Quote:
kjbathe wrote in part:
just because we have a speed limit doesn't mean MP has to enforce a speed limit.
|
That is one of the major problems.
In addition to the proposal being unnecessary it will be impossible to enforce without a major committment of manpower. Without radar posts there will be no way to prove a boat's speed in court. I could go past a Marine Patrol boat doing 60 outside of the 150' zone and there would be no way he/she could positively tell the court how fast I was going without radar.
So if the law is passed and there are no radar posts then what's the point? The Marine Patrol will not be able to bring speeding charges against anyone without radar. Therefore there is no additional tool to place in their arsenal.
As I have suggested a number of times, if the people who believe this is a major issue want a real solution, then adopt USCG Nav Rule 6. This would give the Marine Patrol the ability to visually determine what is happening on the water as conditions dictate, and give them the authority to act and such action would stand up in court.
As for the Homeland Security mandate, as a now retired member of Homeland Security via the Coast Guard Auxiliary I can assure you that port security has been something the Coast Guard has been pushing for since before 9-11 and if Homeland Security can come up with something and mandate that the state's develop and implement a program involving recreational boaters to help secure ports then they will, but it will be up to the states to operate and fund it.
That mandate will divert manpower and boats from the Marine Patrol to the new priority. That's just a fact of life.