Lawmaker wants Cajun Navy to train, pay fee before saving others

[GMDino]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2016/08/23/cajun-navy-training-pay-fee/89232670/

Quote:NEW ORLEANS — The Good Samaritans who rescued hundreds, maybe thousands of people during the "Great Flood of 2016" say they're not happy after a state lawmaker announced that he wants government to regulate future actions by citizen heroes.


A loosely organized group called the "Cajun Navy," took it upon themselves to save strangers, hundreds upon hundreds of them, by boat even when their own property was flooding.


"For the most part, these people are not going to wait for assistance. They're doers," said Cajun Navy member Dustin Clouatre of St. Amant.
[/url]

USA TODAY

Louisiana’s ‘Cajun Navy’ sets sail in fishing boats to rescue flood victims

He got in his pleasure skiff and with others, cleared out entire neighborhoods that were under water after historic rains triggered major flooding.
"At one time in my boat, I had a guy I dropped off at a Buddhist temple. I had a black guy, and I had a Mexican guy. And when we dropped them all off, everybody hugged, high-fived, loved on each other and sent them on their way," remembers Clouatre.
He and members of the Cajun Navy say they're against talk of government regulation.

Republican state Sen. Jonathan Perry of the Vermillion-Lafayette area, announced he is working on legislation that could require training, certificates and a permit fee to allow these volunteers to get past law enforcement into devastated areas. He said some were turned away.


“At the end of the day, there are going to be two things that are going to be the hurdle when you approach it from the state’s standpoint,” Perry said in a local radio interview. “Liability is going to be number one for them. They don’t want the liability of someone going out to rescue someone and then not being 
able to find them (the rescuers) and, secondly, there’s a cost.”


Members of the Cajun Navy don’t understand the call for regulations.

[url=http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2016/08/23/untold-stories-louisiana-flood-victims-baton-rouge-photographers/89210108/]
"How can you regulate people helping people? That doesn't make sense to me," said Clouatre.


Political blog The Hayride also is speaking out against any regulation.


"And we'll never know how many people got rescued, right? Because there were no bureaucrats with clipboards marking down how many. They just went and did it," said publisher Scott McKay. "The fact that John Perry is a Republican, right? It's like, 'Hey, you ran on small government. Now you want to regulate the Cajun Navy.' What are you doing?'"



Perry did not return phone calls for a comment.

[Rotobeast]

Let's start a go-fund-me account for the first cat to punch Perry in the mouth.


Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk

[Benton]

there really isn't a party for less government any more.

[Belsnickel]

I get the liability argument as I am the type of person that thinks in that direction. However, we aren't talking about government land. We are talking about people voluntarily going into a disaster area to help out. When there are evacuations from disasters you will often have people stay behind, you can't force them out, they have that individual liberty. As long as the government says "we do not recommend citizens be in this area and any citizen in the area does so with that understanding" you have covered your butt. Just my opinion on this.

Now, this guy goes to far, but I think having them coordinate with the official rescue efforts would be good. That way you have better efficiency in your use of resources.

[fredtoast]

This is just a tough situation.  If you let every yahoo with a boat into a disaster area then you may end up having to rescue some of them, or what happens when a guy overloads his bass boat and causes a lot of people to drown who could have been saved. But at the same time how do you turn away volunteers when people need saving?

[Rotobeast]

(08-24-2016, 07:47 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: I get the liability argument as I am the type of person that thinks in that direction. However, we aren't talking about government land. We are talking about people voluntarily going into a disaster area to help out. When there are evacuations from disasters you will often have people stay behind, you can't force them out, they have that individual liberty. As long as the government says "we do not recommend citizens be in this area and any citizen in the area does so with that understanding" you have covered your butt. Just my opinion on this.

Now..... do you remember the E.O. that Obama put through that gave the Federal Government control over all bodies of water ?

Do you think that could include flood waters covering private property ?

Just a thought.....

Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk

[GMDino]

(08-24-2016, 10:59 AM)Rotobeast Wrote: Now..... do you remember the E.O. that Obama put through that gave the Federal Government control over all bodies of water ?

Do you think that could include flood waters covering private property ?

Just a thought.....

Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk

I don't think so.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/executive-order-stewardship-ocean-our-coasts-and-great-lakes

[Rotobeast]

(08-24-2016, 11:02 AM)GMDino Wrote: I don't think so.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/executive-order-stewardship-ocean-our-coasts-and-great-lakes

Link wouldn't open for me, but I think the one I'm referring to even included collection of rainwater.

Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk

[Rotobeast]

Now I remember....
It was under the Clean Water Act, where the EPA has control over nearly every body of water.
In a flood event, the EPA would definitely have a valid reason to be involved.
I could see the entire area then being deemed Fed property.
Not to mention the special rules of a disaster scenario, where they even have the right to collect weapons.
I also remember the EPA having SWAT type security, when overtaking that mining area in Alaska.

Not saying anything goofy would happen, just spit-balling future tin-foil events.


Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk

[GMDino]

(08-24-2016, 11:17 AM)Rotobeast Wrote: Now I remember....
It was under the Clean Water Act, where the EPA has control over nearly every body of water.
In a flood event, the EPA would definitely have a valid reason to be involved.
I could see the entire area then being deemed Fed property.
Not to mention the special rules of a disaster scenario, where they even have the right to collect weapons.
I also remember the EPA having SWAT type security, when overtaking that mining area in Alaska.

Not saying anything goofy would happen, just spit-balling future tin-foil events.


Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk

I can see where the EPa would get involved in something like that.  Sewage drains and septic water would be involved too I reckon.