Carry on boat in waterway off GA coast

Discussion in 'National Laws, Bills and Politics' started by Malum Prohibitum, Jan 17, 2007.

  1. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    67,152
    1,470
    113
    (1) What are the firearms laws pertaining to boats in the ocean close in to shore and far out (how far?)

    (a) possession on board

    (b) Concealed carry

    (c) Full Auto

    Do these laws mimic the state adjacent to the water, and, if so, how far out?


    (2) Do you believe that there are any reasonable suspicion or probable cause standards applicable to your decision to stop and/or search a boat?
     
  2. Green911

    Green911 Guest

    19
    0
    0
    roger

    I have some answers, it just going to take so time to get it down.
     

  3. Green911

    Green911 Guest

    19
    0
    0
    Here we go...

    (1) What are the firearms laws pertaining to boats in the ocean close in to shore and far out (how far?)

    If you are out of state waters (more than 3 miles), then there is no weapon law other than Title 2 weapons laws. So, you could carry concealed.

    (a) Possession on board -- sure, as long as is not a Title 2 weapon or you have an ATF 5861.4 (Form 4) to possess and/or ATF 5861.20 for crossing state lines.


    (b) Concealed carry -- sure, as long as is not a Title 2 weapon or you have an ATF 5861.4 (Form 4) to possess and/or ATF 5861.20 for crossing state lines.


    (c) Full Auto -- sure, as long as you have an ATF 5861.4 (Form 4) to possess and/or ATF 5861.20 for crossing state lines.

    Note: The Coast Guard can not enforce state laws. If we find a violation of a state law we may detain you till locals arrive.


    (2) Do you believe that there are any reasonable suspicions or probable cause standards applicable to your decision to stop and/or search a boat?
    No, not normal. Most of the inland Coast Guard boardingss are conducted to ensure your vessel in compliance with all federal laws pertaining to a vessel of your type and size. We are looking for unsafe conditions. That be said, if your actions (IE: changing courses away from us, the way the boat rides, and actions of the crews.) give us a reasonable suspicion then stand-by, we may come over to ensure your vessel in compliance with all federal laws pertaining to a vessel of your type and size.

    Now everyone remember, I am just typing away these not official statements. I am just giving my two cents.

    Green911
     
  4. Adam5

    Adam5 Atlanta Overwatch

    13,638
    168
    63
    Re: Here we go...

    In other words, if one of us gets caught target shooting with a full auto on the ICW, don't say that you told us we could.. :roll:
     
  5. Gunstar1

    Gunstar1 Administrator

    8,460
    5
    38
    Re: Here we go...

    Even if you could get an opinion from the AG of GA about it he would say the same thing.
     
  6. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    67,152
    1,470
    113
    Re: Here we go...

    (1) So, in your opinion, the Coast Guard can conduct these boardings, which necessarily involve a detention, i.e., a seizure of the person, on a whim?

    I am just looking for your opinion as somebody who has experience with what the Coast Guard does out there.

    (2) Also, if I am armed, are you/they going to point guns at me and disarm me?
     
  7. Green911

    Green911 Guest

    19
    0
    0
    OK, I knew this was coming....

    (1) So, in your opinion, the Coast Guard can conduct these boardings, which necessarily involve a detention, i.e., a seizure of the person, on a whim?

    When a Boarding Officer comes onboard your vessel, he/she is going to ensure the safety of his boarding team and the safety of the vessels crew. If he feels that to ensure the safety of that boarding he need to remove that weapon, make it safe, and separate the ammo from the gun; he can and should. That is what he has been trained to do. You should follow the commands; he is doing what he is trained to do.

    Here is a link. It a little strong but true.
    http://deepcreekyachtclub.com/WebPage/AdmiraltyLaw.html

    Here is what we call our marching orders:
    14 USC 2
    The Coast Guard shall enforce or assist in the enforcement of all applicable Federal laws on, under, and over the high seas and waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States; shall engage in maritime air surveillance or interdiction to enforce or assist in the enforcement of the laws of the United States; shall administer laws and promulgate and enforce regulations for the promotion of safety of life and property on and under the high seas and waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States covering all matters not specifically delegated by law to some other executive department; shall develop, establish, maintain, and operate, with due regard to the requirements of national defense, aids to maritime navigation, ice-breaking facilities, and rescue facilities for the promotion of safety on, under, and over the high seas and waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States; shall, pursuant to international agreements, develop, establish, maintain, and operate icebreaking facilities on, under, and over waters other than the high seas and waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States; shall engage in oceanographic research of the high seas and in waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States; and shall maintain a state of readiness to function as a specialized service in the Navy in time of war, including the fulfillment of Maritime Defense Zone command responsibilities.
    http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html ... -000-.html

    One more part:
    14 USC 89a
    The Coast Guard may make inquiries, examinations, inspections, searches, seizures, and arrests upon the high seas and waters over which the United States has jurisdiction, for the prevention, detection, and suppression of violations of laws of the United States. For such purposes, commissioned, warrant, and petty officers may at any time go on board of any vessel subject to the jurisdiction, or to the operation of any law, of the United States, address inquiries to those on board, examine the ship’s documents and papers, and examine, inspect, and search the vessel and use all necessary force to compel compliance. When from such inquiries, examination, inspection, or search it appears that a breach of the laws of the United States rendering a person liable to arrest is being, or has been committed, by any person, such person shall be arrested or, if escaping to shore, shall be immediately pursued and arrested on shore, or other lawful and appropriate action shall be taken; or, if it shall appear that a breach of the laws of the United States has been committed so as to render such vessel, or the merchandise, or any part thereof, on board of, or brought into the United States by, such vessel, liable to forfeiture, or so as to render such vessel liable to a fine or penalty and if necessary to secure such fine or penalty, such vessel or such merchandise, or both, shall be seized.
    http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html ... -000-.html


