On water safety check in havasu, bullshit

[blackbart]

+1 this is news to me also.

x2 me too

 

[wsuwrhr]

Everything is within reach in a mini.

Just like a mini skirt.

I like it

 

[rivergames]

That was probably the guy we passed with someone pulled over going down river with the stern light not working. He already had someone stopped on AZ side, but guess he could have finished up before you got there.

Luckily Paul took the heat off me since my stern light bracket broke :thumbup:


All in all, I think this a complete bullshit. I don't mind cops on the water at all. In fact I wish they would pull over more morons that are horrible boaters. But it seams like they don't really care about that as much as getting $ for possible Duece's

Problem is, they pull you over for 0 reason just to get you to blow. I am worried about them pulling me over, stopping me in the middle of the river, when I don't have a lot of freeboard and another boat can sink me if I am not proactive about it.

I rarely have a beer now if I am driving due to the fact that they are currently booze Nazi's. :thumbsdown

 

[OldSchoolBoats]

Never let the CG Aux take up any of your time. Nothing good can come of it. You are on vacation and they are wasting your time. They are volunteering their time and usually want to BS with you about stuff you already know (since you learned it on RDP). If they try to flag you down, wave back and leave. On the ramp, tell them you are busy.



My vacation time is worth a lot! I work my ass off for it.

I was at Elsinore.........far cry from a vacation, but get what you mean. Learned my lesson.

 

[wsuwrhr]

All in all, I think this a complete bullshit. I don't mind cops on the water at all. In fact I wish they would pull over more morons that are horrible boaters. But it seams like they don't really care about that as much as getting $ for possible Duece's

Problem is, they pull you over for 0 reason just to get you to blow. I am worried about them pulling me over, stopping me in the middle of the river, when I don't have a lot of freeboard and another boat can sink me if I am not proactive about it.

I rarely have a beer now if I am driving due to the fact that they are currently booze Nazi's. :thumbsdown

Yep, my boat still bears the 18" gouge in the gunnel from their boat contacting mine in Parker. Hauled me onto their boat for a dui inspection and left my wife and her friend on our boat with zero operator experience. He wouldn't let me beach it. I was worried about my wife getting swamped and sinking, or worse, getting hit by some moron not paying attention while they were left to drift.

They didn't get their dui they wanted so bad and everytime I see that scratch, or threads such as this, brings up feelings about that day and I am reminded why I don't like LE.

Brian

 

[HitIt]

Since there has been some talk in this thread about Coast Guard and Coats Guard Aux, I think everyone should be clear on the difference.

Coast Guard: You are their bitch. Do what they say. They can shoot you.
Coats Guard Aux: You can ignore them. They will try to talk you to death.

 

[HALLETT BOY]

You guys have to realize , all stops , no matter how trivial , are stops to look for OUI ! That's the Golden Ring and proves to whatever agency
they work for , their worth . It's no different then a black , brown person being pulled over and profiled , we are being profiled because we boat .

 

[X-rated]

Can you refuse a LEO permission to board until he removes his big black boots? Honest question.

 

[rivergames]

Yep, my boat still bears the gouge from their boat contacting mine in Parker. Hauled me onto their boat for a dui inspection and left my wife and her friend on our boat with zero operator experience. He wouldn't let me beach it. I was worried about my wife getting swamped and sinking, or worse, getting hit by some moron not paying attention while they were left to drift.

They didn't get their dui they wanted so bad and everytime I see that scratch, or threads such as this, brings up feelings about that day and I am reminded why I don't like LE.

Brian

The day I get pulled over by them, my exact words will be the following:

"I don't want my boat to sink, nor get scratched. I know you guys are trying to do your job, but lets cut the bullshit. Give me your POS Breathalyzer now so we can get the show on the road and I can get on my way to keeping my boat safe n sound

 

[wsuwrhr]

The day I get pulled over by them, my exact words will be the following:

"I don't want my boat to sink, nor get scratched. I know you guys are trying to do your job, but lets cut the bullshit. Give me your POS Breathalyzer now so we can get the show on the road and I can get on my way to keeping my boat safe n sound

Ain't going to matter RG,

When I boarded the patrol boat he pushed my boat off with his boot.

