Total hogwash! Have you left your brain ashore?

The article never mentioned "non-English speaking," it mentioned "Slovenian
nationals," which I take to imply non-US-citizens. While documentation does not
require knowledge of English, it absolutely requires US citizenship. The poster
described a situation where, if true, people are fraudulently claiming to be US
citizens to gain some protection of traveling under a US flag.

I never suggested boarding boats based on the linguistic abilities of the crew;
on the contrary, I was suggesting checking out boats that were flying a US flag,
nominally claiming to be US citizens.

Frankly my comments were a bit sarcastic, because I doubt the practice mentioned
is widespread. However, if it is common, it should be stopped because it does
not bode well for those of who legitimately travel under the US flag.







"Geoffrey W. Schultz" wrote in message
7...
In the article which prompted your response it was stated that US
flagged vessels are being operated by non-English speaking individuals.
From your statement it appears that you want to US coastguard to board
these vessels based upon their language and potentially sieze them.
Most people would call this "racial profiling."

There's nothing in the US consitution or US Coastguard documentation
regulations which requires anyone to speak English. I know plenty of
Croation people who are US citizens who do not speak English. Sending a
Coastguard cutter to harass non-English speaking individuals, who may be
well within the law, seems to be a poor idea. As someone who cruises 7+
month per year out of the country I can assure you that the US has a
poor enough world image as it is.

-- Geoff

"Jeff Morris" wrote in
:

I'm not sure what your problem is - why shouldn't the USCG be able to
board a US flagged ship? Why would this offend others around the
world?


"Geoffrey W. Schultz" wrote in message
7...
"Jeff Morris" wrote in
:

However, being a US flagged vessel means that it can be boarded and
searched anywhere in the world by US authorities. Maybe we should
send a cutter to the Adriatic to help close the budget deficit.

Another fine example of American thinking on how to make friends
around the world! Then again we're doing a great job with our
current policies.

-- Geoff

On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 14:29:50 -0400, "Jeff Morris"
wrote:

On this I would agree with jaxie - it is patently illegal for a non-citizen of the US to own, or in
any way have a controlling interest, in a US Documented vessel. The laws go on at great length
closing as many loopholes as the lawyers could think of. There is no exemption for recreational
vessels. Vessels in violation certainly lose their documentation, and might be liable for seizure.

Uh-huh: the first phrase indicates a mistake is in progress.

Owning a US registered vessel is the stuff for which lawyers exist:
the usual mechanism for non-citizens is to vest ownership in a US
corporation. The asset ownership issue is essentially pencil-whipped.
A US corporation need not cost a whole lot of money : $250 can do
it....

Brian Whatcott Altus OK

Documenting is what I, as a Banker, want in anything I'm
lending money for but not what I as a retiree actually need - then I only
need to register.

Documentation is what you want if you leave the country for anywhere other than
Canada and most Caribbean countries.

jeffies, argue with the Coast Guard. documented boats have lost their right
documentation by having a non-citizen in command.

jeffies, you REALLY should drop out of this discussion, for your wife is
nowhere near at hand to tell you that you are a dumb cluck.

"Jeff Morris"
Date: 9/30/2004 10:51 AM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id:

Once again, jaxie is proved wrong.

Here's the United States Code, Title 46, Section 12110:

Section 12110. Limitations on operations authorized by certificates
(a) A vessel may not be employed in a trade except a trade
covered by the endorsement issued for that vessel.
(b) A barge qualified to be employed in the coastwise trade may
be employed, without being documented, in that trade on rivers,
harbors, lakes (except the Great Lakes), canals, and inland waters.
(c) A vessel with only a recreational endorsement may not be
operated other than for pleasure.
(d) A documented vessel, other than a vessel with only a
recreational endorsement, may be placed under the command only of a
citizen of the United States.







"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
jeffies, this has been discussed before and the problem it seems is that
you
don't understand what the English word "command" means in relation to a
documented vessel, as the word is understood by the US Congress.

First of all, jaxie doesn't understand the rules. His claim that a
citizen
must
be on documented vessels at all times is completely bogus. It may be
true
for
commercial fishing vessels, but not for recreational boats.

jeffies is wrong on this, and it has been argued before. Again, I say.
jeffies is dead wrong on this.

You've made this claim before but never substantiated it. Its pretty easy
to
find the regs that require Fishing vessels to be command by citizens; why
can't
you find the regs that apply to recreational vessels?


US documentation has been lost on recreational vessels found to being
operating
by a non-citizen with not citizens onboard and in command.

So, you're claiming that non-citzens can't charter a documented vessel in
US
waters? I should be pretty easy to find a rule about that - how about it
jaxie?

Brian, they may be registered in say South Carlolina but they are not, can not,
be US documented and operated by non-citizens.

That some countries allow their citizens to register some boat with some state
-- and then ignores the international conventions -- in no way means that some
county -- say Brazil or Italy or Singapore -- will accept it as the same as US
federal documentation.

close, but a couple of points

boats can be "registered" with a state (New York, Alabama,
California, Guam, etc), and usually have to be to kept in use in that
state for some period of time. you do not need to be a US citizen to
register or use a boat in any state. mostly, you just have to pay
your fees. state registration is usually not recognized by national
governments of the world.


There are many US registered yachts in the Adriatic - owned and sailed by
Slovenian nationals; everywhere down the Croatian coast there are Ol' Glory
ensigns flying on ships with no one speaking English on board.

