BoatBanter.com - Coast Guard Authority ???

BoatBanter.com (https://www.boatbanter.com/)

- Cruising (https://www.boatbanter.com/cruising/)

- - Coast Guard Authority ??? (https://www.boatbanter.com/cruising/45281-coast-guard-authority.html)

I think you are seeing our ingrained resentment as US citizens to exceptions
to our rights to privacy. The USCG may inspect your boat but unless you are
transporting something that might be perceived as a threat you have nothing
to worry about. A case of hand grenades would definitely qualify as a
perceived threat.

Since the Bahamas raised their crusing fees we have been routing through the
Old Bahama channel on deliveries. Being so close to the Dubyas dreaded Cuba
we get boarded 1 or 2 times every trip. The Coasties have always been very
professional and have been very careful not to do any damage.

Where it gets kind of outrageous is in some Florida waters where everyone
from the county deputies to game wardens think they have supreme powers.

--
Glenn Ashmore

I'm building a 45' cutter in strip/composite. Watch my progress (or lack
there of) at: http://www.rutuonline.com
Shameless Commercial Division: http://www.spade-anchor-us.com

"Peter Hendra" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 22:11:58 -0400, Larry W4CSC
wrote:

They can't haul your ass over in your car on I-26 without justifiable
cause
or there's big trouble. But, they can haul your ass over and tear apart
your boat any ol' time they get a hankerin' to! Nothing on the water is
"illegal search and seizure" any more...even before 9/11/01.

Hi,
A question.

I am sailing to the east coast of the US early next year after I cross
the Atlantic. I have a valid 10 year visa (we had to apply for one at
the Madrid US embassy even though if we fly in we get an automatic 3
month visa), and don't carry or use dope of any kind.

What concerns me about all of this is not the boarding by the US
Coastguard, but the stories of searches being done and damage caused
by the searchers. I have heard one where the tops of the water tanks
were cut open - and that in international waters. I can understand and
appreciate the need and benefit to stop foreign flagged yachts in
international waters due to the drug trade and don't mind at all being
searched. What I don't want is having to repair damage at my time and
expence.

Question: has anyone had any bad experience of this kind?

FWIW
When we arrived at the Customs wharf in Australia (well before 9/11),
there was a yacht moored to the wharf that had been stripped down
inside in an attempt to find illegal weapons and drugs. The yacht had
been intercepted after a tip that the owner was running guns. He
claims that he is a collector and that the box of hand grenades were
part of his collection. The case went to court. If he wins then
Customs has to make good the damage. If he loses, they don't. Is it
the same with the US Coastguard or any officials if they find that no
offence has been committed?

Another point, as a New Zealand registered yacht we cannot be boarded
by any other officials than Customs or Quarantine ones in Australian
ports (excepting police if we are commiting a crime) as we come under
Customs control. I believe that this is part of international law but
I may stand to be corrected.

Everywhere we have been stopped by coastguards or other officials in
the world so far they have always asked first (politely) if they can
come aboard.

Glenn Ashmore wrote:

Where it gets kind of outrageous is in some Florida waters where everyone
from the county deputies to game wardens think they have supreme powers.

If you have a documented vessel, don't you tell these good ol' boys to
take a flying F**K at a rolling donut?

Lew

Lew Hodgett wrote in
ink.net:

If you have a documented vessel, don't you tell these good ol' boys to
take a flying F**K at a rolling donut?

You do that in Charleston Harbor and you'll find yourself in the Charleston
County Jail. Noone in law enforcement cares a damn about your documented
vessel or your big yacht. If it's cruising inside South Carolina, it's
subject to every little fiefdom in the place. I've been inspected 5 times
in one day by 4 different sets of bureaucracies....even in camo
flackjackets.

As a matter of fact, we have a law that says 1 mile to seaward is the
city's line in all waterways, even the Atlantic Ocean. Jetski riders are
WELL aware of this little poke of the stick. It is used to keep them off
the exclusive beaches of the waterfront mansions. Of course, there's a
little problem with that....There ARE no exclusive beaches in SC. They can
keep you from parking on their roadways with miles of no parking signs, but
the BEACH, on the other hand, is PUBLIC PROPERTY and they can do nothing to
stop you from pulling your boat up on it. The public's property line on
the beach is 100' up the beach from the high water mark, which puts their
house on the public property after a big storm...(c;

A condo owner called his local rent-a-cops on Kiawah Island's gated town to
run us off "his beach" when we pulled two jetboats up on it. The cop made
lots of noises until I asked him to write me up for it so I could sue the
town. He backed off when I handed him my waterproof laminated copy of SC
Code. He had no idea the law even existed. We stayed most of the day.

--
Larry

You know you've had a rough night when you wake up and you're outlined in
chalk.

"WaIIy" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 10:24:34 -0700, "Bob La Londe"
wrote:

Amazing that with the various changes in our country in many ways we are
becoming worse and more oppressive in than the country we fought so hard
to
make ourselves independent of over 200 years ago.

Yes, and it gets worse every day.

Just hope your city doesn't want to take your house for the newest
Walgreen's.

That is one of the things I was reffering too, but didn't want to
specifically mention in this boating NG.

--
Bob La Londe
http://www.YumaBassMan.com

In article ,
Peter Hendra wrote:

Everywhere we have been stopped by coastguards or other officials in
the world so far they have always asked first (politely) if they can
come aboard.

If you say "No", they will just point the "Big Guns" at you and ask
again......

Me

"Johnhh" wrote in message
...
Well, they can have my house, but they had better keep their bloody hands
off my boat!
Just hope your city doesn't want to take your house for the newest
Walgreen's.

That is one of the things I was reffering too, but didn't want to
specifically mention in this boating NG.

Could someone please explain to me "how the government can take your house
for a private development?" I do know that expropriation can take place
for the good of the city for roads and things like that but for private
development is beyond my comprehension.
Thanks.......
Jim Carter
"The Boat"
Bayfield

Could someone please explain to me "how the government can take your house
for a private development?" I do know that expropriation can take place
for the good of the city for roads and things like that but for private
development is beyond my comprehension.
Thanks.......
Jim Carter
"The Boat"
Bayfield

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled last week that to create jobs or a higher
tax base falls under "public use" or "public good" or whatever term was
needed, and now allows governments to expropriate private citizens
property and resell it to developers. Sam

"Jim Carter" wrote in message
...

"Johnhh" wrote in message
...
Well, they can have my house, but they had better keep their bloody hands
off my boat!
Just hope your city doesn't want to take your house for the newest
Walgreen's.

That is one of the things I was reffering too, but didn't want to
specifically mention in this boating NG.

Could someone please explain to me "how the government can take your house
for a private development?" I do know that expropriation can take place
for the good of the city for roads and things like that but for private
development is beyond my comprehension.

I couple days ago the US Supreme Court ruled that a local jurisdiction could
employe emminent domain to sieze private property for private use if its
part of a development plan for an area.

i.e. A city really wants developer to build a high ticket (revenue
generating) shopping mall, and a few hold out home owners won't sell. The
city can sieze the land and turn around and sell it to the developer. That
is pretty bad, but its worse. Many cities have an independent developement
corporation that is an independent corporation that doesn't answer to the
voters. They can use that to do things that would not be legal for the city
to do like sell property below market value without voter approval or public
bid.

Got a prime piece of river front with a view. You can pretty much count on
losing it if somebdy want to build a hotel there now.
--
Bob La Londe
http://www.YumaBassMan.com