Must feel good to be a complete dick.

I feel sorry for that guy's wife, dog, or kid.

 

[Wheeler]

Can you refuse a LEO permission to board until he removes his big black boots? Honest question.

Keep a Pitbull on your boat, problem solved.

 

[Stainless]

The day I get pulled over by them, my exact words will be the following:

"I don't want my boat to sink, nor get scratched. I know you guys are trying to do your job, but lets cut the bullshit. Give me your POS Breathalyzer now so we can get the show on the road and I can get on my way to keeping my boat safe n sound

How do they know you woudn't throw their breathalizer in the drink?

 

[rivergames]

Ain't going to matter RG,

When I boarded the patrol boat he pushed my boat off with his boot.

Must feel good to be a complete dick.

I feel sorry for that guy's wife, dog, or kid.

Are you fucking kidding me? I'd blow up with him pushing my boat away if I had someone in my boat that doesn't know how to run in. I'd be beyond livid

If I ever get pulled over, I will have someone turn the voice recorder on their phone

 

[rivergames]

How do they know you woudn't throw their breathalizer in the drink?

Fuck, I might if they pushed my boat away without me on it

 

[wsuwrhr]

Are you fucking kidding me? I'd blow up with him pushing my boat away if I had someone in my boat that doesn't know how to run in. I'd be beyond livid

If I ever get pulled over, I will have someone turn the voice recorder on their phone

haha, WTF are you going to do about it?

You aren't in control.

Brian

 

[wsuwrhr]

Can you refuse a LEO permission to board until he removes his big black boots? Honest question.

Yea, right.

Are you new?

 

[rivergames]

I'd raise hell if they damaged my boat or put my passangers in danger of being pushed off with 0 knowledge how to run a boat. Try my best to have as much evidence as possible and try my best to get them to start being actual cops and not booze Nazis to make a buck

 

[wsuwrhr]

I'd raise hell if they damaged my boat or put my passangers in danger of being pushed off with 0 knowledge how to run a boat. Try my best to have as much evidence as possible and try my best to get them to start being actual cops and not booze Nazis to make a buck

I was younger and naive, I had no idea I could submit for damages, or had any recourse against the officer. I just took my lumps and never went back.

Less bullshit at Mead anyway.

Brian

 

[2FORCEFULL]

these he said she said thread have no place here.........D

 

[PVHCA]

The day I get pulled over by them, my exact words will be the following:

"I don't want my boat to sink, nor get scratched. I know you guys are trying to do your job, but lets cut the bullshit. Give me your POS Breathalyzer now so we can get the show on the road and I can get on my way to keeping my boat safe n sound

Realistically these stops have only been enforced basically the last 10ish-12ish years, prior to that the cops were pretty easy going. I learned from RDP years ago that when and if I got pulled over just insist on NO FST's and go directly to the breathalyzer and low and behold they just told me to move along. I've been lucky over the years and have minimal contact with the PoPO.

 

[charlyox]

Never heard the throwable must be with in arms reach?

I sit on mine. It allows me to see over someones head if they are riding in the bow and if I need it I have it right under my ass.

 

[NicPaus]

I sit on mine. It allows me to see over someones head if they are riding in the bow and if I need it I have it right under my ass.

I am 6'4 no need for a booster seat. The safety checks I have had they never boarded the boat. They had all the passengers hold up a vest and I showed them the whistle throwable and extinguisher. No need for them to come on board. I might leave the throwable under my seat to avoid a hassle from here on out. You would think the extinguisher would be required within arms reach before the throwable.

 

[Dettom]

Yes you have to let them board. and as far as the Type IV being "Within Arms Reach" is NOT IN THE AZ or CA LAW. The law says readily accessible. Another Over Aggressive Cop IMO!

