[NYCAP123]

Originally Posted by Marmot

Killing someone by hot dogging in the middle of a crowd at night just to look like Joe Hero to the rescue is not simply a case of the odds catching up with someone.

No matter how you want to paint this incident or how much of a jingoistic spin you would like to put on it, this was not much different than if someone fired a gun into a crowd, maybe there was no intent to hit someone but the action left little chance of any other outcome and that, my patriotic friend, is not an accident. It is callous disregard for others, an arrogant display of immunity from accepted standards of operation, and simple reckless behavior.

What is the difference between this tragedy and the recent fatal incident on Long Island that was attributed to reckless operation? Both involved an incompetent operator with little or no situational awareness functioning at a level inadequate to meet the demands.

This isn't the first and only time this scenario has been played out by a CG small boat driver, fortunately it is one of the few fatal incidents. If any other organization had the same record it would be shut down until it could prove its training and operations met acceptable standards for public safety.

Actually it would be more akin to a police officer getting into an accident while responding to a call. Haven't heard of too many police departments being closed down due to that happening.
The difference between this and the accident on Long Island is that the operator on LI killed himself. Otherwise, not much would have happened to him even with the other 3 deaths.

[Marmot]

Originally Posted by NYCAP123

Actually it would be more akin to a police officer getting into an accident while responding to a call. Haven't heard of too many police departments being closed down due to that happening.

"Geoffrey Alpert, a criminology professor at the University of South Carolina ... said studies had shown that 35 percent to 40 percent of all chases end in accidents, about 20 percent in injury and 1 percent in death."

And that is precisely why many police departments have changed the rules of engagement to prevent killing innocent people.

The hero mentality behind the crashes of life-flight helicopters, speeding ambulances, and fire-rescue vehicles as well as high speed response and chases has led to a nationwide review of operating standards for public service providers.

It is past time the CG recognized they are part of a larger problem that a uniform and a flag and a carefully cultivated public image will not insulate them.

"... not much would have happened to him even with the other 3 deaths."

I am not talking about crime and punishment. The idiot coxwain may stew in his own juices for the rest of his life regardless of how society judges him. Or not, it depends on whether he can comprehend the scope of the tragedy his choices created.

If he is the typical brainwashed young defender of the faith I doubt this event will rate as much more than "collateral damage" as those who are looking for a way to shift part of the blame to the victims seem to be hoping.

I am talking about training and operating standards in an organization that is assigned the role of oversight of all maritime operations in the country. They absolutely must be held to the highest standard and they must display the highest standards in all aspects of their operation. There is simply no excuse or mitigation for this incident. The 33 had radar, it had a searchlight and it had several sets of eyes available as it screamed into an area crowded with small boats packed with amateurs. All it lacked was a competent operator.

[NYCAP123]

If he is the typical brainwashed young defender of the faith I doubt this event will rate as much more than "collateral damage" as those who are looking for a way to shift part of the blame to the victims seem to be hoping.

I am talking about training and operating standards in an organization that is assigned the role of oversight of all maritime operations in the country. They absolutely must be held to the highest standard and they must display the highest standards in all aspects of their operation. There is simply no excuse or mitigation for this incident. The 33 had radar, it had a searchlight and it had several sets of eyes available as it screamed into an area crowded with small boats packed with amateurs. All it lacked was a competent operator.

I know a lot of guys in their 60's who can't close their eyes because they'll revisit what they experienced when they were 19. Even young people have consience.
As to the rest I again suggest that all those who have a complaint about a coastie reach out to his superior. It won't be ignored. For those who think a policy should be changed e-mail your congressman. Bashing someone who tried to serve his country but may have screwed up is not the proper course to take.
Merry Christmas. How about we concentrate on prayers for the affected familes...all of them.

[BMS]

Marmot,
I was a brainwashed 18yo when I enlisted and became a braineashed coxswain at 19. I can promise you that the training the CG gives you as well as the experience gained is extremely professional. This incident is not due to lack of training or boat handling skills it is a situation of poor judgemet, and a lack of situational awareness that caused an unfortunate fatality. Is this young man a professional yes and should he be held accountable absolutely. FYI CG Coxswain school is 2months and another 8-12 breaking in as coxswain before being qualified. A bit more in depth than the 2 week paper captian courses

[Marmot]

Originally Posted by BMS

" I can promise you that the training the CG gives you as well as the experience gained is extremely professional."

