|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
Military.com Forums Coast Guard Discussions Point-CounterPoint navy stops pirate vessel|
Go
|
New
|
Find
|
Notify
|
Tools
|
Reply
|
|
|
New Member |
http://www.defensetech.org/archives/003823.html?wh=wh
would't the coast guard be on the boarding party, and if so why would there be no mention of their particapation. |
||
|
|
New Member |
Are there any USCG personnel assigned to the USS James E. Williams?
|
|||
|
|
New Member |
i would think there would be a ledet,or taclet on board.
|
|||
|
|
Member |
"...would't the coast guard be on the boarding party"
why would they be on the boarding team...What training would the ledat team have in taking back a ship fm pirates, seems like a Marine Op to me..... |
|||
|
Experienced Member |
In legal terms what happened here was the USN responded to a request for assistance from another vessel. They can do that and can do it well. This wasn't a LE boarding of any type. They actually only boarded for medical assistance. The large grey helicopter and much larger grey boat distracted the cowards, oops I mean 'pirates' enough for the crew to take control back of their own boats.
|
|||
|
Member |
There are not enough LEDETs to be assigned to every Naval vessel. They are usually deployed only on those operating within the Caribbean basin/Eastern Pacific and/or the Arabian Gulf. They have been deployed to other theaters, i.e. the Med for specific operations. Navy warships have Visit, Board, Search, and Seize (VBSS) boarding teams comprised of armed sailors. I believe they have different levels of training to include Non-Compliant Boardings.
I've been out of LEDET for a long time, but I'm willing to bet that they have advanced tactical skills that exceed that of non-SEAL/USMC (i.e. Joe Sailor) VBSS teams. Edit in response to MC's post. Under international maritime law, warships have the Right of Approach/Right of Visit to investigate violations of international law including piracy and slave trading (and something else I don't recall). |
|||
|
|
New Member |
Also keep in mind that Navy warships are only required to have a Coast Guard LE officer on their crew when they are performing domestic law enforcement functions, such as drug interdiction in the Caribbean. Posse comitatus prevents the USN (as a branch of the armed forces) from performing domestic law enforcement but allows it to perform law enforcement in international waters. The USCG is precluded from the posse comitatus requirements and is the only armed service authorized to conduct domestic LE. Thus, when an E4 or higher who is a BTM/BO in the USCG is on board a USN vessel, that USN vessel has domestic LE authority as a result of the presence of the Coastie. In situations like this, they are not in domestic waters so posse comitatus doesn't apply and they don't need the USCG for search/seizure/arrest authority.
|
|||
|
Member |
That would be operation of an illegal broadcasting station. Hard to believe that an illegal radio broadcasting station takes precedence over illicit narcotics trafficking but it does. |
|||
|
|
Member |
Thanks Cajun for refreshing my memory. The presence of a Coastie BO onboard a warship does not actually provide the necessary authority, at least not according to protocol. Prior to a boarding the warship had to in chop to a CG command and the Coast Guard ensign (which actually conveys the authority) had to be hoisted. We deployed with a big ensign for the ship and a small one for the RHIB. Nothing cooler than seeing an Aegis CG flying the CG ensign.
|
|||
|
|
Member |
One of the simple pleasures in my life as a LEDET member was watching them hoist the CG Ensign. Some Navy CO’s simply truly hated it but they all wanted their Snowflakes ASAP when they got a bust. I had the CO of the USS Cromlin tell me he would rather have the Gay Rights flag flying than the (as he called it) KFC flag. We really wanted to accommodate him but he retracted that statement when he found out we were attempting to acquire said Gay Rights flag in Panama.
|
|||
|
|
Experienced Member |
Me and Chuck Norris say, "One Riot ... One Ranger". |
|||
|
|
Member |
I say we put ol' Chuck in a Zodiac CZ7, give him two MAC-10s that he is so fond of and let him cruise the Horn of Africa coast for a month or two. Piracy would cease to be an issue.
|
|||
|
"Does anyone know where the love of God goes when the waves turn the minutes to hours?" - Gordon Lightfoot |
It would be nice if North Korea really appreciated the assistance but time will tell.
Don |
|||
|
Member |
FedRich, I concur with your post with this caveat: customary international law allows warships the right of visit/approach for the purpose of identifying the nationality of a suspect vessel. They can approach those vessels, board if necessary (i.e. "visit") but just to identify the nationality of the vessel. The "universal crimes" of operating an illegal radio station, piracy, and slavery can be investigated by any nation when they have a reasonable belief that those crimes might be happening aboard the suspect vessel. It's a slight distinction, but an important one. |
|||
|
|
Member |
One thing to add to your post-- BTMs have no inherent LE authority. They operate solely under the LE authority of the qualified BO on scene. Even if there are multiple qualified BO's, only the senior boarding officer (that is, the lead one) holds the LE authority for that mission. |
|||
|
|
Experienced Member |
Mr O, I would have to say that you are using 'authority' where you should be using 'responsibility.' The stuff you describe is a matter of policy, where the authority comes from the multiple USCs.
|
|||
|
|
Member |
You are correct. I had thought about adding something regarding stateless vessels but didn't want to confuse the discussion. Like I said, I've been out of that business awhile so you'll have to excuse the brain fade. Nowadays, I don't get outside of 200nm. Anyone fishing within that 200nm is fair game. |
|||
|
|
Member |
Absolutely -- the distinction between stateless and assimilated to stateless is the next step in the analysis. It wasn't a brain fade at all.  |
|||
|
|
Member |
MC, absolutely right as usual. I stand corrected. As a policy matter, the USCG limits the people permitted to use LE authority to those in charge of the boarding team (I don't have the MLEM in front of me, but it is in there). Title 14 of the USC doesn't delineate between a "Boarding Officer" and "Boarding Team Member" or who among those individuals listed in Title 14 USC 89(a) can exert law enforcement authority. Congress gave us, the USCG, the authority, and the chain of command in the USCG has the authority to promulgate regulations governing the use of that authority. It's just the same as any other federal agency-- they're given the statutory authority in the USC, and then they're able to implement regulations and policies to use that authority. Apologize for the confusion. |
|||
|
|
Member |
It's good to see our haze-gray brothers and sisters get some credit for the hard work they're doing off the Horn of Africa... curbing the piracy problem there is a monumental work in progress. Go Navy!
|
|||
|
| Powered by Eve Community | Page 1 2 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
Military.com Forums Coast Guard Discussions Point-CounterPoint navy stops pirate vessel
