House panel weighs 'Blizzard' boating bill

[Jonas Pilot]

CONCORD - House lawmakers weighed a bill Tuesday that would extend penalties for driving a boat recklessly to the driver's motor vehicle privileges.

The House Transportation Committee is reviewing Senate Bill 285, which would allow for the suspension or revocation of a driver's license for serious boating offenses, including for operating recklessly or while intoxicated.

The bill, which has been passed by the Senate, was prompted by the arrest of Erica Blizzard for reckless driving a day after she was convicted of negligent homicide in April 2010. In a high-profile case, Blizzard was accused of killing a close friend, Stephanie Beaudoin, while piloting a boat at night on Lake Winnipesaukee on June 15, 2008.

Blizzard was convicted of negligent homicide and spent six months in jail. After her conviction, the Department of Safety held a hearing and stripped Blizzard of her privilege to pilot a boat for three years starting that May.

While Blizzard's boating license had been suspended, current law prevented the sentence from being applied to her driver's license.

“There was a public outcry over this type of behavior and a desire for it to be avoided in the future,” Lt. Tim Dunleavy of the state Marine Patrol told the panel. “As a result, we have this legislation before you today.”

The bill, sponsored by Sen. Jeanie Forrester, R-Meredith, would allow judges to suspend or revoke a driver's license for serious boating offenses, and it would allow for suspension of a driver's license for the duration of a boating license suspension.

The committee is expected to vote on the bill this week.

Earlier this month, the state Supreme Court upheld Blizzard's suspension after she filed a challenge.

http://www.unionleader.com/article/2...WS06/703279937

[lawn psycho]

Although I understand the "intent" of the law, I don't agree with it's application. The article does not show the specific legislation but I have severe reservations given how some of these reserve officers are borderline summer campers.

The list of offenses that would apply to suspending a license had best be extreme. Someone operating a jet ski on a lake too fast and a Officer Weekend Warrior deciding to say reckless operation should not result in someone losing their car diving privileges IMO.

BUI I agree with to suspend a drivers license but this legislation should be narrow and not just a horribly written dragnet to essentially double-dip. That NHMP is proposing the legislation makes it seem like a power grab given that the Blizzard "education certificate" revocation was upheld.

[secondcurve]

Certainly makes sense to me. They should also extend the law to snowmobiles and ATVs.

[fatlazyless]

Boating and car driving are two totally seperate items. One is a boat and the other is a car; one floats and the other rolls, one has brakes and the other one don't.

Drinking an adult beverage like a 16-oz can of Pabst Blue Ribbon, held below the gunnel of your rickety old 14' aluminum utility while you bounce along on a summer late evening, watching the sky turn from pink to black, and head back, is just such a long time Winnipesaukee tradition that it makes no sense what-so-ever to go and create this new hardship for boaters who enjoy an occaisional adult beverage!

So.........Bottoms up, and three sheets to the wind, which is sailboat talk in case you did not know! If you want to have a beer......then it's definately better to mix beer with boat'n, then to mix beer with car-driving......just because boats will float while a car will not float!

Just remember this; you need to keep one hand on the tiller handle, and the other hand on the beer, and just let the boat find its own way back........no worries......it works every time!

[NoRegrets]

This is a topic that gets my blood to boil. The actions of a few create punishment for all! Create stricter punishment for offenders but do not expand the reach of current laws for individual events like the "Blizzard" case.

[Belmont Resident]

Originally Posted by NoRegrets

This is a topic that gets my blood to boil. The actions of a few create punishment for all! Create stricter punishment for offenders but do not expand the reach of current laws for individual events like the "Blizzard" case.

People who get drunk and become irresponsible do so no matter what they are driving.
You cannot tell me a person is just going to go out and tie one on out on the lake then be a perfect angle when on land. Fist of all how do they get home from their boat?
Yes some will argue they could be staying at the marina but most are not.
I believe it is time for a change and all these infractions should be tied together and follow the person to whatever state they live in.
Someone who drinks and drives recklessly or just plain drives recklessly doesn’t stop at the high water mark of a lake.
I for one hope this bill goes through.
It would make it safer for the rest of us on snowmobiles, ATV's and driving down the road if we get those who think they can drive recklessly off the road, or trails.

[Phantom]

If I am not mistaken ..... That is ALREADY in affect in Mass.

Although we do not have "Boating Lisences" in Mass ... a DUI offense on water can be applied to the persons Drivers Liscense.

Don't ask me the details, I just foggily remember it going into effect a few years ago.... I reallly don't pay much attention to Mass Law as 90% of my boating is on the Big Lake.

