|
Home | Forums | Gallery | Webcams | Blogs | YouTube Channel | Classifieds | Calendar | Register | FAQ | Donate | Members List | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
12-22-2005, 08:24 PM | #101 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 183
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Quote:
I guess all this seems to have become moot today anyway, since everyone started deleting everything there today after reading pm203's request. Now I guess nobody will be able to read any of this stuff. Wonder why it was all deleted if it was not a problem? It's too bad there wasn't any way to have saved any of this stuff. Last edited by Fat Jack; 12-23-2005 at 12:53 PM. Reason: forgot the "wink" |
|
12-23-2005, 08:33 AM | #102 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 74
Thanks: 4
Thanked 12 Times in 4 Posts
|
Quote:
This speaks volumes and I hope our legislators are catching these shenanigans! |
|
12-23-2005, 09:44 AM | #103 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: NH
Posts: 2,689
Thanks: 33
Thanked 439 Times in 249 Posts
|
Facts?
Quote:
|
|
12-23-2005, 10:03 AM | #104 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 225
Thanks: 41
Thanked 86 Times in 46 Posts
|
The posts were deleted because you take them and twist them to meet your own agenda.Safety is not the issue here,and you know it.You and your group do not like performance boats and will do what ever it takes to make them go away.You have gone to great lenghts to instill fear in the general public and even have the commitee backing an unneccessary law based on political agenda,not fact.If you look at the way they voted,you can tell it was political and not based on fact.
Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays to all. Paul |
12-23-2005, 10:12 AM | #105 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Weirs Beach
Posts: 1,959
Thanks: 80
Thanked 975 Times in 436 Posts
|
Regardless of if they were removed or not, they were viewed by many. I personally don't think that deleting the threads on accidents was a good idea. I also don't think one should sensationalize the accidents either. Look at the facts!
My point is, that of the thousands of Hi-performance boats in America, Over a period of 4 years, the original poster was able to compile a list of only 50 accidents, nationwide! 50 ACCIDENTS OVER 4 YEARS, NATIONWIDE! That's it 50! 12.5 accidents per year! Most of the 50 accidents compiled were the result of driver error of some extent or BWI! To be sure speed was a factor in some of the accidents, but not all. Accidents will happen if a human being is operating the piece of equipment, its a statistical fact. Nothing, no amount of laws, training or education will eliminate accidents completely. However, as the number of registered boats has increased here in NH and nationwide, the number of accidents has DECREASED. Explain that? Lake Winnipesaukee has had less accidents this year? Explain that? Woodsy |
Sponsored Links |
|
12-23-2005, 10:44 AM | #106 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 95
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
I agree with Woodsy, I wish they wouldn't remove them.
Quote:
"I heard that the RR&D committee said they will not pay any attention to online petitions because they are "too easy to fix" and non-residents can "too easily forge them". But at least the one that WinnFABS started at http://www.ipetitions.com/campaigns/HB162 will not get any respect either. A friend of mine was at that Winnfabs meeting yesterday and said they already have over 6000 signatures on their petition, signed in ink by legitimate NH residents. So this might be a waste of time. I'm jut going to wait and see what happens and go to Lake Champlain if the bill passes." And when a thread that was discussing on how to oppose House Bill 162, his post was: "Count me in. Let me know how I can help." Look honestly, removing posts was not a good approach, especially since that data can be found publicly in other ways. I say keep them, since when you look at each issue/accident, the information will detail what really happened. But I will quote Bear Lover here to illustrate not everyone is like that: "This summer I spoke to several performance boaters at the hearings and found them to be responsible and considerate." |
|
12-23-2005, 11:05 AM | #107 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,761
Thanks: 32
Thanked 440 Times in 207 Posts
|
Quote:
I think I can "Explain That" The decrease in accidents on Winnipesaukee can be attributed to.... Boater Safety Certification law still being phased in Bear Island NWZ law from the 90's Meredith NWZ law recently enacted Several recent laws regarding PWCs and where they can be operated Increased enforcement of the laws by the MP See, these laws do work! And just think how much more the accident rate will drop when the Eagle Island NWZ and HB162 take effect! To be fair there are other factors also involved like better equipment, increased public awareness and a few more I'm sure you can think of. |
|
12-23-2005, 11:51 AM | #108 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 96
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Woodsy and Winnilaker
It's easy to post here and say the threads should not have been deleted. Why don't you post that on OSO? |
12-23-2005, 12:37 PM | #109 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 95
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
I just tried to follow the link above to do just that, but apparently even that link got removed. I don't frequent that site that much, I will try and keep an eye open for new ones to let those folks know not too. You can search on my name over there, my position is , attacking users, does not help anyone, especially since proponent folks keep a close eye on them.
