Police to limit size of raft-ups????

[wingNwing]

Hmm, what would happen if they were to deny a permit for a gathering, and I come by, all unawares, and choose to anchor on the same creek that 49 boats are already in? Okay, it's a ridiculous question, and 800 boats in one small creek is a ridiculous situation that definitely infringes on others. But ... I think this law needs some more thought about how its worded and what its consequences could be. And the homeowner who wants a say in whether people can get a permit within 300 feet of his property line? Or wants the limit to be not 50 boats, but 20?

[DRFerron]

I think in the end it will go the way of mandatory life jackets for everyone: a lot of uproar about infringement on rights, the issue will have been aired, and then it will die.

[erps]

Originally Posted by wingNwing

Hmm, what would happen if they were to deny a permit for a gathering, and I come by, all unawares, and choose to anchor on the same creek that 49 boats are already in?

Well the permit requirement appears to put the burden on the organizer rather than the participants. That's somewhat reassuring to me anyway.

Senate Bill 127 would prohibit anyone from holding a marine gathering of 50 or more boats without first obtaining a permit from the Department of Natural Resources.

[DRFerron]

I represent my sail club at CBYCA and I just received an email about the delegate's meeting on 11 February with this message:

the Guest Speaker for the Delegates meeting is:

Colonel George F. Johnson IV - Superintendent of the Maryland Natural Resources Police, to address the issue of Senate Bill 127.

I can take a list of questions if anyone is interested.

[ImASonOfaSailor]

Why does everyone make a big deal about stuff? If ur boating and want to party go and find a island for real 800 people rafted up together! This sounds like a problem already.
by the read it seems like to me the cops want to be able to get to each other in-case of a problem of people with no common sense..

[erps]

Why does everyone make a big deal about stuff?

concern about unintended consequences, possible erosion of rights, or just for the mental exercise of thinking some of these things over.

Would it be appropriate to require a permit to organize a two boat raft up? That seems silly to me.

[wingNwing]

Originally Posted by erps

Well the permit requirement appears to put the burden on the organizer rather than the participants. That's somewhat reassuring to me anyway.

Well, "unintended consequences" is definitely where I was going with this. As written, I don't see where the rafted boats need to be tied to each other. So, if there were 49 boats, there would have been no obligation to get a permit. But then I come along and drop my hook, and suddenly we've reached a tipping point.

I DO think the 800 boats need to be restrained somehow. Do you think we'll be able to anchor out on the 4th of July to watch the fireworks, without a permit? I just don't think this proposed law has been thought out fully.

[jackdale]

Everyone is aware that this is a Maryland Senate Bill

Police want to control raft-ups | MDGazette.com

[DRFerron]

Originally Posted by jackdale

Everyone is aware that this is a Maryland Senate Bill

Yes. But the Chesapeake Bay is a freeway stop for a lot of boaters heading up and down the east coast and, just as the anchoring issue in Florida was of interest to boaters outside of that state because they pass through at one point or the other or spend winters there, so might this be of interest to boaters outside of Maryland. And, as Jaye mentioned the SSCA, that organization's events draws boats from all over the country.

[Michael K]

We have quite a long history of government encroachment on our freedoms here in the USA. An early example comes to mind and has long been a favorite of mine.

Henry David Thoreau (1817–1862) was an introspective man who wandered the woods surrounding the small village of Concord, Massachusetts, recording the daily growth of plants and the migration of birds in his ever-present journal. How, then, did he profoundly influence such political giants as Mohandas Gandhi, Leo Tolstoy, and Martin Luther King Jr.?

The answer lies in a brief essay that has been variously titled but which is often referred to simply as “Civil Disobedience” (1849). Americans know Thoreau primarily as the author of the book Walden, or Life in the Woods (1854) but it is “Civil Disobedience” that established his reputation in the wider political world. It is one of the most influential political tracts ever written by an American.

“Civil Disobedience” is an analysis of the individual’s relationship to the state that focuses on why men obey governmental law even when they believe it to be unjust. But “Civil Disobedience” is not an essay of abstract theory. It is Thoreau’s extremely personal response to being imprisoned for breaking the law. Because he detested slavery and because tax revenues contributed to the support of it, Thoreau decided to become a tax rebel. There were no income taxes and Thoreau did not own enough land to worry about property taxes; but there was the hated poll tax — a capital tax levied equally on all adults within a community.

Thoreau declined to pay the tax and so, in July 1846, he was arrested and jailed. He was supposed to remain in jail until a fine was paid which he also declined to pay. Without his knowledge or consent, however, relatives settled the “debt” and a disgruntled Thoreau was released after only one night.

As I understand it, before his release a close local friend who went by the name of Ralph Waldo Emerson paid Thoreau a visit and asked, "Henry, what are you doing in there? Thoreau simply replied, "What are you doing out there?