The last time I was boarded, I was told the same thing, flotation device had to be within arm's reach. I thought it had to be "readily accessible" too. Apparently, to some of these guys, they're not the same thing. Didn't want to push it. I told him I thought the fire extinguisher had to be throwable. He didn't get my sense of humor. Just the same, I was glad to get them off my boat.. I don't like when I'm in their world.

 

[Havasteve]

Always record interactions with police. When they see that they are being recorded they tend to behave. Remember, it's their job to fuck you over. So when they stumble, drunk on authority, and stomp on your freedom and upholstery you have nice video to go along with the complaint.

When you see Coast Guard on the lake keep in mind they don't operate like other LEO on the lake. They spend their entire time pulling "Safety inspections" They don't just cruise around looking for a victim they go from one boat to another all day long. They pull everyone over. They're a menace.

If I were to have had a few beers on the lake and they lit me up I would just smile and wave. If I'm busted I may as well have some fun. I would pretend I couldn't hear them and just ignore them like they weren't there. And if they persist wave them along side and toss a hand full of old rope in front of their boat.

 

[DaveC]

Damn it. I thought we had an understanding with 5.0.

We wouldn't act like a jackwagon (at least in their presence) and we wouldn't be subject to the B.S. safety inspection.

This is B.S.


At any rate, thought I would add this:

Fourth Amendment to the Constitution: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.[2]

 

[wsuwrhr]

What country is that from?

Fourth Amendment to the Constitution: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.[2]

 

[RCDave]

Damn it. I thought we had an understanding with 5.0.

We wouldn't act like a jackwagon (at least in their presence) and we wouldn't be subject to the B.S. safety inspection.

This is B.S.


At any rate, thought I would add this:

Fourth Amendment to the Constitution: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.[2]

Hey how can you read that, when its covered with so much dust from years of being ignored....

 

[Patyacht]

I always carry a copy of the state regs I'm boating in. Here I carry current copies of AZ, CA and the NV boaters books. Plus the Federal boaters pamphlet. Through the years I've found more LEO's and CG recently that don't know the regs. I don't question them even though I know they are wrong unless they start making it an issue with their not knowing. I can't count how many times I've been stopped for not having state registration numbers displayed on my boat. It's against federal law to display state numbers on a documented boat. But I usually won't argue unless they want to write me up. Then a quick " You know when I tell your boss you didn't know the law" he won't like the fact that you made a mistake by not know knowing the law.

 

[Patyacht]

OK I just checked the current Federal Requirements for Recreational Boaters. Page 9 and 10 spells out the LJ and type IV device requirements: http://www.uscgboating.org/images/420.PDF
Since Lake Havasu and Lake Mojave are Regulated waterways, technically we must comply with the Federal Requirements on those lakes. I don't think Mead, Parker or Powell are in that category.

The United States Coast Guard sets minimum standards for recreational vessels and associated safety equipment. To meet these standards, required equipment must be U .S. Coast Guard "approved" or "certified". This means that it meets U .S. Coast Guard specifications, standards, and regulations for performance, construction, or materials.

Throwable devices must be immediately available for use. They should be on the main deck within arm's reach, hanging on a lifeline, or other easily reached location.

 

[Racey]

I was younger and naive, I had no idea I could submit for damages, or had any recourse against the officer. I just took my lumps and never went back.

Less bullshit at Mead anyway.

Brian

So when are you coming back? :thumbup:

 

[Patyacht]

Damn it. I thought we had an understanding with 5.0.

We wouldn't act like a jackwagon (at least in their presence) and we wouldn't be subject to the B.S. safety inspection.

This is B.S.