The incident itself and your description of what you believe underlies the incident indicates otherwise.

"This incident ... it is a situation of poor judgemet, and a lack of situational awareness that caused an unfortunate fatality."

The fact that this coxwain did not understand that loss of situational awareness at night in a narrow waterway crowded with recreational boaters called for reduced speed and enhanced observation points directly to a failure of the system to either provide him the tools to function in such an environment or the oversight to remove him from an environment for which his training and judgment was inadequate.

He did not use the machine gun to clear the crowds so he could pass did he? Why not, because he knew that was not allowed in this case, he was trained to determine the conditions in which he could use that kind of force. He was obviously not trained to determine when he could use the speed and power available in that boat. He lacked the judgment to determine by himself the risks of operating in the manner that led to the death of an innocent civilian but was assigned that role anyway. He was not trained to balance his response to the conditions and situation. That is a failure of training and oversight and is seen all too often on the coastal and inland waterways of this country. He was poorly trained and poorly supervised.

I believe that the CG would provide more security for you and me if they would leave the local waterway policing to the local police and concentrate on what they are trained and equipped to do well, offshore SAR. We don't need amateur tugboat drivers risking property and we don't need reckless jackboots running amuck on our inland waterways. I am sorry if that description offends you but it reflects the way that many of us have come to view the CG in its nearshore activities.

[GFC]

It's been interesting to read these posts.

From the sounds of much of what I've read, we should tar and feather all USCG boat operators because of one unfortunate incident.

Using that line of thinking and reason(?), should we tar and feather all licensed captains because one of them might have done something wrong while skippering a 63' Bertram that caused it to sink?

Might I be so impertinent as to suggest that we not tar and feather anyone in either of these incidents until more facts are presented?

We can speculate about what caused both incidents but speculation has no bearing on the facts.

I've learned in the past that if I keep my mouth shut and my fingers off the keyboard until the facts are learned it keeps me from having to publicly wash the egg off my face.

[BMS]

Marmot,
No offense taken. The CG does much more than offshore sar and it always has been. There are not always localities that have the ability to police waterways. To add to that the CG is enforceing federal law not just state and local. Yes he screwed up but so do all of us. I would love to hear of one person on this forum who hasn't fed up royaly in his life. I know I have. Maybe its driving a boat maybe a car, maybe we could have hurt and killed someone but did't. It just gets to me when you put yourself outhere like the CG and other public servents the entire organization gets blasted. Its easy for people to sit at the dock and arm chair QB the entire CG but until you have done it I guess you realy don't know what its like or all about. I hope this does't offend you but I have taken plenty of flack from people in the CG, now as a commercial tow and salvor, and as a diver. Boaters constantly complain about us until we are needed suddenly we are you best friend. Now I have a few coasties from my old unit that are still on active duty coming over for Christmas diner so I hope you all have a great Xmas eve as me and a couple of CG hooligans are about to. LOL

[Marmot]

Originally Posted by BMS

"There are not always localities that have the ability to police waterways. To add to that the CG is enforceing federal law not just state and local."

There isn't a stretch of water in existence that any local authority with access to a computer hasn't already received a federal grant to buy hardware to enforce federal, state, and local laws.

Between the city cops, the county cops, the port cops, the fish and game cops, CBP and who knows how many other waterborne forces I have missed, we really don't need to have the CG running around creating the hazards that many on this site alone have mentioned. I suggest they use the money to perform tasks that other entities cannot do.

[K1W1]

Hi,

As sad as this whole scenario really is there is another side that no one has mentioned to the best of my recollection

What happens if the guilty party gets let go by the USCG?

Does he lose entitlement to whatever qualifications he now has or does he get prevented from sitting exams for future tickets?

One day this guy might be driving a yacht near you!!!

[dennismc]

The license is secondary to experience and attitude, my friend here has Ocean Going unlimited tonnage and had to take a Boating Safety course in order to feel comfortable operating his 30 ft sailboat, most of our accidents here are caused by Licensed Captains who become complacement and think they have total authority to do what they feel is right and of course, lots of them do the opposite and don't do what they should. The human condition usually trumps everyting in the final analysis.

