I served on a 180' buoy tender in the late 1970s (USCGC Blackhaw, San
Francisco), and we had a couple 50 caliber guns. Because of the numerous
missions of the Coast Guard, all the cutters have guns. Buoy tenders don't
just tend buoys; they are used for search & rescue, drug interdiction, and
any other mission that comes along. In some places, buoy tenders are the
only Coast Guard presence so they have to be prepared for anything. On the
larger buoy tenders, like the one I was on, there is a billet (i.e. a
required crew member position) for a Gunners Mate.

I was on the buoy tender for about two years and in that time we never went
on a drug patrol, but we did get the list of suspect vessels to watch for.
If we had come across a vessel suspected of carrying drugs and boarded the
vessel, that would have been the most likely scenario for breaking out the
50 cals.

If maintaining aids to navigation is at some point removed as a CG mission,
I suspect it will done by contractors, not by federal employees. In the
case, I highly doubt they would carry arms.

"Hewel" wrote in message
...
I was looking at some photos of Coast Guard vessels. I'm puzzled, why do
Aids to Navigation vessels like the Juniper Class buoy tenders have
"provision for 25mm Bushmaster" chain gun? That's a lot of gun! I'd bet
every one of them is armed with the 25mm and then some, right now. I've
seen other buoy tenders, icebreakers and tugs with 12.7mm machine guns
and/or 7.62mm machine guns as well. Keep in mind these ships were
commissioned before the Department of Homeland Security in most cases.
The Coast Guard while having some military and law enforcement missions
was under the Department of Transportation. I look at a buoy and think
why would you need to shoot it?
I can see that those non-military and non-law enforcement
responsibilities returned to the DOT as civil service jobs at some
point, but would that mean these boats would have to become unarmed?
They don't let other civil service employees have weapons. Where does
that leave the Auxiliary? I wonder if it will end up becoming
militarized at some point. I hope not. It would be an easy step for
someone to take in Washington, kinda like a floating militia.
The job of the Coast Guard has become very complex. Perhaps there are
elements that should remain as military units and some that should be
pushed away from their military ties?

Capt Lou wrote:
When the Coast Guard was transfered into the Department of Homeland
Security,
so was the Coast Guard Auxiliary. Now all auxiliarists have to be
fingerprinted, and if they want to volunteer as crew or for other jobs,
they
have to pass a security background and criminal check. I know an
auxiliarist
friend of mine who had long hair and was told to cut it. Does anyone
feel that
the government is going a little overboard for civilian citizen
volunteers?
What about the auxiliarist who has been volunteering for the past 15 or
20
years? Is he or she a security threat? Maybe it is time to consider the
U.S.
Power Squadron and tell the USCGAUX enough is enough! I hear that 60% of
the
auxiliarists in my division will not submit to the fingerprinting.
That's a lot
of dues paying members dropping out!

"Listen to the live broadcast of 'Nautical Talk Radio' with Captain Lou
every
Sunday afternoon from 4 - 5 (Eastern Standard Time) on the web at
www.959watd.com or if you are in Boston or Cape Cod set your radio dial
to
95.9FM.