Quote:
Originally Posted by Mee-n-Mac
Respectfully I disagree. While the NHMP asserts it can perform safety checks at any time, I don't see how that jives with the decision and the reasoning given by the majority in the case I previously presented. They dismissed the charge because they ruled the safety check to be a "stop" and all "stops" require "articulable suspicion" per NH law. They didn't excuse the because the stop was a safety check. Since the NHMP doesn't exercise what it thinks is it's authority it's a moot point but in cases where the courts have ruled I don't see much leeway for the NHMP in safety checks other than for them to be, legally speaking, voluntary. They seem to be able to ask if you have a PFD but you aren't required to answer.
|
MnM, here is the deal. Joe citizen is operating his boat on public waters that are under the jurisdiction of the NHMP. Such operation is a regulated activity. An officer observes a violation, either one of operation or one of equipment that is plain to see. He stops that vessel and advises why the boat was stopped. He asks Joe Citizen to produce a positive form of ID or equivalent and a Boating Ed certificate. He asks for the registration. He then performs a safety check by asking Joe to produce certain safety equipment. He pushes off and fills out his paperwork. He may issue a warning, a defective equipment tag or a summons or a combination, depending on the severity of the violation first observed, and/or the condition or presence of required safety equipment. That is it.
That is not compromising his rights any more than if he were stopped on the street. Same drill, "I stopped you because................., license and registration and (depending on state) proof of insurance." He then returns to his cruiser, fills out his paperwork and issues appropriate documents or warnings to the operator. The required safety equipment and check is unique to boating law and it has worked well for many years.