Coast Guard boarding: what ID?

[ProMaritime]

Several misunderstandings here. Local law enforcement, including water cops, have no authority to board a USCG Documented vessel without probable cause. Period. Probable cause can be observing a criminal act like driving a boat while suspected of drinking alcohol or beating your wife while underway.

Various state vessel registration rules and regulations may seem to give a boarding right without probably cause to local law enforcement to board that state's registered vessels only. it is doubtful that such a provision would extend to out-of-state vessels and definitely does not extend to USCG Documented vessels.

Unfortunately, local law enforcement, especially water cops, are notoriously untrained and like to throw their weight around. If you think an order from them to allow you to be boarded without probably cause violates your constitutional rights notify them of this fact and state your intention to file a complaint but don't get in a pissing match with them.

 

[Hippocampus]

Have been boarded in the US and elsewhere. Sometimes by kids from the Midwest who were yet to become knowledgeable. However, even those have been professional and curtious once educated.
Sometimes boarding occurs to confirm the vessels occupants citizenship. Human smuggling isn’t always at land borders. Other times due to a interpol be on the lookout. We routinely kept a waterproof document container on the boat. In was face sheet of insurance policy, radio licenses, documentation paper and EVERYONE’S PASSPORT. Never been asked for more than that.

 

[Alaskan Sea-Duction]

Several misunderstandings here. Local law enforcement, including water cops, have no authority to board a USCG Documented vessel without probable cause. Period. Probable cause can be observing a criminal act like driving a boat while suspected of drinking alcohol or beating your wife while underway.

Various state vessel registration rules and regulations may seem to give a boarding right without probably cause to local law enforcement to board that state's registered vessels only. it is doubtful that such a provision would extend to out-of-state vessels and definitely does not extend to USCG Documented vessels.

Unfortunately, local law enforcement, especially water cops, are notoriously untrained and like to throw their weight around. If you think an order from them to allow you to be boarded without probably cause violates your constitutional rights notify them of this fact and state your intention to file a complaint but don't get in a pissing match with them.

I feel the same. Do you have any case law to support your position?

 

[ProMaritime]

Alaska Sea-Duction asked if I have any case law supporting my contentions. Sorry, no but then I haven't looked. And don't really care. A US Coast Guard Admiral family friend verified this to my satisfaction. He also told me that every US Navy ship has a Coast Guard officer onboard. Due to the Posse Comitatus Law US military is prohibited for engaging in law enforcement. Navy snipers take the bad guys out (Just like the Tom Hanks mover) and if any are left the Coast Guard officer puts them under arrest.
What is legal is what the last judge said it was.
I have told local DLNR water cops that they have no authority to board without probable cause. They don't like it, but they get. One even turned away after he asked me to verify that my boat was a USCG Documents vessel.

 

[Group9]

Seven cases since 2015 doesn’t seem excessive. Heritage Foundation is a conservative think tank.

https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud/search?state=MS

Mississippi has the most restrictive voting laws in the nation, a relic of Jim Crow laws. Even to vote by absentee ballot requires a witness and for it to be notarized, a standard that would stop me from voting due to the sheer difficulty of it. To find people that “violated” these restrictions and without easy public transportation to get to distant places is deliberate.

There are in statistics ade Type I and type II errors ( false negative and false positive). To point to one fraud case and argue it’s a common issue and tighten restrictions severely - with Mississippi being the most severe - has the defect of practically denying those that aren’t fraudulent but can’t afford the inconvenience of voting. I’m absentee but wouldn’t get a notarized witness.

Our criminal system was built on the premise of “beyond a reasonable doubt,” not “more likely than not” as in our civil cases, as we would rather have one guilty person evade conviction than convict someone innocent. The same framework should apply in voting to be consistent with our democratic ideals, especially when there is no fraud besides a handful.

Happy to have this conversation offline if you want to private message me and we can speak. I would appreciate your perspective. And I did study this in law school too. Out of curiosity, given the known facts of Mark Meadows registering and voting from an address he never lived at (or visited), would you prosecute? Seems to be a clear cut case; but obviously a handful of these don’t affect a statewide election.

No thanks. I've given up trying to argue with people who are fixed in their political positions. That and trying to teach tricks to my cat.

 

[bowball]

No thanks. I've given up trying to argue with people who are fixed in their political positions. That and trying to teach tricks to my cat.

