Boarded by plod

[jaws]

[ QUOTE ]
Lets go a stage further and make it compulsory to give finger prints and a DNA sample before dole/sick pay / passport/ driving license and pension can be collected.

[/ QUOTE ]

..and of course that data will never fall into the wrong hands as we can trust the government to keep it safe on CD.
Why people are so trusting of the government beggars belief. Anything held on a computer connected to a network can be got at with enough knowledge. It's already been shown that the data held on biometric Passports etc can be changed with off the shelf kit.

 

[NDG]

Cant understand why some people get so worked up about this kind of thing. As long as its reasonable and polite and there's no demand for "papers" , and its doesnt happen all the time, then they're all right by me.

By the way, if it was the CG Helicopter wanting to practice boarding, rather than a police RIB, I bet no one would be indignantly saying "they have no right" etc etc,. Life's all a bit of give and take, and if it helps to cut down on boat crime and dangerous speeding in MoBos in confined waters then its a good thing.

 

[jaws]

The point is it does happen all the time. They don't stop cars going through London and they don't randomly come to your home and do a spot check. There has to be some justification in my mind.
I value my freedom and that includes not being stopped at the drop of a hat.

There is a also reason why people have signs saying deck shoes only on their boat and this doesn't cover black steel toe capped jack boots.

 

[NDG]

Does it happen all the time...? Hasn't ever happened to me in 8 years or so, although customs did come aboard once. Maybe I am the exception rather than the rule.

If it happened frequently then I agree that would be excessive, but if I am even half way to being a typical example then what is the problem? If your boat or your outboard/tender/liferaft was nicked I bet you would want them around.

 

[Shorn100]

What's the point of asking for a letter from the parents. Surely, any self respecting paedophile (self-respecting is an oxymoron in this case!) would simply have written their own - how would the police know if it's real or fake.

It doesn't seem a very intensive check - I guess that if they were concerned they wold have made further enquiries such asking for a telephone number to phone the parents.

Not good policing on that point I would suggest. One wonders if they were being serious!

Shorn

 

[Iota]

Never happended to us either in the last 22 years but nice to know they are out there. I don't see what the fuss is about, seems a tad silly to judge everything by civil liberties. The officers in question might have had a rough description of a stolen boat or anything but so what it all seemed pretty amicable.

Iota

 

[capnsensible]

Having been boarded by Brits, French, Spanish and Moroccans, I can reveal that the ones without guns but taking the same risks generally give me cause for admiration rather than denigration.
Rule Brittania!
Oh, before anyone starts, this not NF propaganda, just a sailors observation. /forums/images/graemlins/ooo.gif

 

[Sailfree]

Just to clarify. With my wife I have taken my grandson skiing most years. He has a different surname and we have been asked before do we have a letter of authority from his parents. Not in a difficult way just trying to ensure the child was OK etc. For this reason I always get a letter from my daughter.

This year as he was 16 I almost did not bother. I also went alone with him this year - great bonding and having some adult conversations etc - think it may be the last year we go together as next year he may want to go with friends etc.

Again I was asked at customs the relationship and did I have authority. What surprised me a little was that they then asked him independantly to confirm our relationship. I was surprised as they had his passport showing that he was 16 but as another pointed out I could have forged any letter of authority.

Overall I am happy to be questioned and happy that the authorities attitude is the protection of children but I recommend others get that letter if only so that you have the authority to authorise any medical treatment in the event of illness or injury.

 

[QuestGirl]

I don't think I would have had a problem with them boarding but I definitely would have asked why first, and then decided. I wouldn't have just said ok. Same with customs or anyone else 'official' wanting to board - if they have a reason, even if it's just 'practising boarding', they have to give it and the very fact that they asked permission tells you that you could have refused. You could also have reserved the right to refuse to answer questions and to ask them to leave at any point - I would have made that clear and got their agreement before anyone came on board.

 

[Tranona]

The questioning at borders and by airlines is, I suggest a very different issue from getting a letter of permission to drift around Chichester harbour on a warm summers afternoon. Our granddaughter will soon be of an age when we will be taking her abroad without her parents and will certainly get a letter from our daughter for the reasons mentioned such as getting medical treatment as well as showing we are not kidnapping her. But taking her out on the boat in Poole harbour - why?

 

[Sailfree]

I agree with you except a letter would also give you authority to permit medical treatment.

Accidents and illnesses don't just happen abroad.

We all hope common sense would prevail but in this lets sue someone society only immediate life saving treatment may be given by some.

