Skip to comments.Boat owners say they were fearful during Coast Guard search
Posted on 09/22/2005 2:42:37 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
click here to read article
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.
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.
Ive 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.
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.