This isn’t political at all so I’m surprised by that response. I’m analytical and independent. Always open minded to new information and viewpoints., especially from those with relevant experience like yourself. I can’t speak to your cat.

So the offer still stands.

If there is a Mississippi state website you can give me the link to that hadsthe relevant fraud and prosecution data, I’ll review it. (I only found the Heritage Foundation website).

 

[psneeld]

Alaska Sea-Duction asked if I have any case law supporting my contentions. Sorry, no but then I haven't looked. And don't really care. A US Coast Guard Admiral family friend verified this to my satisfaction. He also told me that every US Navy ship has a Coast Guard officer onboard. Due to the Posse Comitatus Law US military is prohibited for engaging in law enforcement. Navy snipers take the bad guys out (Just like the Tom Hanks mover) and if any are left the Coast Guard officer puts them under arrest.
What is legal is what the last judge said it was.
I have told local DLNR water cops that they have no authority to board without probable cause. They don't like it, but they get. One even turned away after he asked me to verify that my boat was a USCG Documents vessel.

Sorry, but every Navy ship does not necessarily have a USCG person on board. Occasionally when assigned to missions where interdiction "might" be possible or they are specifically tasked to...then USCG may be on board.

Just like USCGAUX vessels, they have NO law enforcement authority UNLESS a USCG regular with boarding authority is aboard.

Here is a section and link to explain USCG/US Navy ops

"1. U.S. Navy Support. U.S. laws, most notably the Posse Comitatus Act (18 U.S.C. 1385), historically prohibit USN and other DOD personnel from participating directly in law enforcement activities unless expressly authorized by Congress. In 1981, Congress specifically authorized the limited use of DOD military facilities, platforms, and equipment to assist federal authorities in maritime drug interdiction. As an example, Coast Guard LEDETs routinely deploy aboard USN vessels to conduct law enforcement boardings pursuant to authority set forth in 10 U.S.C. 379. Until 2015, USN frigates were the primary platform for deployment of Coast Guard LEDETs. Following the decommissioning of frigates in 2015, the Coast Guard and SOUTHCOM continue to seek alternate platforms for Coast Guard LEDETs to embark. Since 2015, the USN has employed other ship classes in support of the counter-drug mission, including Cyclone-class coastal patrol boats, and more recently, littoral combat ships. In addition to surface asset support, the USN employs P-8 aircraft to bolster detection capability throughout the WHTZ. This class of aircraft proves to be one of the most effective detection assets in the region, bolstering interdiction performance for U.S. Government and partner nation surface assets.

https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/uscg_-_maritime_law_enforcement_assessment.pdf

Plus the Navy does not need USCG for anti-piracy missions as they are usually outside the US and don't fall under Posse Comitatus as they are on a mission sanctioned by Congress doing a mission primarily enforced by many nation's navies.. However USCG personnel are often assigned as they are more in tune with collecting evidence and ultimately legal issues.

"This last factor seems entirely irrelevant, as the Posse Comitatus Act does not apply extraterritorially. Chandler v. United States, 171 F.2d 921, 936 (1st Cir.1948); United States v. al Liby, 23 F. Supp. 3d 194, 200 n. 37. (S.D.N.Y. 2014)"

https://www.lawfareblog.com/piracy-and-political-question-doctrine-non-conflict-uses-force

In Florida (and other states I believe)...similar to USCG safety inspection...

"FWC Officers also have the authority to stop and board vessels which are not being used for fishing. Just being on the water gives an FWC Officer a right to stop you, without cause, to conduct a safety inspection."

https://www.uslawshield.com/fwc-officers-florida-need-know/

 

[ProMaritime]

Your first sentence uses the word "necessarily" which identifies you as one who likes to argue over the minutia and waste other people's time. Obviously, nothing in necessarily necessary.

 

[RT Firefly]

Greetings,
Mr. PM. I would be very careful questioning Mr. ps's comments. Historically he has provided accurate information including the minutiae.

 

[psneeld]

Your first sentence uses the word "necessarily" which identifies you as one who likes to argue over the minutia and waste other people's time. Obviously, nothing in necessarily necessary.

I wasn't the one who posted that there are USCG personnel on every Navy ship.

That is not even close to being correct or the fact that they ore the ones that cleanup every piracy situation.

Arguing isn't what I want, getting good info out there is....

Might want to do some more research before posting.