On Oct 31, 9:13?am, wrote:
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 07:17:12 -0700, Chuck Gould

wrote:
USA Today reports this morning that Homeland Security has ordered one
of its divisions, (the USCG) to define a plan to positively identify
boaters. The rationale is that small boats could be loaded with
explosives and used to
blow up military or commercial vessels, ala USS Cole. Until the USCG
presents its plan we don't know the details, but possible requirements
*could* include, at a minimum, carrying a national Boater ID card.
(Something the Administration seems to favor, based on its proposals
in several areas).

I don't know where USA Today got their information, but the USCG
proposal specifically REJECTS creation of any additional or special
ID. They adamantly DO NOT want one. The idea is that any photo ID such
as a drivers license or state issued ID in lieu of a drivers license
would be all that is needed.

In a speech made in December of 2006, Admiral Thad Allen, ranking
admiral in charge of the USCG, specifically proposed instituting a
"national license" for pleasure boaters. The USCG has since made some
PR-type statements disavowing that proposal.

One of the challenges is that under existing law, a USCG boarding
officer cannot ask anybody aboard the boat for identification, but
only for documents identifying the boat.

Some additional insight on this issue:

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.o.../Gov.Lacks.htm

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Oct 31, 9:13?am, wrote:
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 07:17:12 -0700, Chuck Gould

wrote:
USA Today reports this morning that Homeland Security has ordered one
of its divisions, (the USCG) to define a plan to positively identify
boaters. The rationale is that small boats could be loaded with
explosives and used to
blow up military or commercial vessels, ala USS Cole. Until the USCG
presents its plan we don't know the details, but possible requirements
*could* include, at a minimum, carrying a national Boater ID card.
(Something the Administration seems to favor, based on its proposals
in several areas).

I don't know where USA Today got their information, but the USCG
proposal specifically REJECTS creation of any additional or special
ID. They adamantly DO NOT want one. The idea is that any photo ID such
as a drivers license or state issued ID in lieu of a drivers license
would be all that is needed.

In a speech made in December of 2006, Admiral Thad Allen, ranking
admiral in charge of the USCG, specifically proposed instituting a
"national license" for pleasure boaters. The USCG has since made some
PR-type statements disavowing that proposal.

One of the challenges is that under existing law, a USCG boarding
officer cannot ask anybody aboard the boat for identification, but
only for documents identifying the boat.

Some additional insight on this issue:

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.o.../Gov.Lacks.htm

That's weird. I haven't read the link yet, but if the CG thinks a crime has
been committed, who are they supposed to call, who *IS* allowed to ask for
ID?

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
ups.com...


One of the challenges is that under existing law, a USCG boarding
officer cannot ask anybody aboard the boat for identification, but
only for documents identifying the boat.

Some additional insight on this issue:

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.o.../Gov.Lacks.htm


That doesn't make sense. The USCG is the only branch of the service that is
empowered to arrest a civilian. Seems like they would need to know who they
are arresting.

Eisboch

On Oct 31, 10:39?am, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message

ups.com...



One of the challenges is that under existing law, a USCG boarding
officer cannot ask anybody aboard the boat for identification, but
only for documents identifying the boat.

Some additional insight on this issue:

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.o...mber/Gov.Lacks...

That doesn't make sense. The USCG is the only branch of the service that is
empowered to arrest a civilian. Seems like they would need to know who they
are arresting.

Eisboch

I'm far from entirely informed on the details of USCG arrest powers
(thank heavens!), but they may be allowed to ask for ID when making an
arrest but not when conducting a boarding.

A failure to identify the person being arrested would be contrary to
the Constitution on an extremely fundamental basis. How could anybody
rely on the right of habeus corpus if the government could factually
claim "We have no idea who we have in custody!"?

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Oct 31, 10:39?am, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message

ups.com...



One of the challenges is that under existing law, a USCG boarding
officer cannot ask anybody aboard the boat for identification, but
only for documents identifying the boat.

Some additional insight on this issue:

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.o...mber/Gov.Lacks...

