SailNet Community banner

1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Noah's Bosun
Joined
·
236 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Finally... One I think we should support. HB-703 (Workman; Perry) and SB-1454 (Hutson)

These proposed bills restrict the stopping of vessels for safety checks (by FWC , County, and Local Officers) without "Probable Cause". Be nice to have the same rights as you do behind the wheel of the car.

While I don't agree with the practices of the introducing House Member (Riding the kids on the bow of the boat is kinda like riding them on the hood of the car) the basic premise still stands. Dislike having my day interrupted for a random "Safety Check" while headed back to the mooring ball. Yeah, I got my jacket, whistle, etc... Same as last week. Same as every week. I didn't get old, being too bold.

Anyway, a couple we can watch and hopefully support.
 

·
Noah's Bosun
Joined
·
236 Posts
Discussion Starter #2
Update... HB 703 has cleared committee with an amendment changing the original proposed language. The original draft restricted State and Local LEOs from stopping a vessel for a safety inspection without "probable cause". The amended version eliminates the requirement for probable cause, but requires tne officer to issue a Safety Inspection Sticker if all safety requirements are met. Vessels displaying a valid Safety Inspection Sticker cannot be stopped in the future without obvious violations in progress. The amemdment was introduced by the bills original sponsor and the amended bill passed committee by a vote of 12 to 3.

Better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick. Write your local reps if you are a Fl resident.
 

·
██▓▓▒▒░&
Joined
·
13,645 Posts
Florida is putting all the fruit and nuts on display for the snowbird season. Right now SE Florida wants to ban all spearfishing, including recreational spearfishing, out to the 150' depth line. Apparently those mean old recreational free divers and scuba divers are depopulating the reefs...although, no one bothered to study how many divers, licenses, catches (as verified by FWC water stops) or anything else are actually involved.

"(Riding the kids on the bow of the boat is kinda like riding them on the hood of the car)"
Had that discussion with the USCG one day wile under sail. They said "bowriding" we said "No, that's the foredeck crew on the foredeck inspecting the luff of the foresail." See, they're facing BACKwards and looking UP, not playing Titanic....

Apparently it will only take another one-foot rise is sea level to submerge most everything east of Federal Highway, and the rise in groundwater will ensure everything west to the Glades (being restrained by a crumbling 20' dike) floods out regularly in any heavy rain, as the ground water table rises too high to allow drainage.

Between that and the Zika mosquitoes, Florida may solve itself within fifty years.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,022 Posts
Don't get me started on illegal government searches disguised as "safety checks." It is the most blatant violation of the 4th Amendment that anyone can imagine, yet some seem to think it's no big deal.
 

·
snake charmer, cat herder
Joined
·
2,640 Posts
we all forget that we as boating souls are no t subject to land laws. these are equalizers to force the boating public to be harrassed by same standards as land craft. such fun. precedents for future boardings without cause for whatever toilet reason they find to stop ye ... good luck.

perhaps you started the bbq and someone reports maria joowanna smoke from your boat-- enjoy the fun
 

·
Over Hill Sailing Club
Joined
·
3,688 Posts
Florida is putting all the fruit and nuts on display for the snowbird season. Right now SE Florida wants to ban all spearfishing, including recreational spearfishing, out to the 150' depth line. Apparently those mean old recreational free divers and scuba divers are depopulating the reefs...although, no one bothered to study how many divers, licenses, catches (as verified by FWC water stops) or anything else are actually involved.

"(Riding the kids on the bow of the boat is kinda like riding them on the hood of the car)"
Had that discussion with the USCG one day wile under sail. They said "bowriding" we said "No, that's the foredeck crew on the foredeck inspecting the luff of the foresail." See, they're facing BACKwards and looking UP, not playing Titanic....

Apparently it will only take another one-foot rise is sea level to submerge most everything east of Federal Highway, and the rise in groundwater will ensure everything west to the Glades (being restrained by a crumbling 20' dike) floods out regularly in any heavy rain, as the ground water table rises too high to allow drainage.