At any rate, thought I would add this:

Fourth Amendment to the Constitution: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.[2]

Fourth Amendment does not apply to your boat: http://www.sailfeed.com/2012/10/coast-guard-boardings-and-your-fourth-amendment-rights-part-1/

 

[RCDave]

Fourth Amendment does not apply to your boat: http://www.sailfeed.com/2012/10/coast-guard-boardings-and-your-fourth-amendment-rights-part-1/

You made my earlier point. Our elected officials use the constitution essentially as toilet paper. Our founding fathers are ashamed in their graves along with every other patriot that gave up his/her lives for this country. uke:uke:uke:

 

[77charger]

They have been allowed to board boats for years its not a new thing.Dont agree with it myself but i feel at places like havasu or river its an excuse to check for booze cruising.Same goes for stopping you no violation needed they can just stop to "inspect for safety stuff".

 

[wsuwrhr]

So when are you coming back? :thumbup:

I had babies.

Water levels ate shit.

Sold the houseboat. Had to sell to liquidate a third partner to minimize drama. 2nd partner was pretty soured in the deal so I don't think he wants to try again.

I think in 4 or 5 years my kids will be old enough and we will be looking again.

It was fun for the first few years.

Brian

 

[Ballyhoo]

Its called freedom, liberty, and individual rights, some of the basic principals on which our country was founded. The right for law abiding citizens to live their lives free from government harassment and tyranny. Our freedoms have been beat back consistently. When will it stop?

So we are a nation will laws just like most other civilized nations. How would you like your police to work? Wait for something to happen, respond, write a report and then attempt to solve the crime? No proactive policing at all? No crime prevention? Just at the ready to roll in after the fact and pull out a pen?
You might not be aware but on a daily basis, all over this great nation there are literally thousands of contacts by police with all kinds of people. Most of these contacts that are of the enforcement type dont always end up in a ticket or arrest. The cops give a warning and use the contact to educate. Many of the folks are truly law abiding citizens that made a mistake.
I think that is the idea behind these safety inspections. No city, county or state is making any windfall amount of money off of fines. The only folks getting paid are the criminal and civil attorneys.
There are always so many internet tough guys (not accusing you) that talk about how they wouldn't do this or let the cops do that. Same guys couldn't tell you anything about the bill of rights or what amendment that protects us from unreasonable search and seizure. AND they are almost always the guys that let the cops do their job and move along.
These boat inspections just like DUI checkpoints have been litigated top to bottom in our courts, including the supreme court, which has been very liberal for some time.
I have had some interaction with boat cops and fish cops over the years. I am polite and let them do their job. I ask them questions when I have one. These contacts have been positive. No issues for me and none for them. I received a warning one time for some minor equipment issue.
Sounds like the OPs buddy was let go with a warning. It just sounded like he wondered why they stopped him in his 100k tin can. Your expensive boat or car does not prevent the cops from stopping you in these situations.
Before you complain about the laws, ordinances and court decisions, educate yourself on why some of them exist. Know something about our bill of rights and its amendments. This is a free society, so exercise your right to vote!

 

[crzy2bealive]

I have never had a safety inspection.....but I'm ready

 

[CoolCruzin]

yeah my cushion is with in arms reach/ easy to reach for ---after I open the hatch up . RRRRRRRR
This crap is why most hate cops. They cause problems .

 

[77charger]

IMO if you are not breaking any law or doing anything wrong you should not be stopped!!Now if you are doing something wrong then you should get stopped and if you get warned then you are lucky.

Like i said i know on water you can be stopped for safety check i dont agree with that but it is legal.

 

[Flying_Lavey]

Most all of the cop hate comments in here are annoying and HIGHLY ignorant. It's not the cops fault they are DOING THEIR JOB. Reme.ber back in middle school being taught the speperation of power with the 3 branches of gov't? Well the cops are part of the executive branch and it's their job to enforce the laws written by the LEGISLATIVE branch (senators and representatives, or a committee appointed by them) and upheld when challenged by the SUPREME COURT.

Just a little very basic gov't structure lesson for the ignorant. You Wana go on and on about your conspiracy theories and opinions about gov't, go ahead..... in the political section.

 

[DaveC]

We got that part. Not what I am saying.

Just because our elected officials or courts do something doesn't make it right.

I could go on but we have had this discussion so many times its nauseating.

