Looks like meat's back on the menu boys!!!
Posted on 09/22/2005 2:42:37 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Two of the Moss Landing Harbor residents who were the subjects of random boat searches during Labor Day Weekend say their experiences were closer to armed invasions than the friendly "safety inspections" characterized by U.S. Coast Guard officials.
Both residents said search crews entered the harbor in inflatable boats with machine guns mounted on their bows. Then, carrying M-16 rifles, they approached residents and boarded and searched their boats in the name of safety and "homeland security."
One resident, who asked not to be identified for fear or retribution, said his experience was "very intimidating, very frightening."
"To me it reeks of Nazi Germany and the death squads in Argentina," he said. "I don't want my name on their list."
Scott Jones, a live-aboard resident who was searched, said there has been talk in the harbor about contacting the American Civil Liberties Union, but he first wants to hear further from the Coast Guard about its future intentions.
Lt. Mark Warren of the Monterey Coast Guard Station said he has heard mostly positive response to the operation, but may rethink future actions given current criticisms.
"We take lessons and learn from these types of operations. If the public is genuinely distasteful of it, we might not do it," he said. "I'm not saying we won't, but I'm not saying we will."
In addition to trying to ensure the safety of boats on the bay during the holiday weekend, Warren said, the operation was part of an effort to increase the public's awareness of the Coast Guard's role as a law enforcement agency under the Department of Homeland Security. He said the public might have been surprised to see weaponry that is now standard issue to all Homeland Security forces.
"I, as a U.S. citizen, am highly offended by that," said Jones, who is accustomed to Coast Guard boardings when he sails. "When a sheriff's deputy drives down the road or a CHP officer drives down the road and I see them, I'm aware of his job, and not because he's pulled me over and put a gun to my head.
"The Coast Guard's needs would be better served by an advertising campaign," he said, "rather than bullying people in their bedrooms at 10:30 at night."
Jones said he and his wife were sleeping when they were awakened by knocking on the side of the boat.
He went to the deck and was confronted by two armed officers asking if they could come aboard. Thinking something had happened in the harbor that the officers needed to talk to him about, Jones acquiesced.
"It seemed a little unreasonable at 10:30 at night," he said, "but it was the middle of the night and I was half asleep, so I said 'OK.' At this point, I looked out and saw six to eight officers (on the dock) and all appeared armed."
The officers boarded his boat and quickly spread out beyond the immediate deck without invitation, saying they were conducting a safety inspection.
"I can say with all certainly that what they did was not a safety inspection or in any way related to a safety inspection," he said. The officers demanded access to the bilge, saying they wanted to make sure the boat wasn't taking on water.
"This was highly suspect," Jones said. "If you're on board, you'd know if you were taking on water."
When Jones showed them the bilge, the officers repeatedly, and with increasing forcefulness, demanded to know if there were other accesses to the bilge. They also "demanded" the driver's licenses of everyone on board.
Increasingly upset by the nature of the search, Jones asked for the officers' authority and justification. One officer read to him from a federal code authorizing the search.
"It was either the Patriot Act or homeland security,"Jones said.
Warren said the officers would not have cited the Patriot Act because it affords the Coast Guard no additional authority.
Jones conceded he may have heard "homeland security" and registered "Patriot Act," but still feels the search was unwarranted and in a gray area of the law at best.
"I wouldn't question their professionalism, but I do question their motive and their authority," he said. "To me, it sounds like something that an ACLU lawyer would just tear apart."
Coast Guard officials say they are authorized by maritime law to board and search vessels on U.S. waters, including waters that lead to U.S. waters, to enforce federal laws.
Warren said the officers were attempting to ensure the safety and compliance of docked boats by checking for oily water in their bilges and that their sanitation devices were in locked position. Some searches were conducted at night in an effort to catch boats before they went onto the bay for the weekend.
The second boat owner who spoke to The Herald said his boat was searched after he challenged officers who were searching other boats, at 10:30 p.m. Sept. 2, and during the morning on following days. Told they were acting as Homeland Security officers, he asked what they were protecting the harbor from.
"Terrorists," he said he was told by the officers, who exhorted him to "remember the Cole," referring to the October 2000 attack by terrorists on the USS Cole that killed 17 sailors.
"The only terrorists down here are you guys," he told them. "You're scaring the hell out of me with that machine gun."
While Warren was noncommittal about future searches, he said it is important for the public to know the Coast Guard's presence will be increased.
"The Coast Guard's focus on homeland security has increased our presence on the water and will continue to increase our presence simply because that's what Congress is wanting us to do right now," he said. "The concern at the congressional level about the security of ports is pretty high."
Nov3 felt peoples liberties were violated. He made a quackery of an argumt though. I was a boston commuter for nearly a decade and I work in construction. If I took offense to every "screw you" i would be perpetually offended.
What really offends me are the anti war protestors now and the ones in the 60-70's, especially the maggots who spit on my uncle upon his return from Viet Nam.
