state ferry encounter(s)

[amlevin]

NavyLT,

I’m really surprised at your comment about the Captain’s authority. Especially considering your user name here.

The Captain can, and will, determine what is legal “aboard HIS vessel”. He has absolute and complete authority under federal law. He could easily throw you into the brig for any reason he saw fit while the vessel is under way. He could then release you from the brig and send you on your way once the vessel is docked. You might try to push the issue [after docking] but you would not fare well if at all.

Now, in exactly the same scenario of being put into the brig, and you resisted, then you are “interfering with the crew in the performance of their duties” which is a federal crime, and very easy to prove.

So, please, be my guest and push the Captains button’s. Just let us know what federal prison you are in so we can send care packages.

I’ve known Dave for years now. If you want to argue the WA statues with him, may I suggest you bring a lunch.

Chris

The Captain is not "The Law" on his ship, he is merely responsible for enforcing Federal, State, and Local Laws as well as "Company" policies. He "can't make it up as he goes". There are no more "Captain Queeg's or Captain Bligh's" on US ships, especially Washington State Ferries.

 

[Varmiter]

Amlevin,

You are absolutely right. He can’t make it up as he goes along. But what so many forget is all the Captain, at the board of inquiry, need do is invoke the word “Safety”.

Now it may ultimately be proven that safety was not compromised, his opinion regarding his actions at the time, there mere fact that HE thought it was a safety issue, he will win any debate.

So, in effect, although legally he can’t do just anything he wants, and what Captain does, if his actions were based on his perception of a “safety” issue, I guarantee, he will win. Now bring a gun into the issue.

No Captain, like any of us, can be expected to know every Federal, State and/or Maritime law. After all, according to some here, he is only a step above a bus driver. If he doesn’t actually know about a particular law, all he need do is justify his actions for reasons of safety. While he may ultimately be proven wrong, he will not be faulted for the decisions he made at the time.

But, whatever his decision, if an individual resists or fights his decision(s) while the vessel is underway, that individual can easily be charged with a Federal offense, punishable by a fine, or jail, or both. State charges could easily follow.

At the end of the day, all the Captain wants to do is finish his voyage and go home at night. He will basically not interfere unless he thinks there is a safety issue. Bring a gun into the equation, especially OC, right or wrong, if he thinks it’s a safety issue, I guarantee he will win the debate/argument or court case.

Chris

 

[Jeff Hayes]

Amlevin,

/
No Captain, like any of us, can be expected to know every Federal, State and/or Maritime law.

Chris

He or she had better know the ones he or she is enforcing.

 

[Varmiter]

Within the STRICT confines of your statement(s), you would appear to be correct.

I noticed that you conveniently left the Captain out of the equation. We will get back to that in a moment. If an individual WERE detained by a Ferry worker, the Captain would have been made aware of the situation. If he was not made aware of the situation, that “Ferry worker” would most likely be out of a job.

However, lets take this item by item.

Ferry worker tells open carrier he can't open carry on ferry.
Open carriers says, why, yes, I can, state law does not prohibit it.

True, UNLESS the open carrier does NOT have a valid permit.

Ferry workers detain open carrier and notify Washington State Patrol who meets the ferry at the destination.

Sorry, but “Ferry workers” do not have the ability to communicate outside the vessel. If there is communication outside the vessel, it must, and does come through the Captain, or his designated officer(s). So now, the Captain is back in the loop.

WSP confirms that open carry is legal on the ferry and everybody leaves.

While this is possible, it all depends on the discretion of the Captain. His actions, right or wrong have already been stated. Additionally, does the open carrier have a permit?

As an extension of the Washington State Highway System, unless there is an at-sea emergency or hi-jacking, the WSP has jurisdiction for law enforcement on the ferry.

Sorry. Not quite true. The Captain has ultimate jurisdiction while the vessel is underway. No if ands or buts about it. Once the vessel docks, jurisdictional authority changes.

Oh.....almost forgot. I’m still waiting for your answer to my question stated in my post # 50.

Chris

 

[BigDave]

As an extension of the Washington State Highway System, unless there is an at-sea emergency or hi-jacking, the WSP has jurisdiction for law enforcement on the ferry.

When it comes to law enforcement jurisdiction refer to;

RCW 47.60.275 Local law enforcement officers on ferries and terminals.