The original intent of the law was to enforce tariffs back when that was important. Now they get all their money from us. You think they would treat their best customers better

Bottom line is the exception should not apply to inland waterways towards U.S. citizens :thumbsdown

I would go as far as saying, outside of drug interdiction, it should NOT apply to non-commercial vessels in our territorial ocean waters

Fourth Amendment does not apply to your boat: http://www.sailfeed.com/2012/10/coast-guard-boardings-and-your-fourth-amendment-rights-part-1/

Remember what Boatcop used to say. He instructed his people to try to avoid the safety inspection stop and look for cause. It was just better PR. Plus he said it was easy to find cause anyway.

IMHO that is the right answer

 

[BoatCop]

Damn it. I thought we had an understanding with 5.0.

We wouldn't act like a jackwagon (at least in their presence) and we wouldn't be subject to the B.S. safety inspection.

This is B.S.


At any rate, thought I would add this:

Fourth Amendment to the Constitution: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.[2]

Since you can Google the 4th Amendment, how about searching further for "the rest of the story":

Vessel Searches .--Not only is the warrant requirement inapplicable to brief stops of vessels, but also none of the safeguards applicable to stops of automobiles on less than probable cause are necessary predicates to stops of vessels. In United States v. Villamonte-Marquez, the Court upheld a random stop and boarding of a vessel by customs agents, lacking any suspicion of wrongdoing, for purpose of inspecting documentation. The boarding was authorized by statute derived from an act of the First Congress, and hence had ''an impressive historical pedigree'' carrying with it a presumption of constitutionality. Moreover, ''important factual differences between vessels located in waters offering ready access to the open sea and automobiles on principal thoroughfares in the border area'' justify application of a less restrictive rule for vessel searches. The reason why random stops of vehicles have been held impermissible under the Fourth Amendment, the Court explained, is that stops at fixed checkpoints or roadblocks are both feasible and less subject to abuse of discretion by authorities. ''But no reasonable claim can be made that permanent checkpoints would be practical on waters such as these where vessels can move in any direction at any time and need not follow established 'avenues' as automobiles must do.'' Because there is a ''substantial'' governmental interest in enforcing documentation laws, ''especially in waters where the need to deter or apprehend smugglers is great,'' the Court found the ''limited'' but not ''minimal'' intrusion occasioned by boarding for documentation inspection to be reasonable. Dissenting Justice Brennan argued that the Court for the first time was approving ''a completely random seizure and detention of persons and an entry onto private, noncommercial premises by police officers, without any limitations whatever on the officers' discretion or any safeguards against abuse.''

Several State Appeals Court decisions have upheld the same provisions on inland waterways, including a Texas case which upheld the warrantless boarding of vessels on a sole-state lake. (A lake that is completely within the state. Think Elsinore) While those decisions have no ruling over CA, NV or AZ, it, and the other cases, would be used as precedence if a challenge were to be filed here. So far every court has upheld the warrantless stop and inspection of vessels on the waterways.

If you want some interesting reading, read the Texas case here:

http://www.txcourts.gov/All_Archived_Documents/ccaInformation/opinions/152999a.htm



And the entire Colorado River from Utah to the Mexican Border (including Mead, Mohave, Powell, Havasu, and all sections of River) is a Federal Navigable Waterway, due to it bordering 2 or more states, and has the ability to facilitate interstate commerce.

 

[DaveC]

I can read just fine. Read it several times and don't agree. Just my opinion

If you look above I just agreed with you, even though I don't

LOL

I know the drill

I never blames the cops. It is the dirtbag politicians. Think about it. The exception was created to guarantee the Federal tariff. Never mess with their revenue sources

Since you can Google the 4th Amendment, how about searching further for "the rest of the story":