Would you like me to post a new thread there? Will that really make a difference to everyone? |
12-23-2005, 01:02 PM | #110 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 183
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
12-23-2005, 01:03 PM | #111 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 96
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
For me the problem is when opponents say one thing here, then I go to OSO and read something totally different, and in many cases insulting. I'm not taking about you.
I can assure that what is said here by proponents, is identical to what is said at proponent meetings. |
12-23-2005, 01:20 PM | #112 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 183
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Quote:
Quote:
http://www.offshoreonly.com/forums/s...2&postcount=82 Quote:
I also recall that you've been influential with that webmaster in the past in having posts removed and "lurkers" ejected, how about asking him to repost all of the stuff that was deleted? Walk the walk. Last edited by Fat Jack; 12-24-2005 at 12:27 PM. |
|||
12-23-2005, 01:25 PM | #113 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,980
Thanks: 246
Thanked 739 Times in 440 Posts
|
Quote:
I'd love to see some good data that shows what a great idea the speed limit is. I could be easily convinced that it's a good idea with simple facts. Please post some facts. By "facts", I don't mean "so and so deleted 50 anti-speed limit posts on OSO". I really don't think anyone with much intelligence thinks this sort of debate matters at all. |
|
12-23-2005, 01:42 PM | #114 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 183
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Quote:
If you guys were half as sincere as me, then you'd have bowed out as soon as the ARG poll published. So please don't challenge my sincerity. |
|
12-23-2005, 02:04 PM | #115 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 96
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Fact - NH has enacted several boating safety laws and rules in recent years
Fact - The number of boating accidents is going down Opinion - These laws are working, we need more Fact - We have had a speed related fatality on Winni Fact - According to a poll 68% of voters want a speed limit Opinion - The poll is valid, voters should get their limit Fact - Members of the opposition are hiding and deleting accident information Fact - Most experts say HB162 is good for tourism and the economy Opinion - HB162 is necessary, even vital |
12-23-2005, 02:18 PM | #116 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Gilmanton, NH
Posts: 754
Thanks: 136
Thanked 92 Times in 51 Posts
|
Code:
Opinion - These laws are working, we need more |
12-23-2005, 02:25 PM | #117 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Laconia NH
Posts: 5,547
Thanks: 3,159
Thanked 1,094 Times in 788 Posts
|
Quote:
I just attended a Christmas Party in Seabrook, and told about 20 or so fishermen about it. They are fuming because they were not aware that this law will effect them. They will be calling their state representatives. The HB162 folks have completely left them out when the had their hearings in The Lakes Region. HB162 have sent them a very Merry Christmas.
__________________
Someday may never be an actual day. |
|
12-23-2005, 04:42 PM | #118 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,980
Thanks: 246
Thanked 739 Times in 440 Posts
|
Quote:
Granted, it's not a full 68%, but Richard Nixon got around 61% of the popular vote in 1972. Bill Clinton, the only other impeached president in recent history, got a smidge more than 68% of the vote in 1992. I have little faith in the ability of most voters to make a good choice... That said, I'm not a fan of making laws based on opinion, be it popular or not. I think facts are far better. Not that it would convince me either way, but can anyone share the credentials of the "experts" that claim HB162 would be good for tourism and the economy? Not trying to be a jerk, I am truly curious. Maybe it would sway someone your way. |
|
12-23-2005, 06:21 PM | #119 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,943
Thanks: 23
Thanked 111 Times in 51 Posts
|
Not so fast
Quote:
__________________
Mee'n'Mac "Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by simple stupidity or ignorance. The latter are a lot more common than the former." - RAH |
|
12-23-2005, 06:49 PM | #120 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Pitman , NJ
Posts: 627
Thanks: 40
Thanked 21 Times in 12 Posts
|
Quote:
And if the 25 mph speed limit had been in effect , the police would've had him cuffed , booked and jailed before the accident ever happened , for an ESTIMATED speed of 28mph
__________________
Paddle faster , I think I here banjos |
|
12-23-2005, 07:26 PM | #121 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,943
Thanks: 23
Thanked 111 Times in 51 Posts
|
Speed that night
Quote:
ps - IMO This whole discussion is on the verge of going into soap opera land. There's far too much of they did this/them did that and not enough of what facts are pro or con HB-162. I do understand how emotional the topic is and how easy it is to "retaliate" when you think you've been "attacked". Certainly there is a wider aspect to HB-162 than mere speed and danger. Still I do hope that both pro and anti people can at least try to keep things more about what the ostensible purpose of HB-162 is. I for one am not interested in personalites or hidden motivations even though I'm well aware they exist.