Law enforcement officers of cities, towns, and counties which are served by state ferries shall have, and are hereby authorized to exercise, concurrent jurisdiction and authority with state law enforcement officers in the enforcement of laws of the state and local governmental divisions at those state ferry terminals located within the respective governmental division served by such local law enforcement officers and on state ferries at the terminals and throughout the ferry runs, notwithstanding that the ferry may not be in the officer's governmental division.

[1969 ex.s. c 13 § 1.]

 

[sudden valley gunner]

It matters not he is "Federally" licensed he is hired to operate what is basically a moving toll bridge in our state. The state can choose to be more restrictive on what "captains" operating within their border are allowed to do. By some reasoning seen in this thread I can go get the federal machine gun stamp and because its a federal license now own a machine gun in our state.

 

[Trigger Dr]

The captain on a Wa State Ferry, is not "licensed", but has the same U.S. Merchant Mariner's Document (Z Card) as the steward, wiper, Able Seaman (Any waters) that is issued by the Coast Guard. The captain has a higher "endorsement" ie, Mate, or Captain, with limitations as to the size vessel he can supervise. To get the "Z" card, one must show a certain amount of underway time aboard a certain type vessel, and demonstrate competency in various acts of seamanship, by a physical test of those skills.

 

[Chap]

Licensing of Maritime Personnel

46 Code of Federal Regulation SubChapter B, Part 10

http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_10/46cfr10_10.html

Just curious, Does anyone know the exact name of the vessel?


Chap

 

[Chap]

Thanks NAVY LT or NAVY LCDR to be correct

For those interested in the Manning of this vessel.

http://cgmix.uscg.mil/PSIX/PSIXSearch.aspx
This website is a free online public CG Search for vessels.

http://cgmix.uscg.mil/PSIX/PSIXDetails.aspx?VesselID=47442
Specific to the vessel.

This vessel is inspected by the Coast Guard look under
"Vessel Particulars" shows - "Service: Passenger (Inspected)"
also under
"Vessel Documents and Certifications" shows - "Certificate of Inspection" this is the document which shows the minimum manning for the vessel. ( basically a registration for them to operate as a passenger vessel ) Not viewable by the general public.
46 USC Sec. 8101 -

I can assure you this is vessel is required to be operated by a Licensed Master. this type of vessel is considered a Subchapter "H" Vessel.

Subchapter "H" is regulated under 46CFR70
http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_10/46cfr70_10.html

Master and all Licensed officers must have their licenses displayed. 46CFR78.65-1
http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2010/octqtr/pdf/46cfr78.65-1.pdf


Chap

 

[sudden valley gunner]

June 1st! Thanks!

Oh yea I forgot. Congrats on the promotion. You can have John update your name on here?

 

[Trigger Dr]

For those interested in the Manning of this vessel.

http://cgmix.uscg.mil/PSIX/PSIXSearch.aspx
This website is a free online public CG Search for vessels.

http://cgmix.uscg.mil/PSIX/PSIXDetails.aspx?VesselID=47442
Specific to the vessel.

This vessel is inspected by the Coast Guard look under
"Vessel Particulars" shows - "Service: Passenger (Inspected)"
also under
"Vessel Documents and Certifications" shows - "Certificate of Inspection" this is the document which shows the minimum manning for the vessel. ( basically a registration for them to operate as a passenger vessel ) Not viewable by the general public.
46 USC Sec. 8101 -

I can assure you this is vessel is required to be operated by a Licensed Master. this type of vessel is considered a Subchapter "H" Vessel.

Subchapter "H" is regulated under 46CFR70
http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_10/46cfr70_10.html

Master and all Licensed officers must have their licenses displayed. 46CFR78.65-1
http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2010/octqtr/pdf/46cfr78.65-1.pdf


Chap

Thanks for the correction. I got my "Z" card 9-19-80. never renewed it. Things have changed a bit.

 

[Chap]

Sure no problem, glad I got to use some of this knowledge. If I lived there, I'd be the CG Inspector for that vessel.

I was in New Orleans 6 yrs. ago doing various boat and barge inspections as well as the Ferries.

I'm currently doing allot of barges here in Greenville, MS. I use to have five " H " boats in Shreveport, LA. ( Casino boat inspections ) In the last year I've handed them off to the State Gaming Board due to new law going into affect 11May11. ( Casino boats not considered vessels unless the get underway once a year )

I only wish I understood all these gun laws and court precedences. This website has helped me immensely.