 

[suse]

[ QUOTE ]
If you ever go through London on your boat you have a 90% chance of being boarded by the boys in blue. They always wait, of course, until you are in the Pool of London so that they get maximum visibility to show the public that their tax is being put to good use and that they are doing something to combat terrorism. A lot of terrorists come from Teddington apparently! /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

One of my sons-in-law is a river policeman with the Met - he says they try to question everyone coming into the Thames - but not necessarily boarding them - prevention tactics. He's a really decent chap, sometimes rather full of moral rectitude offset by a quirky sense of humour. On the way to drop him and my daughter and kids off at the airport the other day, we were stopped routinely by police at the entrance to the drop off point. It was interesting to see how he (driver) behaved - he didn't flash his warrant card or say what his connection was. The policeman was, I thought, rather officious in that polite way they have (which immediately irritates me, even though I try to hide it). He was polite back, and nodding dogged to all the chap said. It was afterwards it was interesting - he made the same sort of remarks us grockles make, slightly more veiled, perhaps, but there all the same....

S x

 

[PilotWolf]

Everyone who is saying about 'asking to board' being a give away that they don't have the powers to - have you thought that maybe they are just being polite?

In my previous occupation we DID have the power to board the vessel simply by the authority of our Warrant whether you agreed or liked it or not, (not saying the police have the same authority as I don't know), but we always asked first out of politeness and respect to the skipper/owner. Boarding with consent makes it far more 'pleasurable' for both parties and saves on paperwork for the boarders /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

With regards to the letter and children I think that a letter that allows you to act in loco parentis (?sp) with regards to any emergency treatment, etc. would be a good idea - especially if the parents maybe difficult to contact quickly.

W.

 

[NealB]

I've been boarded twice on the Thames in the last year: once as we approached St Kats from seaward, then, a couple of weeks ago, as we came round the bend by the O2 (see, it's not discrimination against those intrepid voyagers from Teddington).

Both times they were very friendly (as were we), and stayed for about half an hour for cup of tea and a yarn. They didn't take up our invitation to go below and poke around.

Both times we were issued with a 'stop and search' ticket.

Was this an infringement of our civil liberties? Well, maybe, but, if so, only a very minor one.

Does it help us sleep soundly in our beds, secure in the knowledge that national security is so obviously at the top of their agenda? Err...you're joking, right?

Does it help with promoting an image of a caring, community police force? Not sure on this one....I suspect Telegraph and Mail readers will say 'yes', whereas Guardianistas will be outraged.

My own view? Well, actually, they were nice enough chaps, and it did add a little interest to our trip (including, a relatively high-speed, coming alongside exercise).

 

[Beadle]

No

In those circumstances a letter from parents saying they agreed to her going on your boat would not absolve you of a duty of care.

If she fell overboard or got crowned by the boom you would still have the same liability.

 

[jordanbasset]

sorry wrong thread

 

[Seven Spades]

For all those that don't mind,how would you feel if you had a knock on your front door, asked a details and a look round, completely differently I suspect. Most would ask to see a search warrant.

I don't see why we are seen as such high risk and need to be stopped and searched upon enter entering London. Cars are not stopped routinely so why should we be.

 

[Searush]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
'do you have a letter from her parents to confirm that it is okay for her to be with you out here?' they asked. Er no! Well you should really, especially on a boat... but she looks happy enough so I'm sure its fine...

[/ QUOTE ]It is burocracy and 'elf and safety gone mad.

I help run a Sea Scout group and the paperwork is horrendous. We have to get permission slips for everything. I am qualified as a YM and according to Scouts rules can only take 1 keel boat up to 500meters from the shorein summer and have to stay in quiet estuaries in winter!

[/ QUOTE ]

/forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif I'm an ex-Sea Scout (from the mid-60's) and an avid reader of Uffa Fox, who took a party of scouts to Paris from Poole in an open sailing whaler. They slept under the thwarts taking it in turns to bale/ steer/ row and sail. The only shelter was to pull a spare sail over you. There was no engine or buoancy, only kapok life jackets and no modern oilies or multi-layer thermals. But they all survived and sailed/ rowed up the Seine to moor in the heart of Paris as planned in time for the exhibition they were attending.

Sadly, our risk averse culture would throw up their collective arms in horror at such a wonderful adventure today. We have lost a lot and our children are losing more. /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif

 

[davidfox]

Sorry they werent 'Plods' they were 'Tossers'

 

[NealB]

I'm a great fan of Uffa, too, (both his designs and his writing). If I recall correctly, wasn't he breaking the rules when he took the Scouts off on the whaler? There were concerns even then.