__________________
Mee'n'Mac "Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by simple stupidity or ignorance. The latter are a lot more common than the former." - RAH |
|
12-23-2005, 07:57 PM | #122 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Pitman , NJ
Posts: 627
Thanks: 40
Thanked 21 Times in 12 Posts
|
Quote:
Uninvolved bystanders are easiey swayed after hearing horrors storys of how the race around and terrorize other boaters on the lake...so of course like obedient sheep the go along with the crowd for safety sake. That is a very easy point to get acrossed
__________________
Paddle faster , I think I here banjos |
|
12-24-2005, 12:31 AM | #123 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 96
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Quote:
Don't forget that the citizens of NH own the lake. |
|
12-24-2005, 08:21 AM | #124 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 295
Thanks: 74
Thanked 52 Times in 25 Posts
|
Bear Lover is Correct.......Again
Of course the majority of the people get it. Slower is safer. Period. There is not logical argument to counter that. The majority get it. The special interests that care only for their “right” to do whatever they want are not concerned about anybody getting in the way of their fun even when it impacts everyone else’s ability to enjoy the lake.
And can you folks who keep on using the state motto of “Live Free of Die” give it a rest. I do not think Stark intended it to be use in the defense of GFBL crowd. The words "Live Free or Die", written by General John Stark, July 31, 1809, shall be the official motto of the state of New Hampshire. It was the 1945 Legislature that gave New Hampshire its official motto and emblem, as World War II approached a successful end. The motto became "Live Free Or Die," as once voiced by General John Stark, the state's most distinguished hero of the Revolutionary War, and the world famous Old Man of the Mountain was voted the official state emblem. The motto was part of a volunteer toast which General Stark sent to his wartime comrades, in which he declined an invitation to head up a 32nd anniversary reunion of the 1777 Battle of Bennington in Vermont, because of poor health. The toast said in full: "Live Free Or Die; Death Is Not The Worst of Evils." The following year, a similar invitation (also declined) said: "The toast, sir, which you sent us in 1809 will continue to vibrate with unceasing pleasure in our ears, "Live Free Or Die; Death Is Not The Worst Of Evils." -The New Hampshire Almanac |
12-24-2005, 08:37 AM | #125 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 95
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Quote:
How many people were involved with that survey? Where was the survey done? Who paid for the survey? Were they boaters? Were they from the lakes region? Did the survey specify the arbitrary limits or just a speed? How come anybody who opposes HB162 never seem to have remembered being part of this survey? Let's not forget all these NH citizens that oppose it: http://www.opposehb162.com/opposehb162/testimonials.htm real people, real names, real passion to do what's right! |
|
12-24-2005, 10:56 AM | #126 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,980
Thanks: 246
Thanked 739 Times in 440 Posts
|
Quote:
I routinely exceed 500 MPH, have covered more than a million miles at that speed over the years, and am still very much alive. If slower is so obviously safer, why not have a speed limit in the air? |
|
12-24-2005, 11:24 AM | #127 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Pitman , NJ
Posts: 627
Thanks: 40
Thanked 21 Times in 12 Posts
|
Quote:
What would you bet it's somebody who's boat will do...........oh lets say.......... ahh.......mmmmmmm........43mph. Wanna bet? And they figure that's as fast as anyone has to go
__________________
Paddle faster , I think I here banjos |
|
12-24-2005, 11:33 AM | #128 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,761
Thanks: 32
Thanked 440 Times in 207 Posts
|
Quote:
The speed limits for aircraft are dependent on altitude, distance from an airport and if you are in a terminal control area. You must also comply with any speed given you by air traffic control. There is also an FAA overall speed limit of 758 MPH over land. The military can exceed this if necessary. These speeds limits are higher than with boats. But remember that at 45 MPH most planes will drop out of the air like a toolbox. |
|
12-24-2005, 04:12 PM | #129 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,943
Thanks: 23
Thanked 111 Times in 51 Posts
|
45/25 and not ?
