kinds...

That said, compared to what I've heard on this subject, we seem to have a lot less "harassment" where we are than other parts of the country. Hope it stays that way.

It would make sense, however, that if you have a recent safety inspection, they oughta leave you alone.

 

[KD3PC]

JK

once again you miss my point, and please don't paint me with such a broad brush of points of view. I take things one topic at a time. Each thing should stand on it's own.

FYI, I could care less about whether you or anyone wears a PFD, my comments that you refer to were about those operators who were/are DUI and get off scott free at almost every chance, whether on land or sea often 2, 3, or 4 times BEFORE they KILL Someone. I also see no point in the Gov't making another rule on top of an already existing law that is all but un-enforceable....i.e. pfd/MSDs/etc/etc. It matters not to me which arm or microcosm of Gov't does this.

On my boat, a 42' sailboat, the risks are far different than those of a kayak/canoe/jet ski...as would be the requirements for the wearing of a pfd..similarly I feel that my boat is adequate to venture out in almost any weather, yet the CG is continually called out to resque or recover a 12-20 flat bottom fishing boat, with 4-5 aboard and not one piece of safety gear between them....see the difference..

I strongly agree with SemiJ, that although the CG does a lot of good things, babysitting us is not one of the things they should be doing, IMHO...however, they have been given the charter and mission as part of that poster child for gov't intrusion, TSA to do the things they are doing. So get it over with, let me know what the rules are, and the fine for not doing it. I will decide on my own to do it, ignore it or even switch hobbies, if need be.

Feel free to test them with a lawsuit, having worked with some of the higher ups, they would welcome a return to their original mission/charter and let the private sector babysit the recreational boater..but our Gov't has decided for us that we need far more nanny laws...they are not through with us yet...

YMMV

 

[SEMIJim]

It would make sense, however, that if you have a recent safety inspection, they oughta leave you alone.

Speaking of safety inspections: I tried to contact the local Auxiliary for a safety inspection. Looked it up on the USCG site. They never called me back.

Every time I've seen them on the water they've been headed the other way and it would've raised too much a ruckus on the creek to try a hook up with them at the time.

Jim

 

[KD3PC]

It would make sense, however, that if you have a recent safety inspection, they oughta leave you alone.

That would just be way too much common sense for our Gov't to agree to...or even make that simple process mandatory...if that would cut down on the searches/boardings/etc..

It really comes down to is what are we, recreational boating doing, that the Gov't finds so threatening? Simply enforce the laws that are there..what a concept...

 

[RON20406]

As an advocate of a professional, well-funded Coast Guard, I, however, would agree with the sentiments of Semi Jim to advocate less government intervention in our lives. The primary role of the Coast Guard is to serve our country in times of need and protect our citizens from harm on the water. This is best accomplished with their drug interdiction efforts, search and rescue and providing a military presence along our coasts. I do not believe that it serves their interests or ours for unnecesary or superfluous boardings when there is no reasonable cause. If they require CG certification on vessels, then it should be done before launch and at your local marina/boatyard, not as an inconvenience during a recreational outing. Unfortunately, people today do not question many interferences from our government and that was never the intention of our Founding Fathers. OUI's and nuisance calls on the water should not be the responsibility of the CG but rather local law enforcement. Government is not the answer to everything in our lives. I wonder what Mr. Jefferson would have to say? Good luck and good sailing, Ron

 

[S/V Brighid]

those who would sacrifice securityfor liberty deserve neither....Benj. Franklin

 

[Barnacle Bill]

I'm a bit late in responding, but the USCG has a pretty big presence in my immediate home sailing area and if you have an inspection sticker displayed on the side of your boat they will leave you alone for regular inspections and will only pull you over if they feel there is a reason. Often, however, they have new coasties and so they do random inspections as a part of training and since we are out there happily sailing along, they might pull you out of the pile. Often they will have you continue underway (not stop) and board you and go through your papers, etc. while you continue to happily sail along. When finished they will hop off and let you be. By and far they do much more good than harm and I don't mind their presence at all. But, if you do have a problem with their procedure and really think that it was harrassment that they displayed - beyond what you expect from them, they actually do have an avenue for making complaints and they take them very seriously.

 

[Alan]

A very wise statement by old Ben, but I have to question the security part of stopping boaters with no provocation not to mention the legality.

