So 1 out of every 2 Coast Guard personnell you met were bad?
Posted on 05/29/2002 1:26:07 PM PDT by 68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub
OK
The Coast Guard in both peace time and war time is ALWAYS under command of the Commander-in-Chief.
Top and bottom do not a chain make. In time of peace it goes from the CIC to the DOT and down. In time of war it goes from the CIC to the DOD and down. Go back and look at that little history of yours; they transfer the department in time of war and it reverts at the end.
One path is military, one isn't. That does not mean that the organization management procedures aren't military in nature, because of course they are. I think we are arguing definitions of what constitutes "military."
The Coast Guard is ALWAYS subject to the USCMJ, at peace, at war.
The USGS personnel are when at sea or on US property, but I am not certain that applies elsewhere. Maritime law makes sense as they wouldn't want to be flopping internal procedures every time there is a dust up abroad. Are you suggesting that if I am arrested as a US citizen by the USGS in time of peace that I get a military trial? Sorry, I don't buy it. There are other differences from standard military practice. IIRC, if a documented boat is at the dock, it can only be boarded by a US Marshall and not the USGS alone, but then, they may have changed the rules... probably without an act of Congress. That's the problem.
BS. But I will admit having no great love for the Clintonista brass who were in charge at the time, and that feeling is shared by many of those who work at the Pentagon.
You just literally spit on the graves of every service man and woman who died on 9/11 and since then.
BS again. I can support the people on the line and still despise the people in charge who screwed up and don't resign. I want people in those positions who won't get our people killed stupidly or unnecessarily. Maybe I care more about them than you do.
You call that attacking the Coast Guard? Look, if I think that they have more important things to do, perhaps I think that they have useful and important responsibilities, like inspecting container ships. That is hardly attacking the agency, it is attacking the policy.
" But I have also seen them playing eco-cop without any knowledge of what they were doing, I know people who saw them getting their jollies boarding boats with nude babe sunbathers, I nearly got my boat bashed when they were conducting a "safety check" in choppy water just because they wanted to gawk at the antique yacht, and know that they tried to board a Federally documented vessel illegally (all 20 years ago)."
That post was in response to the assertion that they never harrass boaters. They are all facts, and I stand by every one of them. I have met good and bad among the Coast Guard (probably 50/50). No agency is perfect. Agencies with both rule-making administrative, and judicial powers too easily go overboard. That doesn't mean that I don't think that they do important and useful work. It does mean that I want them doing more of those things and I don't want them playing eco-cop (which is still in their recruitment advertising). That is better handled under civil law. I also don't want them harassing boaters ala airport security. Let the Navy protect itself until Congress declares war (which it should have done some time ago).
Oh so it was the Coast Guard 40 footers who used to run us out of the Oakland Naval Supply Center when we would go down there in a skiff to look at the ships? REALLY? Gosh they sure were a funny gray color for a Coast Guard boat, white numbers on em too.
I'll tell you about another incident. I had a 1941, 32' Sheldon motor sailer, equipped with a rasty DAMR-273 Buda diesel with a Bosch inline pump (a military motor from an old gig). I had obtained it as a $600 wreck and spent 7 years restoring the boat. It was immaculate, half a dozen new ribs, major cabin reconstruction in appetong, new 22' X 30" skeg (I bored the shaft hole), rebuilt motor (not the pump) and new tanks, gold leaf drop-shadow lettering, 22 coat varnish job, the hull was like glass, it had a dinghy and varnished hoisting tackle. On its second run over to San Francisco, (really its maiden voyage after an early shakedown or two inside the Estuary) it went air-bound. I must have cleared the lines at least 20 times and it would start, and then quit. I gave it up right in front of Pier 39 when it was still not yet officially open. A tug came by, and hailed me asking if I needed aid and I so acknowledged. He stood by until the 41 footer arrived. That's when they nearly tore apart my railings with their boat handling. A 20 something crewman (I don't remember the rank) boarded with notepad in hand yelling, "Where are your vents!!!" No, he didn't say, "What's the problem?" or even "Are you OK?" much less introduce himself, he started looking about the boat and asking to see the required equipment and when he found out it was all there and that I didn't need the bilge vents because it was a diesel, THEN he asked what was wrong. In defense of the crew a more mature fellow boarded and told our gung-ho enforcer to tone it down. He decided that there was no point in doing anything to fix it so they gave us a tow to the unfinished marina so that at least I could drop off my passengers (who were headed for SF anyway). The Coast Guard bid their adieu's and left. I went back to work and figured out that it was an air leak inside the injector feed pump that had worsened as I consumed fuel and had to suck a taller liquid column off the bottom of the tank. I transferred fuel from my other reserve tank, it started and idled fine, so I went home. Then I got the pump rebuilt.
I am sure things are different up in Coos Bay, where people tend to be more serious about their boats than in the Oakland Estuary. If your aquaintances up there are anything like the people I met in Brookings on the Chetco, they are probably fine people. I can only go by my personal experience down here and it wasn't as you portray.
That is the job of U.S. Customs and Port Authority
Coast Guard Auxiliary
District 11s, Division 2, Flotilla 27...reporting in.
Indeed it is. They don't have the manpower either. They could be relieved by some boarding and pre-inspection of ships capable of carrying illegal passengers and weapons. We also have a corruption problem in that area and I think that a back-check by a competing agency would improve the effectiveness of the Customs Authority.
My interest is to see more patrolling for illegals and contraband weapons. Do you have a problem with using the USCG for that purpose?
If they had the additional manpower...no. But since they don't, and they have similar training like the Navy, it makes since they help secure our naval forces. And no, the Navy doesn't have the resources to maintain perimeters without shooting people out of the water. The USCG has small craft just about everywhere which can help maintain those perimeters.
That is not what I have seen, but that was 20 years ago. Almost every Navy ship has a Zodiac and even a motorized lifeboat with M-16s and a grenade launcher aboard could do the job proposed here. A USCG 41 footer is overkill IMHO.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.