Chap's iPhone

 

[amlevin]

June 1st! Thanks!

Does that mean that for now you are just "frocked"?

 

[Ajetpilot]

Officers very rarely get frocked. I just put it on for real when the message that comes out says I will get paid.

Boy, things have changed. When I was in the Navy, we were frocked the instant the promotion list was promulgated. Of course, I retired 25 years ago. There is nothing as constant as change.

 

[Bill Starks]

I just received word that the NO Firearms signs have been removed from the Friday Harbor ferry docks. However you will still see them at/near the Customs area.

 

[hermannr]

I would expect that passengers/crew would have to abide Canadian Law as soon as the ship crosses into Canadian waters. Yes, it is an US registerd vessel, but whos waters you are in makes a difference. That is one of the problems with ships arming themselves against pirates, they have to dock eventually and some countries have definate problems with firearms. (like GB and Canada)

I would think that would be the reason for customs having a no firearms sign.

 

[amlevin]

I would expect that passengers/crew would have to abide Canadian Law as soon as the ship crosses into Canadian waters. Yes, it is an US registerd vessel, but whos waters you are in makes a difference. That is one of the problems with ships arming themselves against pirates, they have to dock eventually and some countries have definate problems with firearms. (like GB and Canada)

I would think that would be the reason for customs having a no firearms sign.

Ships carrying arms that are prohibited in the country where they make land merely have to surrender them to the authorities until they depart.

Anyone here ever watch "Whale Wars" on Cable? When their ship made port in New Zealand they video'd the process. For a bunch of pacifist type "Whale Savers" they sure had some interesting ordnance. Even a Barrett 50 cal.

The issue of arming merchant ships against pirate attacks is a matter of perceived liability again. Could you imagine a bunch of seamen opening fire on a private yacht that approached them on the open seas merely because they needed assistance?

 

[Metalhead47]

..........

WHAT THE FROCK IS FROCKED?!???

Ships carrying arms that are prohibited in the country where they make land merely have to surrender them to the authorities until they depart.

Anyone here ever watch "Whale Wars" on Cable? When their ship made port in New Zealand they video'd the process. For a bunch of pacifist type "Whale Savers" they sure had some interesting ordnance. Even a Barrett 50 cal.

The issue of arming merchant ships against pirate attacks is a matter of perceived liability again. Could you imagine a bunch of seamen opening fire on a private yacht that approached them on the open seas merely because they needed assistance?

... no, but I could imagine a bunch of seamen opening fire on a rusty marauding pirate skiff and scaring those bastards all the way back to Somalia.

And seriously, the Japanese navy really needs to torpedo those stump-humping terrorist hypocrites and be done with them. They're a sovereign nation seeing to their own business in international waters.

 

[amlevin]

..........

WHAT THE FROCK IS FROCKED?!???

Don't know how it is exactly used today but it used to be a means of promoting an officer even though there wasn't an available slot for them. In the military the table of organization there are a certain number of positions (slots) available for each rank. When they are all filled there is no place for a newly promoted officer so they consider him/her "frocked" until someone who is currently in their "slot" dies, leaves the service, or retires. For those officers that require Congressional confirmation they remain "frocked" until confirmed and then they loose this cute designator.

Of course some of us who served at lower rank, this was merely a misspelling of what our real status was.

 

[Chap]

Got to love Goggle

Frocked

The term "frocking" dates back to the age of sail, when communications between the Department of the Navy and ships at sea could take months. News of the promotion of an officer arrived, usually via letters brought by another ship, and often with orders for the newly promoted officer to report to a new ship or station. The ship that brought the news would often take that officer away to his new post. Since the departing officer created a vacancy on the first ship, the Captain would often forward a recommendation for promotion for one of the remaining officers, to be carried back to the Department of the Navy. Since one of the symbols of rank was a frock coat, the newly promoted officer would pass his old frock coat to the officer remaining behind and recommended for promotion to the old rank of the departing officer. Months could go by until the Captain's recommendation made it back to the Department of the Navy, was acted upon and made official, and news sent back. In the intervening time, the officer recommended for promotion would be accorded the privileges and authorities of his "new" rank, but would not receive the pay for it, since it was not yet official. And because it was not yet official, and because he was still wearing the old frock coat of the recently departed and (officially) promoted officer, the officer recommended for promotion was considered "frocked."

Chap