 

[Rick Webb]

Coast Guards Authority to Board

The Coast Guard has the right to board your vessel because of it's customs enforcement authority. Law enforcement authorities must either have permision or probable cause. Two different animals and different parts of the Constitution.

 

[RON20406]

those who would sacrifice securityfor liberty deserve neither....Benj. Franklin

And where do You draw the line? Coasties boarding any boat, any time, with no reasonable cause? CG inspections to recreational boaters are hardly a security issue for a branch of our military (as stated previously) as would be drug interdiction for suspected drug runners offshore and in coastal waters or threatening foreign vessels to our national security. A wonderful quote by Old Ben, but not relevant to the point unless you believe CG inspections of recreational boaters are vital to our national security. Good luck and good sailing, Ron

 

[inarathree]

A lot of bad things have been done under the guise of "just doing my job", but in the defense of the coasties, I am ok with what they do for their job. They have been doing it for a long time, since what 1790?

I am not in so much of a hurry that a 15 minute inspection is going to ruin my day.

USCG boarding and does not impede on the Fourth Amendment, which has been upheld numerous times in court. Although the Supreme court has never judged one way or another, Court found that “[w]hile the need to make document checks (on sea vessels)is great, the resultant intrusion on Fourth Amendment interests is quite limited.”

 

[RON20406]

And, while we're at it, why not promote a dual purpose boarding of recreational boaters-- the first: an inspection of the vessel proper; the second: an inspection of food aboard which violates government guidelines for healthy eating as directed by Michael R. Taylor, Food Czar. Anyone for Brie on garlic toast? Safe sailing, Ron P.S. Please don't mention the Dom Perignon!

 

[Winkfish]

those who would sacrifice securityfor liberty deserve neither....Benj. Franklin

Actually, I believe you have it backwards. The quote was actually, "Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither."

 

[LuzSD]

Actually, I believe you have it backwards. The quote was actually, "Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither."

My thoughts as well,Winkfish, it makes more sense.... when I looked up that quote (because I thought it was quoted backwards) it is actually (according to Wikiquotes) .....They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

 

[LuzSD]

We were boarded once in the early evening while practicing with our spinnaker; we were one of two boats out and after they stopped a speeding little power boat, they came over to us. We had to put everything away for them to board, but it was ok. Actually as someone else mentioned, they were doing some training of new guys (they were just kids!!) and it was all quite interesting. They were actually lots of fun to have aboard. Their black boots and the marks they might leave were our biggest concern. We had everything they requested and then off they went to the mother ship anchored farther out.

The PO of our boat in SD were boarded quite often evidently and once, they were asked if they could board in the middle of a hot race. The PO asked them to meet them later if they didn't mind and I guess that is what they did.

Now homeland security guys all of 20 years old with machine guns pointed at us as they tell us to keep a specific distance (with no wind to help us accommodate them) is much more intimidating to me. And they have no interest in chatting about it.

 

[SEMIJim]

those who would sacrifice securityfor liberty deserve neither....Benj. Franklin

You've got it precisely backwards. The quote apocryphally attributed to Benjamin Franklin is "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. "

Whether Franklin actually said it or wrote it or not, I agree with the sentiment. My "fellow" Americans are doing just what that quote warns us against. You see: By granting government the power to give you safety, you also grant it power to take it away. And take it away it eventually will, as all governments given that power eventually do. Then we'll have neither liberty nor safety.

Well, I write "we," but I really mean the children of those of you that have them. What you're bequeathing them is not what was bequeathed to you

Jim

 

[woodster]

just cureious here how many of you that were boarded by uscg ...first ask to see there ID cards before letting them board.......

regards

woody

 

[LuzSD]

just cureious here how many of you that were boarded by uscg ...first ask to see there ID cards before letting them board.......



not us, it was very very clear who they were and where they came from... as I said, the mother ship was sitting off shore waiting for them

 

[Dave602]

I have on more than one occasion had the Coasties pull up and see my USCG courtesy inspection decal on my mast, wave and go on about their business with other folks. Well worth having them come and do one.

 

[rpwillia]

Speaking of the TSA

... Now if you want to talk about the TSA, but then I hardly ever see them on the lake.

I would be nervous if I saw this guy on the lake.