Between that and the Zika mosquitoes, Florida may solve itself within fifty years.
Every year it seems that more and more houses get built in low-lying places that are bound to get washed away WHEN a major hurricane hits the "Treasure Coast" and vicinity. Just a matter of time before we all get to subsidize the rebuilding of more houses where houses should never have been built.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,799 Posts
Don't get me started on illegal government searches disguised as "safety checks." It is the most blatant violation of the 4th Amendment that anyone can imagine, yet some seem to think it's no big deal.
I agree that these laws need clarification or amendment, like FL seems to be trying to do.

However, saying its a violation of the 4th amendment is a layman's argument. It clearly isn't (not that I'm happy with it). The 4th says that "unreasonable" search and seizures are not permitted, not all. The Supreme Court has explicitly agreed that maritime searches are not unreasonable, given the exposure to smuggling and contraband that are routinely identified.

Sure, local law enforcement and the USCG use this as their right to board and inspect, when the intent doesn't seem related to recreational boating. That said, how long would it take a smuggler to start using recreational vessels, if they were off limits. Smuggling is not remotely limited to drugs. Think about it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: eherlihy

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,022 Posts
Explain how a suspicionless stop and search of your vehicle is illegal under the 4th Amendment, but a boat is not. Smugglers use cars too.
 

·
snake charmer, cat herder
Joined
·
2,640 Posts
sorry to tell you there is NO protection ON WATER per maritime law protecting anyone from unlawful search and seizure because there is no duch thing on water. we CHOOSE to give up our bill of rights coverage when moving on board.
no right to privacy
no protection from alleged illegal search n seizure
no right to bear arms on board--seems to be act of aggression...projectiles forbidden...
and one other skips my brain at present.
move on board and these are gone.
so...
all MOOT.
get with it.
you bitching about land rights you gave up when you moved onto boats.
and yet we still live on boats. go figger.
research a lil better before spewing RIGHTS you gave up when moving onto water.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,799 Posts
Explain how a suspicionless stop and search of your vehicle is illegal under the 4th Amendment, but a boat is not. Smugglers use cars too.
Smugglers in cars are stopped at the boarder and are subject to search. Big difference.

Nevertheless, I'm not trying to argue right from wrong here. I'm only saying that the law is extremely clear on this one. Maritime searches are explicitly not a violation of the 4th amendment.

We can all agree we don't like it, but that's different from being illegal.

Again, however, I ask what would prevent a bad guy from adopting whatever situation were deemed untouchable on the water.

Note, the vast majority of our boarder is water and the vast majority of that (think remote beaches) are not secure whatsoever. Unlike road crossings.
 

·
██▓▓▒▒░&
Joined
·
13,645 Posts
Minne-
Bear in mind that fourth amendment "car search" cases went into the US Supreme Court twice in the early 70's, first upheld then reversed and thrown out. SO nice to know the "none most reasonable men in the land" can find themselves to be wrong. Cars being a special case, because you need a license and as such have to "right" to drive them, the law is actually applicable only to "cars" and drivers.

But contemporaneous correspondence from the Founding Fathers made the intent and purpose of the 4th Amendment very clear. They were concerned with carriages and riders on the King's own highways, as individuals simply didn't travel any distance by private boats. Shipping was SHIPPING back then, you didn't just hop down to the next state, so it wasn't considered.

They wanted to be able to carry seditious and treasonous papers preaching openly for revolution and downthrow of the government, without the King's own men being able to stop the and search their saddlebags or coaches. Yeah, it kind of was that simple and that extreme. No want? No warrant? NO SEARCH even if you are trying to find those damned Colonial revolutionaries on their way to foment revolution.