He'll be back, reincarnated and real pissed off.
that's ok.
I hope he comes after me, I got something for him too :)
That could explain it - but these are on full time duty.
Well, times are different than when I was in.
I’ve been retired (Army) for close to 20 years now – time does fly, and things do change. I talk to a soldier today and I am nearly lost.
I once had a crew member who brought some pot aboard, without bothering to tell me about it. After he was caught, fired and beached, I found that the guy had tried pouring the pot down a sink which drained overboard. I don't doubt that there was a seed or two lodged somewhere in the drain hose. Which would have made me in "violation of the law." Guilty only of the fact that a "crime" took place on my boat.
The point being that under a zero tolerance law, my boat could have been confiscated for something that took place without my knowledge or consent, that I did my best to rectify as soon as I found out about it.
I will say that shrimpers hire some pretty questionable characters, you'd think that under zero tolerance, most of the shrimp boats could be mothballed for good.
Yes, the USCG is a fine organization, the zero tolerance policy wasn't. I think it probably wasn't their idea, though.
And? Coasties are just doing their job. I bet this boat owner is a liberal... quick to use the ACLU and the spector of the Patriot Act......
Everybody loves the Coasties no piece of crap liberal with a boat is going to change that.
"I tend to agree with the article – a bit unusual for me. We have a fairly large Coast Guard presence in this area – a major school at Yorktown, search and rescue, buoy tenders – and port security. For some strange reason the port security branch has drawn the type of people who gravitate to SWAT teams. I know they have to be aggressive. I know they have to be alert. I also know some would think it a great idea to expand their normally boring duty with a few “safety inspections” – and late night is always a great time to roust people."
I've worked on base for nearly 4 years now.
I've seen just about the whole crew rotate to new duty stations.
The "openigs" for the port security teams are few and far between.
It's not a matter who wants to go, it's based upon the need at that time.
As I said I'm onboard, both commercial and recreational boats, doing inspections in 3 different ports.
Personally I think the "media" prints what they want us to believe.
I have actual 1st hand experience with Coast Guard crews AND the commercial and recreational boating public.
It's been very, very, few times that I've heard the public "complain" about the Coast Guard.
My 1st year was as a watchstander in the radio room on base.
Watchstanders also answer phones for the base.
In that time I handled 2 "irate" callers, out of hundreds.
The people in the "article" reminded me of the 2 "irate" callers.
Lets wait to pass judgement until AFTER the Coast Guard investigation, and believe me, there will be one.
Bump.
BTTT
They were certainly up to looking for drugs or some other contraband on board, but they weren't casing the boat for their own gain. Were you drinking last night when you wrote this? You don't have to answer.
Oh. People like me? Must be some great folks. 8>p
It goes back to some plain old common sense. If they had some probable cause or any reason to believe that the guy harbored drugs on board, then fine, but not to just wake someone up at 10:30 at night for no valid reason. It makes ordinary citzens like myself wonder just what the heck is going on sometimes.
Additionally, what do you think would have happened if they searched this guy and they found a handgun? Even if he were licensed, do you really believe the authorities would treat this citizen respectfully? No way.
The war on drugs is a joke at best. I don't know what the answer is, but what we are doing is obviously not working. It wastes resources and allows violent predators to do less time in jail. Its a jobs program and little else.
When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.
You don't have to agree with the "follow the money" trail for it to be there. You can refuse to admit to what is there to see.
A quick example is the "DARE" program that is real popular with the LEO types. Any attempt to cut the program is met with fierce resistance, not because it works, but because they don't want to loose the funding. There has not been a study to date to prove the program works. Yet no one dares cross the police union.
The war on drugs started after the prohibition era ended, there were lots of folks on the government payroll and they need to justify their employment. Up comes the WOD bingo. Problem solved.
Not agreeing with the money trail can only mean you believe everyone employed perusing the WOD is working for free. If you think they are not working for free try to tally up the money spent on paying them. Once you come up with an amount, you have the start of the money trail.
The article that started this thread tells us the CG came out with their guns out. They were simply conducting the WOD, however they paint it for public consumption. They don't need to roust citizens at night to check for life jackets and fire extinguishers.
Because I value freedom and liberty and do not want a police state does not mean I want children smuggled into this country as sex slaves. That is not the issue here. That kind of argument is typical for justifying the payroll of those working for the government. The WOD is about money.
A policeman come to the rescue? Please people are going to be hesitant to call the police because the cop may sue the homeowner if the cop is injured in the rescue attempt. This is the result of police and their unions showing their true colors by suing someone in Michigan right now. For the most part police may take a report, and do nothing with it, because there is no money in it for them. Pull out "Click-it-or-Ticket" or the WOD and then you'll see some action. Why? Because there is money in it for them. Being helpful costs money.
Thank you for your insights!
Like the ones I have met.
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.