[NYCAP123]

Originally Posted by K1W1

Hi,

As sad as this whole scenario really is there is another side that no one has mentioned to the best of my recollection

What happens if the guilty party gets let go by the USCG?

Does he lose entitlement to whatever qualifications he now has or does he get prevented from sitting exams for future tickets?

One day this guy might be driving a yacht near you!!!

You don't quit the CG any more than any other military branch. If they drum him out his discharge would be noted and could even be less than honorable. That's a permanent mark that no civilian in similar circumstance would suffer. It could keep him from getting jobs and yes, licenses for life. That's completely hypothetical though and would be on a case by case basis. I certainly hope that doesn't happen although some here would get great joy from it. BTW, I'd sure rather think the CG was coming to help me in an emergency rather than Fish and Game.

[BMS]

Marmot,
As the premier sea going service in the country what hazards are created. Local officers don't enforce federal law. Also I have numerous drug busts have arrested smugglers with chinese imigrants onboard, countless federal fisheries violations and siezures, and the list goes on. This was just in two years working in SC where DNR and locals are previlant im not even getting into how busy it was in south FL. But you are right and obviously have more experience on the subject than I do I guess th CG has no buisness in law enforcement. We wont even talk of when I was underway with the USN ad Dutch and French Navies conducting counter narcotics boardings and keeping illeagals out of S Fla. No Buisness at all in it

[BMS]

Originally Posted by Marmot

There isn't a stretch of water in existence that any local authority with access to a computer hasn't already received a federal grant to buy hardware to enforce federal, state, and local laws.

Between the city cops, the county cops, the port cops, the fish and game cops, CBP and who knows how many other waterborne forces I have missed, we really don't need to have the CG running around creating the hazards that many on this site alone have mentioned. I suggest they use the money to perform tasks that other entities cannot do.

The United States Coast Guard is the nation's leading maritime law enforcement agency and has broad, multi-faceted jurisdictional authority. The specific statutory authority for the Coast Guard Law Enforcement mission is given in 14 USC 2, "The Coast Guard shall enforce or assist in the enforcement of all applicable laws on, under and over the high seas and waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States." In addition, 14 USC 89 provides the authority for U.S. Coast Guard active duty commissioned, warrant and petty officers to enforce applicable U.S. law. It authorizes Coast Guard personnel to enforce federal law on waters subject to U.S. jurisdiction and in international waters, as well as on all vessels subject to U.S. jurisdiction (including U.S., foreign and stateless vessels).

[Marmot]

Originally Posted by BMS

The United States Coast Guard... specific statutory authority for the Coast Guard Law Enforcement mission is given in 14 USC 2, "The Coast Guard shall enforce... 14 USC 89 provides the authority for U.S. Coast Guard... enforce federal law on waters subject to U.S. jurisdiction and in international waters, as well as on all vessels subject to U.S. jurisdiction (including U.S., foreign and stateless vessels).

Blah blah blah ... go back and reread what I wrote. I never questioned the CG's authority, only its competence. The CG does a great job of high seas SAR and interdiction, let them stick to that and keep the kids offshore and under adult supervision.

And since you have spent so much time down here keeping the bad guys at bay, you shouldn't have any problem finding out what authority the state, local, county, and port police have. Look it up and get back to us would you?

What I am saying and will say again, is there are agencies better trained and equipped to provide local police protection in near shore waters in the USA. They have the same mandate and the same hardware as the CG boys but they also have the benefit of local knowledge, they live where they work and have no plans to leave in a year or so. They know their neighbors and their neighbors know them.

As far as the SD incident goes, have you heard anything about the "reported grounding?" Was anyone saved, anyone lost? Was Osama and a bunch of Afghani hitmen aground and unable to reach the airport?

This isn't just about incompetent coasties, it's about an agency that has lost track of its purpose and cannot train for the roles it won't let go of in a changed world.

[Marmot]

Originally Posted by BMS

As the premier sea going service in the country ...

It sounds like you guys have made a dent in the eggnog already.

If you're boating or driving make sure you have a designated driver and be safe.

Merry Christmas.