    (2) Also, if I am armed, are you/they going to point guns at me and disarm me?[/b]


    If it is me? Most likely. But I am not going to draw my weapon unless I have a reason to. Just because you have a weapon does not mean you want to use it on me. Maybe you just an average citizen want to exercise your 2nd amendment. If the boarding officer believes he needs to in order to ensure the safety of the boarding he should secure it.

    Every boarding is different. Every Boarding Officer conducts the boarding a little different. (It should be the same every time) I was at the All-Star Game in Detroit a few years ago. We boarded 80% on the vessels that pass by the security zone. About 1 out of 10 vessels had a weapon on it. Only one personal was carrying that I boarded. And yes I secured the weapon. He was not very happy that I was there. I secured the weapon and went on with the boarding. His boat was perfect. We gave him his paperwork and weapon back and departed the boat.

    OK, one more thing. He is required to record serial number of every weapon he comes across.

    Remember! If you do not like what you see here, please write your congressman. He is the one that can change laws.

    Sorry this is so long and can some move this to another forum?


    Now everyone remember, I am just typing away these not official statements. I am just giving my two cents.
    Green911
     
  8. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    67,152
    1,470
    113
    Green911, thanks for answering these questions and providing the source for your statements.

    As to my question regarding whether the Coast Guard may board on a whim, it looks like 14 USC 89a almost demands that they do so.

    I have to state that this is troubling to me. I will have to look into this more deeply.
     
  9. Rammstein

    Rammstein New Member

    5,798
    0
    0
    I hope you weren't under the impression that you had the right to tell the .gov to pound sand...
     
  10. Macktee

    Macktee New Member

    6,172
    0
    0
    Maybe I'm a little naive here, but I've got to say I trust the CG and the people who serve in it more than most PDs and LEOs.
    Beyond a doubt, they should be the most respected of federal employees.

    So, thanks Green911 to you and your buddies. And I'm not trying to suck up here; I don't even own a boat! I just have a lot of respect for your outfit.

    Under Admiralty Law, the CG has enormous discretion to search vessels and the occupants thereon. I think I always knew that to some degree, but had no idea of the almost total extent of the CG's authority. Whoa!

    Sounds like they can tell you to bend over and cough for them MP. Just hope nothing falls out...
     
  11. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    67,152
    1,470
    113
    Does admiralty law override the U.S. Constitution? Just curious.
     
  12. Macktee

    Macktee New Member

    6,172
    0
    0
    Maybe this will help:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Admiralty_law

    In the United States

    [edit] Jurisdiction

    Article III, Section 2 of the United States Constitution granted original jurisdiction to U.S. federal courts over admiralty and maritime matters. However, most admiralty cases in the United States can be brought in either federal or state court.

    The federal and state courts have concurrent jurisdiction over most admiralty and maritime claims pursuant to the terms of a federal statute known as the "Saving to Suitors" clause; see 28 U.S.C. § 1333. Under the Saving to Suitors clause, certain remedies are exclusively limited to being filed in the federal courts. Those include suits seeking to arrest ships to enforce maritime mortgages and liens, petitions to limit a shipowner's liability to the value of a ship after a major accident, and actions seeking to partition ownership of a ship. However, the vast majority of maritime actions, such as suits for damage to cargo, injuries to seamen, collisions between vessels, wake damage, and maritime pollution cases may be brought in either state court or federal court.

    In federal courts in the United States, there is generally no right to trial by jury in admiralty cases. Congress has created an exception in seamen's personal injury actions brought under the Jones Act where a jury trial is permitted. In state courts, the right to trial by jury is determined by the law of the state where the case is brought. Consequently, admiralty cases brought in state courts can be tried before a jury.

    [edit] Applicable law

    A state court hearing an admiralty or maritime case is required to apply the admiralty and maritime law, even if it conflicts with the law of the state, under a doctrine known as the "reverse-Erie doctrine." The "Erie doctrine" says that federal courts hearing state actions must apply state law. The "reverse-Erie doctrine" says that state courts hearing admiralty cases must apply federal admiralty law. This can make a big difference; for example, U.S. maritime law recognizes the concept of joint and several liability among tortfeasors, while many states do not. Under joint and several liability, where two or more people create a single injury or loss, all are equally liable, even if they only contributed a small amount. A state court hearing an admiralty case would be required to apply the doctrine of joint and several liability even if its state had outlawed the concept.
     
  13. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    67,152
    1,470
    113
    Thanks for the effort, but it does not help at all. That is a discussion of federal and state jurisdiction. I am looking for whatever the basis is for the Coast Guard boarding on a whim.

    Does admiralty law somehow abolish the Fourth Amendment? Have the courts found some exception to the Fourth Amendment when I am operating a boat that allows a forcible stop and search, perhaps at gunpoint while my gun is seized?