TexasCHLforum.com

http://www.businessinsider.com/us-coast ... an-2016-10

US Navy and US Coast Guard stopped, boarded and seized a "narco sub" carrying 5,600 pounds of cocaine in the Pacific ocean, off the coast of Central America. (Emphasis mine.)

I certainly have no objection to stopping illegal drugs coming from South America into the USA.

However, I'm just wondering. What gives the USA the authority to stop, board, and seize vessels operating in international waters? Even if they are illegal vessels carrying illegal cargo, they are operating in international waters. Who made us the cops of the oceans?

Not saying it's a bad thing that our Navy and Coast Guard does that, just wondering where we get that legal authority, since they were apparently operating in international waters, and definitely were way outside our own territorial boundaries.

I suppose we're operating under some cooperative international treaty, but is it a regional international thing between us and Mexico and Columbia, or a United Nations treaty, or something else? Or just because we want to? Anybody know? Just mildly curious.

Let me Google that for you: http://repository.law.miami.edu/cgi/vie ... ext=umiclr

Article 1 Section 8 of The Constitution says among other things that Congress shall have the power:

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;

Congress then enacted: 46 U.S. Code Chapter 705 - MARITIME DRUG LAW ENFORCEMENT

bblhd672 wrote:Let me Google that for you:

Ok, ok. I deserved that!

I guess my problem was I didn't know how to condense my question to a few key words so that Google, or Siri, or Cortana could understand it.

So thanks for that.

So now, when Google crawls through this site again, people in the future doing a search on Google will see that they can go to a Texas concealed handgun discussion forum to learn about drug interdiction operations conducted in international waters! Who'd uh thunk it!

Lynyrd wrote:Article 1 Section 8 of The Constitution says among other things that Congress shall have the power:

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;

Congress then enacted: 46 U.S. Code Chapter 705 - MARITIME DRUG LAW ENFORCEMENT

I am impressed. It is shown every day that there are some truly knowledgeable people on this forum!

Give me just a minute to come up with a question on string theory as related to time travel!

Google keeps improving its search engine so you can just about type anything in and find the answer. I used the following question:

What gives the USA the authority to stop, board, and seize vessels operating in international waters?

thatguyoverthere wrote:

Lynyrd wrote:Article 1 Section 8 of The Constitution says among other things that Congress shall have the power:

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;

Congress then enacted: 46 U.S. Code Chapter 705 - MARITIME DRUG LAW ENFORCEMENT

I am impressed. It is shown every day that there are some truly knowledgeable people on this forum!

Give me just a minute to come up with a question on string theory as related to time travel!

This guy might have an answer for that one: http://www.hawking.org.uk/space-and-time-warps.html

While the Navy and Coast Guard have the authority under several laws and treaties to interdict non-US flagged ship on the high seas, it is rarely done without the permission of the nation of the flagged ship. It's a very aggressive move and a good way to start a war. Additionally, if you are trying to get a conviction for a violation of US law you have to consider what your authority for interdiction or boarding is. On the other hand, if you really want to get rid of the drug traffickers, you could always order the Navy to sink them all...but be prepared to answer for the collateral damage.


ETA: When I was in the Navy my thought was....The Navy is trained to blow stuff up and kill the enemy, we let the Coast Guard handle the law enforcement and if anybody gives them any "crud", we'll come and sink them or shoot a missile or drop a bomb on them...

ScottDLS wrote:While the Navy and Coast Guard have the authority under several laws and treaties to interdict non-US flagged ship on the high seas, it is rarely done without the permission of the nation of the flagged ship. It's a very aggressive move and a good way to start a war. Additionally, if you are trying to get a conviction for a violation of US law you have to consider what your authority for interdiction or boarding is. On the other hand, if you really want to get rid of the drug traffickers, you could always order the Navy to sink them all...but be prepared to answer for the collateral damage.


ETA: When I was in the Navy my thought was....The Navy is trained to blow stuff up and kill the enemy, we let the Coast Guard handle the law enforcement and if anybody gives them any "crud", we'll come and sink them or shoot a missile or drop a bomb on them...

Generally speaking you are correct - however those laws and treaties apply to ships flagged and registered by a country. I'm pretty sure the government of Columbia is not registering the narcos' subs, nor or the subs flying a nation's flag which is required by maritime law.

You navy or coast guard guys tell me if I'm wrong but don't all ships sailing in international waters have to have a ships registry or flag? kind of like driving with a license plate? No plate and anybody can stop you and ask for registry, destination, cargo! I'm I correct?

bblhd672 wrote:Let me Google that for you: http://repository.law.miami.edu/cgi/vie ... ext=umiclr

I had totally forgotten about this site until your post.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=policing+of+drugs+ ... nal+waters

crazy2medic wrote:You navy or coast guard guys tell me if I'm wrong but don't all ships sailing in international waters have to have a ships registry or flag? kind of like driving with a license plate? No plate and anybody can stop you and ask for registry, destination, cargo! I'm I correct?

You are correct, at least in my understanding of naval law.

However, my Navy experience was limited to underwater stuff so the only way we stopped a ship was via torpedo or missile.

Mk48 or harpoon?

crazy2medic wrote:Mk48 or harpoon?

Either or. MK48=torpedo, Harpoon=missile.

bblhd672 wrote:

crazy2medic wrote:Mk48 or harpoon?

Either or. MK48=torpedo, Harpoon=missile.

688 boat Los Angeles class attack submarine, did Clinton discontinue the Seawolf?