The people who don't understand and support this, are among the 80% of the public that were never originally given the right to vote. And that was intentional too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,799 Posts
hellosailor. I'm not following. By the time the 4th amendment was ratified (long after the constitution was passed, btw), no one was worried about colonial revolutionaries on their way to form a revolution. The British had been booted a decade earlier.
 

·
██▓▓▒▒░&
Joined
·
13,645 Posts
Minne-
A lot of what the Founding Fathers did was openly discussed as being protection for the future. I don't remember who, it was one of "the gang" of honored menu, who said that the only thing worse than needing to throw down another "king" would be the need to do so again--without arms. And so the argument continued, and the express purpose of the second amendment was added, to ensure that the people could retain the military power to throw down another repressive government. The term "militia", by the way, does not apply to independent minding cam wackos as the Nooze would have you believe. What the Nooze often call Militia are legally referred to in many states as "illegal paramilitary groups" whereas the Militia are formally recognized and provided for in every state except Florida. Militia were historically locally formed, locally elected their own officers, and swore support to their State--as opposed to their government. In the US today, most male citizens between ages 17/18 and 45 (or "able bodied") are in fact still members of the state and federal militias, two separate organizations.
But in the aftermath of the Civil War, when marauders and raiders claimed to be just militia keeping the peace, the Fed tried to shut down the entire system, eventually in 1903 starting what was to become the National Guard system, who are actually State Militia that have been federalized and place on loan to the US Military. And that mandatory service, as a militiaman, is in fact the legal basis of our draft system. Which is why Congress will never totally repeal the militias, they don't really want to mess with that can of worms, and lose the ability to draft at the same time.
The "Constitution" is often considered as a cornerstone to our nation. In some ways it is. But remember, there was a Confederation (not the later Confederacy) of these United States, a national government, which was shortly after dissolved and replace with the current Federal Republic.
The Constitution didn't happen with the speed of a web page, it took some years for many things to be settled. And some signers agreed to sign ONLY is certain amendments were to immediately follow in the Bill of Rights. The second amendment being prime among them.
Funny thing now, in the Nooze you hear more and more of machete attacks and cars racking down civilians on sidewalks....and machetes never run out of bullets.

So, sailboats? Effectively they didn't exist when the laws were written to cover travelers and their horses. I' sure Mr. Franklin would have said "Well, obviously, they are one and the same, a means of personal conveyance." While some more recent courts have said "Gee, nope, they just weren't mentioned."

And that's the slippery slope towards that "another" repressive government that the Founding Fathers were sure would come along. Heck, they'd read Machiavelli, too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,404 Posts
Explain how a suspicionless stop and search of your vehicle is illegal under the 4th Amendment, but a boat is not. Smugglers use cars too.
The explanation is very simple: Because the Supreme Court said so.

Since the Supreme Court is the final arbiter of these matters, that's it. There is no one else to appeal to.

Now, you can certainly disagree with the Supreme Court's opinion on the matter. They are not infallible, they have made mistakes before, and this could very well be another one of them. Nonetheless, until they rule differently, it is what it is.
 

·
██▓▓▒▒░&
Joined
·
13,645 Posts
Acutally, all considering I remember the 1973-ish Supreme Court rulings on that very well. First they had ruled the (random, arbitrary, whatever) automobile searches were unconstitutional. Then in the next session, another suit was brought saying that since DRIVING is a privilege, not a right, that privilege could carry restrictions and burdens, and it was through that weasel logic that they allowed the first ruling to be reversed.

The ruling was specific to the facts and issues, so unless you've got an identical "boating license" required before you can set sail...legally there's no comparison and someone with five or ten years and some extra bucks on their hands could make a good new case for boaters.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
88 Posts
Just a matter of time before we all get to subsidize the rebuilding of more houses where houses should never have been built.
It's already happening (for years now). My last home was at 4830' MSL in the high desert of NM and in an area that had never had a flood. I got to pay for Federal flood insurance. This money was used to rebuild those homes you are talking about.
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top