That doesn't make sense. The USCG is the only branch of the service that
is
empowered to arrest a civilian. Seems like they would need to know who
they
are arresting.

Eisboch

I'm far from entirely informed on the details of USCG arrest powers
(thank heavens!), but they may be allowed to ask for ID when making an
arrest but not when conducting a boarding.

A failure to identify the person being arrested would be contrary to
the Constitution on an extremely fundamental basis. How could anybody
rely on the right of habeus corpus if the government could factually
claim "We have no idea who we have in custody!"?


Who cares? The way things stand now, the guvmint can claim you're a
terrorist and refuse to tell you or anyone else on earth IF you're in
custody, or why.

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Oct 31, 10:39?am, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message

ups.com...



One of the challenges is that under existing law, a USCG boarding
officer cannot ask anybody aboard the boat for identification, but
only for documents identifying the boat.

Some additional insight on this issue:

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.o...mber/Gov.Lacks...

That doesn't make sense. The USCG is the only branch of the service that
is
empowered to arrest a civilian. Seems like they would need to know who
they
are arresting.

Eisboch

I'm far from entirely informed on the details of USCG arrest powers
(thank heavens!), but they may be allowed to ask for ID when making an
arrest but not when conducting a boarding.

A failure to identify the person being arrested would be contrary to
the Constitution on an extremely fundamental basis. How could anybody
rely on the right of habeus corpus if the government could factually
claim "We have no idea who we have in custody!"?


I never knew this before until a week or so ago. There was a show on "The
Military Channel" that was doing a feature on each of the armed forces
academies. The CG is the only one that can make an arrest. The Navy can
stop, board and search but if an arrest requirement results, they have to
hold the subjects and call for the CG.

Eisboch

Eisboch wrote:
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Oct 31, 10:39?am, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message

ups.com...



One of the challenges is that under existing law, a USCG boarding
officer cannot ask anybody aboard the boat for identification, but
only for documents identifying the boat.
Some additional insight on this issue:
http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.o...mber/Gov.Lacks...
That doesn't make sense. The USCG is the only branch of the service that
is
empowered to arrest a civilian. Seems like they would need to know who
they
are arresting.

Eisboch
I'm far from entirely informed on the details of USCG arrest powers
(thank heavens!), but they may be allowed to ask for ID when making an
arrest but not when conducting a boarding.

A failure to identify the person being arrested would be contrary to
the Constitution on an extremely fundamental basis. How could anybody
rely on the right of habeus corpus if the government could factually
claim "We have no idea who we have in custody!"?


I never knew this before until a week or so ago. There was a show on "The
Military Channel" that was doing a feature on each of the armed forces
academies. The CG is the only one that can make an arrest. The Navy can
stop, board and search but if an arrest requirement results, they have to
hold the subjects and call for the CG.

There has been a program between the Navy and CG, kind of like an
exchange program, to familiarize the officers with the other services
operations for years. Originally to enable faster integration between
the two during times of war. It appears that this program has evolved
into a program where a CG officer is embarked on Naval warships for the
ability to enable arrests on the high seas.

On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 14:17:22 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:

The Navy can
stop, board and search but if an arrest requirement results, they have to
hold the subjects and call for the CG.

What is the difference between being "held" and being "arrested"?

It is illegal to resist arrest, what about "held"?

I suppose you could be charged with obstructing governmental
administration or some such.

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 14:17:22 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:

The Navy can
stop, board and search but if an arrest requirement results, they have to
hold the subjects and call for the CG.

What is the difference between being "held" and being "arrested"?

It is illegal to resist arrest, what about "held"?

I suppose you could be charged with obstructing governmental
administration or some such.

http://public.findlaw.com/traffic-ti...stop-searches/

On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 17:10:55 -0500, wrote:

This is interesting since I never carried any ID on my boat at all for
years. These days I carry an expired concealed carry license. It is
the only spare state issued ID I have. I am not carrying my wallet. I
have one of my credit cards memorized in case I need to pay for a tow
pirate.

The various flavors of local marine police routinely ask for ID. Don't
know what happens if you don't have any.