Quote:
__________________
Mee'n'Mac "Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by simple stupidity or ignorance. The latter are a lot more common than the former." - RAH Last edited by Mee-n-Mac; 12-24-2005 at 07:34 PM. |
|
12-24-2005, 07:44 PM | #130 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 96
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
There were many people, myself included, that believed 45 was to low and wanted something higher. But the opposition was into a "no limits" and "live free or die" thing and wouldn't even talk about it.
I remember somebody asking about 70 MPH and they were told NO!! Not 70 not 100 not 200. A large number of HB162 supporters would have been just as happy or even happier with 60. Now HB162 is a shoe in that might not even be voted on. So now people want to talk about a higher more reasonable limit. I am honestly sorry about that, but I think it's to late. |
12-24-2005, 10:12 PM | #131 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Pitman , NJ
Posts: 627
Thanks: 40
Thanked 21 Times in 12 Posts
|
Quote:
I could even go for 60 mph , even though mid 80s are attainable. Over 55/60 mph GPH start climbing drastically , not to mention down time and the cost replacement parts . My present engines have about 90 hours on them and probably less than 2 hours over 60 and less than 1/2 hour at WOT. I'm not one who drives it like I stole it In any case , lets have a truce for tomorrow (Christmas) and give it He!! again on Monday Merry Christmas mein friend
__________________
Paddle faster , I think I here banjos |
|
12-24-2005, 11:28 PM | #132 |
Junior Member
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 17
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
I support HB162 but think 45 is not the right number. I would like a higher limit, but it never got off the ground.
None of the supporters thought 45 was to high. Some though it was OK, others wanted it a little higher. 6 months ago a compromise could have happened. The big surprise is where are the PWC crowd. This thing became about high performance boaters. Seems to me more PWCs will be effected than GFBLs. And the limit will also effect PWC rentals, yet some marinas that rent them, like y landing, support the limit. Surprising. |
12-25-2005, 11:11 AM | #133 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 40
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
I feel that if hb162 passes the lake will probably become a more dangerous place to boat. With a mostly seasonal staff of marine patrol officers, and a limited one at that, it seems to me that the focus should be on very high traffic areas of the lake where speed is usually not an issue anyway. Dont you think that having more marine patrol boats say aroung Eagle/ Governors Islands or Bear Island would make the lake safer instead of having them chase down go fast boats in the broads? The costs associated with enforcing a new law such as this would be better spent adding to the staffing level and enforcing the most common causes of accidents. What are proponents of the law going to say when there are no MP boats in those areas because they are chasing me across the broads to write me a ticket for doing sixty and then again when the officers are in court with me because I decide to fight the ticket?How is this going to make the lake safer? If safety is really the answer then address the real cause and put your efforts to greatly expanding the Marine Patrol so that we can all have a safer lake. Perhaps if both sides of this issue met and came up with proposals to increase the MP budget we might all benefit from increased safety on the lake. Think what a joint venture between both sides might accomplish. Or is safety not the real issue here?
|
12-25-2005, 01:17 PM | #134 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Concord NH
Posts: 681
Thanks: 97
Thanked 48 Times in 39 Posts
|
Is safety the issue here?
Quote:
__________________
dont worry be happy |
|
12-27-2005, 08:27 AM | #135 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: The Bay State
Posts: 119
Thanks: 8
Thanked 11 Times in 4 Posts
|
Nude Beaches may help with Speed problems
Instead of legislating speed limits maybe we should legalize public nude or clothing optional areas and beaches around the lake.
If there were a few of those around the area I would expect that Go Fast Be Loud boaters would be slowing down all on their own. Probably down to headway due to the volume of boats in the area. Legislate freedoms not restrictions. Say yes to relaxing nude and no to speed limits.
__________________
|
Bookmarks |
|
|