Slovenia, now a EU member state, has high import tarifs for recreational
boats (to protect their own industry, Elan in particular) and many
Slovenians register their new imported craft in Delaware - it's a cottage
industry there.

Imagine, the USA, a flag of convenience country.

BrianH.

it is not a "US flagged vessel" with a state government registration on it. It
is a state registered vessel. A "US flagged vessel" is (federally) DOCUMENTED.
To be documented, the vessel MUST be owned and operated by a US citizen.

guys, knock it off. this is law and any ng bickering don't change it.

On this I would agree with jaxie - it is patently illegal for a non-citizen
of the US to own, or in
any way have a controlling interest, in a US Documented vessel. The laws go
on at great length
closing as many loopholes as the lawyers could think of. There is no
exemption for recreational
vessels. Vessels in violation certainly lose their documentation, and might
be liable for seizure.

I'm not sure how this works if the vessel is not in US waters. However,
being a US flagged vessel
means that it can be boarded and searched anywhere in the world by US
authorities. Maybe we should
send a cutter to the Adriatic to help close the budget deficit.


--
-jeff

"BrianH" wrote in message
...
JAXAshby wrote:
close, but a couple of points

boats can be "registered" with a state (New York, Alabama,
California, Guam, etc), and usually have to be to kept in use in that
state for some period of time. you do not need to be a US citizen to
register or use a boat in any state. mostly, you just have to pay
your fees. state registration is usually not recognized by national
governments of the world.


There are many US registered yachts in the Adriatic - owned and sailed by
Slovenian nationals;
everywhere down the Croatian coast there are Ol' Glory ensigns flying on
ships with no one
speaking English on board.

Slovenia, now a EU member state, has high import tarifs for recreational
boats (to protect their
own industry, Elan in particular) and many Slovenians register their new
imported craft in
Delaware - it's a cottage industry there.

Imagine, the USA, a flag of convenience country.

BrianH.

In the article which prompted your response it was stated that US
flagged vessels are being operated by non-English speaking individuals.

no, not non-English-speaking (note the required second hyphon) individuals, but
rather non-US-citizens operating US documented vessels. this is illegal, and
the US CG has a legal right to board US-flagged vessel anywhere in the world.
If the vessel is operated by a non-citizen, the CG has a right -- indeed, a
duty -- to sieze the vessel.

you don't like that, don't operate a US-flagged vessel as a non-citizen.

what the hell do yo expect, dood?

I know plenty of
Croation people who are US citizens who do not speak English.

no you don't. you can't get to be a US citizen without knowing English (unless
you were born in the US, in which makes not knowing English unlikely). you
can't pass the tests to become a citizen otherwise.

the usual mechanism for non-citizens is to vest ownership in a US
corporation.

this *can* be done, but most certainly is not the norm, for it brings on its
own issues.

besides, the law STILL requires a US-flagged vessel to be under the command of
a US citizen.

playing silly games will get your boat taken away from you, as well it should.

It's hardly hogwash. What was stated was their nationality, not their
citizenship! And I'd guess that was determined by their language as I
doubt that anyone checked their passports.

I can believe that this was scarcastic, but everyone doesn't know your
sense of humor. I can just imagine a non-US citizen reading this
article and repeating that US citizens suggesting sending the Coast
Guard to board US flagged vessels with foreigner speaking people aboard.
I've been amazed at what foreign cruisers have told me that they've read
on US Internet sites. Perhaps there's just as much rhetoric on non-
US/non-English web sites, but since the majority of American's can't
read them (myself included), we don't know.

What I wonder is what protection a US documented vessel would provide a
non-US citizen.

-- Geoff

"Jeff Morris" wrote in
:

Total hogwash! Have you left your brain ashore?

The article never mentioned "non-English speaking," it mentioned
"Slovenian nationals," which I take to imply non-US-citizens. While
documentation does not require knowledge of English, it absolutely
requires US citizenship. The poster described a situation where, if
true, people are fraudulently claiming to be US citizens to gain some
protection of traveling under a US flag.

I never suggested boarding boats based on the linguistic abilities of
the crew; on the contrary, I was suggesting checking out boats that
were flying a US flag, nominally claiming to be US citizens.

Frankly my comments were a bit sarcastic, because I doubt the practice
mentioned is widespread. However, if it is common, it should be
stopped because it does not bode well for those of who legitimately
travel under the US flag.







"Geoffrey W. Schultz" wrote in message
7...
In the article which prompted your response it was stated that US
flagged vessels are being operated by non-English speaking
individuals. From your statement it appears that you want to US
coastguard to board these vessels based upon their language and
potentially sieze them. Most people would call this "racial
profiling."

There's nothing in the US consitution or US Coastguard documentation
regulations which requires anyone to speak English. I know plenty of
Croation people who are US citizens who do not speak English.
Sending a Coastguard cutter to harass non-English speaking
individuals, who may be well within the law, seems to be a poor idea.
As someone who cruises 7+ month per year out of the country I can
assure you that the US has a poor enough world image as it is.

-- Geoff

"Jeff Morris" wrote in
:

I'm not sure what your problem is - why shouldn't the USCG be able
to board a US flagged ship? Why would this offend others around
the world?


"Geoffrey W. Schultz" wrote in message
7...
"Jeff Morris" wrote in
:

However, being a US flagged vessel means that it can be boarded
and searched anywhere in the world by US authorities. Maybe we
should send a cutter to the Adriatic to help close the budget
deficit.

Another fine example of American thinking on how to make friends
around the world! Then again we're doing a great job with our
current policies.

-- Geoff