Vessel Searches .--Not only is the warrant requirement inapplicable to brief stops of vessels, but also none of the safeguards applicable to stops of automobiles on less than probable cause are necessary predicates to stops of vessels. In United States v. Villamonte-Marquez, the Court upheld a random stop and boarding of a vessel by customs agents, lacking any suspicion of wrongdoing, for purpose of inspecting documentation. The boarding was authorized by statute derived from an act of the First Congress, and hence had ''an impressive historical pedigree'' carrying with it a presumption of constitutionality. Moreover, ''important factual differences between vessels located in waters offering ready access to the open sea and automobiles on principal thoroughfares in the border area'' justify application of a less restrictive rule for vessel searches. The reason why random stops of vehicles have been held impermissible under the Fourth Amendment, the Court explained, is that stops at fixed checkpoints or roadblocks are both feasible and less subject to abuse of discretion by authorities. ''But no reasonable claim can be made that permanent checkpoints would be practical on waters such as these where vessels can move in any direction at any time and need not follow established 'avenues' as automobiles must do.'' Because there is a ''substantial'' governmental interest in enforcing documentation laws, ''especially in waters where the need to deter or apprehend smugglers is great,'' the Court found the ''limited'' but not ''minimal'' intrusion occasioned by boarding for documentation inspection to be reasonable. Dissenting Justice Brennan argued that the Court for the first time was approving ''a completely random seizure and detention of persons and an entry onto private, noncommercial premises by police officers, without any limitations whatever on the officers' discretion or any safeguards against abuse.''

Several State Appeals Court decisions have upheld the same provisions on inland waterways, including a Texas case which upheld the warrantless boarding of vessels on a sole-state lake. (A lake that is completely within the state. Think Elsinore) While those decisions have no ruling over CA, NV or AZ, it, and the other cases, would be used as precedence if a challenge were to be filed here. So far every court has upheld the warrantless stop and inspection of vessels on the waterways.

If you want some interesting reading, read the Texas case here:

http://www.txcourts.gov/All_Archived_Documents/ccaInformation/opinions/152999a.htm



And the entire Colorado River from Utah to the Mexican Border (including Mead, Mohave, Powell, Havasu, and all sections of River) is a Federal Navigable Waterway, due to it bordering 2 or more states, and has the ability to facilitate interstate commerce.

And by using their own logic then, these vessel searches should not be allowed on inland waterways. Sure we can run but not that far. Or run over a border or towards international waters.....

Even Justice Brennan agrees with me:thumbup:

BTW where is RD? He usually agrees this freedom stuff

 

[spectracular]

Since you can Google the 4th Amendment, how about searching further for "the rest of the story":

Alan...I am not going to challenge you on previous court rulings, but what is the right way to ensure that if/when stopped that us regular-joe boaters and our property are treated with respect? Everyone has good days and bad days and LEO are no different.

Earlier posts refer to LEO forcing non-experienced boaters to operate a boat while the primary driver was taken on the LEO vessel. I could see this as either a big risk (in the channel for example), or it could be relatively safe if the conditions/traffic are good. But as a boat operator, if I disagree with the timing/location of a boarding due to safety, what options do I have? Can I tell the LEO that I am not comfortable with their request, and want to head to the nearest beach, or perhaps to less congested/smoother water? Secondly, lets say that the LEO causes damage to my property out of neglect on their part....what recourse do I have? Ultimately it will be my word versus theirs. An earlier poster mentioned recording the entire event with a phone/camera...your thoughts?

 

[530RL]

Some comments,

"Safety Stops" are just part of the American way of life today. You need 4 simple things, and any time I have been stopped, I just pull them out as I am slowing down. I just show them all before the officer ever starts talking.

BoatCop is correct in his postings regarding stops, and I quote from his post "for purposes of inspecting documentation". But it never stops at safety equipment, it always goes to accusatory toned questions of boating impaired.

What he has not posted is that no one is required to submit to a FST or answer any questions other than his/her name. The implied consent law and case law behind it, at least in Arizona, concludes that the only test one must submit to regarding impairment is a legally admissible test. If they want me to do so, no problem, happy to do so. But whatever you do, even if you have never had a sip of alcohol over the last ten years, is submit to a FST. There is no upside, only downside. The statistics are clear, people who have never had a drink in their life, routinely will fail FSTs.

These threads will always exist, these stops will always exist, have you stuff together, smile and grin.

I hate that it has come to this, but it has. Happy to cooperate, unhappy to be unfairly accused of drinking and boating when I do not.

They are just doing their job when stopping one "for purposes of inspecting documentation", or even for that matter, safety equipment. No worries, I have all my stuff ready and available.

But I am just doing my job by not risking other people's lives by boating and drinking, so I would appreciate if officers would not get their panties in a wad when I simply and politely state that I am not going to submit to FSTs.

Lastly, as sort of a funny story, the last officer asked if I had a "noise making" device. I pushed the button on that hand held air horn for about 3 seconds. Not sure why, but he was not amused. What happened to the sense of humor in America?

 

[RCDave]

So we are a nation will laws just like most other civilized nations. How would you like your police to work? Wait for something to happen, respond, write a report and then attempt to solve the crime? No proactive policing at all? No crime prevention? Just at the ready to roll in after the fact and pull out a pen?
You might not be aware but on a daily basis, all over this great nation there are literally thousands of contacts by police with all kinds of people. Most of these contacts that are of the enforcement type dont always end up in a ticket or arrest. The cops give a warning and use the contact to educate. Many of the folks are truly law abiding citizens that made a mistake.
I think that is the idea behind these safety inspections. No city, county or state is making any windfall amount of money off of fines. The only folks getting paid are the criminal and civil attorneys.
There are always so many internet tough guys (not accusing you) that talk about how they wouldn't do this or let the cops do that. Same guys couldn't tell you anything about the bill of rights or what amendment that protects us from unreasonable search and seizure. AND they are almost always the guys that let the cops do their job and move along.
These boat inspections just like DUI checkpoints have been litigated top to bottom in our courts, including the supreme court, which has been very liberal for some time.
I have had some interaction with boat cops and fish cops over the years. I am polite and let them do their job. I ask them questions when I have one. These contacts have been positive. No issues for me and none for them. I received a warning one time for some minor equipment issue.
Sounds like the OPs buddy was let go with a warning. It just sounded like he wondered why they stopped him in his 100k tin can. Your expensive boat or car does not prevent the cops from stopping you in these situations.
Before you complain about the laws, ordinances and court decisions, educate yourself on why some of them exist. Know something about our bill of rights and its amendments. This is a free society, so exercise your right to vote!

Yes. I expect law enforcement to treat me as though I'm innocent, unless I am guilty of a crime. Thank the leftist power mongers for methodically destroying the Constitution and encouraging many in the populous from being independent responsible citizens.

 

[530RL]

Yes. I expect law enforcement to treat me as though I'm innocent, unless I am guilty of a crime. Thank the leftist power mongers for methodically destroying the Constitution and making it ok for many in the populous from being independent responsible citizens

Well Dave, I suspect we may disagree on this, but it is the righties who are behind the police state and expansion of police powers as well as the eroding of the 4th, 5th and 6th amendments. I am fairly confident that most of those protesting police actions are not righties.

 

[RCDave]

Well Dave, I suspect we may disagree on this, but it is the righties who are behind the police state and expansion of police powers as well as the eroding of the 4th, 5th and 6th amendments. I am fairly confident that most of those protesting police actions are not righties.

Yup. We do disagree.

 

[530RL]

Yup. We do disagree.

Well then, I guess the ACLU, who is one of the top litigants, by suits filed, against police powers and defending the 4th, 5th and 6th amendments in the US, is now an organization of the "right".

 

[RCDave]

Well then, I guess the ACLU, who is one of the top litigants, by suits filed, against police powers and defending the 4th, 5th and 6th amendments in the US, is now an organization of the "right".

Wow. I've heard it all now. Anyone that understands the real intent of the aclu is laughing their butts off right now...kinda of a ridiculous statement bro.

 

[coolchange]

Okay, question that I can't believe hasn't come up: WIth in arms reach of WHOM? Surely you don't expect me to leave the helm of a vessel underway to throw a cushion to a MOB?????