[upthesaukee]

Originally Posted by Belmont Resident

People who get drunk and become irresponsible do so no matter what they are driving.
You cannot tell me a person is just going to go out and tie one on out on the lake then be a perfect angle when on land. Fist of all how do they get home from their boat?
Yes some will argue they could be staying at the marina but most are not.
I believe it is time for a change and all these infractions should be tied together and follow the person to whatever state they live in.
Someone who drinks and drives recklessly or just plain drives recklessly doesn’t stop at the high water mark of a lake.
I for one hope this bill goes through.
It would make it safer for the rest of us on snowmobiles, ATV's and driving down the road if we get those who think they can drive recklessly off the road, or trails.

I truly believe that a large chunk of those boaters we see at the sandbars and rafting areas that are pounding down the drinks do in fact go to a marina or back to their cabin, cottage, condo, McMansion, etc.. Some do park at the marina and then drive home and they of course are a double threat.
I enjoy a drink as well as the next guy, but when I am out on the water, I may have one, maximum of two all day. Mostly it is water or soda (yeah, boring, I know!) because I care about the people on my boat and their safe return to the dock.
The drinking that goes on at West Alton or Braun Bay is enough to keep me away on the weekends, it is go early and leave early during the week.
But I must also agree with you that if this is their behavior on the water, what are they like on land in an auto. I too hope the bill passes.

[Belmont Resident]

Originally Posted by upthesaukee

I truly believe that a large chunk of those boaters we see at the sandbars and rafting areas that are pounding down the drinks do in fact go to a marina or back to their cabin, cottage, condo, McMansion, etc.. Some do park at the marina and then drive home and they of course are a double threat.
I enjoy a drink as well as the next guy, but when I am out on the water, I may have one, maximum of two all day. Mostly it is water or soda (yeah, boring, I know!) because I care about the people on my boat and their safe return to the dock.
The drinking that goes on at West Alton or Braun Bay is enough to keep me away on the weekends, it is go early and leave early during the week.
But I must also agree with you that if this is their behavior on the water, what are they like on land in an auto. I too hope the bill passes.

I do not disagree with being allowed to drink on the water at all. Hell I'll be the first to crack a beer open. But, I have also learned over the years that it just is not worth the aggravation to be caught or even suspected of being DUI.
From my understanding the bill is aimed at those who are caught driving recklessly which for some is the result of drinking excessively.
It would place the same restrictions on them as a DWI does, meaning you can not drive anything motorized.
Question? Is it the drinking that keeps you away or the ass that some people make of themselves when they drink that keeps you away? I also used to hang at the W. Alton sandbar and some of the things I saw happening there would have made for a great r rated reality show.
I just outgrew the whole drive to the sand bar every weekend and drink with the same people every single weekend. Yes it was a blast but eventually it got old and boring.

[crowsnest]

I guess if you dont have a drivers license you have nothing to lose
so i dont think it is fair. I do not touch an ounce of alcohol and drive on the road. You should be ever to have a couple of cold drinks while enjoying a ride on the lake the problem is some people dont no when their limit is and they
ruin it for the responsable drinkers If i want to let loose I have my son or wife take the helm back to the dock. we are lucky enough to be able to walk back to camp

[upthesaukee]

It is really a combination of a bunch of things. Lack of respect for others including excessive noise, the drinking, running their boats over your anchor lines...just a real combination of things. We may stop by if we have little grandkids, but only for a litlle while.

And you are correct, not worth loosing a license over. I can sit on my back porch and look over our stream, watch the birds and other wildlife and not have to worry about driving.

Be well, BR...now back to the thread at hand. Pass the law.

[NoRegrets]

All good points but I respectfully hope the bill fails to pass. Writing a law, on a law, that pertains to a previous law will result in unexpected results that create more harm than good to people that have a simple or first accident. Chronic offenders will never pay a big enough price or penalty to victims or society nor will any law control their harmful activity.

Based on many posts it looks like "booze" is the problem so let's go back to prohibition to insure we all will be safe and secure in a bland world. It was first a speed problem that “we” addressed. I am saddened to think that we now need to continue to legislate everything out of our lives until we achieve nirvana. (just joking about the booze and prohibition!!!!)

Address the problem when it occurs and use a “three strikes and you are out” approach. This suggested approach could end up with more and more conditional laws that never address the initial problem. It will generate a revenue stream for trial lawyers and make policy makers “feel good” about their political career by protecting society with paper.

We all make choices and need to "man up" to the consequences of our actions. The legal system has allowed those with power (money is power) take advantage of and even mock societies punishment. This is one fallacy of yet one more law.

Now we are calling for harsher punitive punishment that crosses into multiple aspects of life. Throughout time man has been very creative at developing punishment. Why not forbid someone from purchasing or using gasoline once convicted of a boating, auto, snow mobile, or RV crime? We can install a RF chip under their skin that disables all gas or electric engines. All we would need to do is have all manufacturers build in a "kill" operation on all devices. Some states already force the installation of “blow devices” to detect alcohol DWI /DUI offenders’ automobiles.

Looking forward to another safe boating sesson on the big lake!!!!

[Belmont Resident]

I’m not sure why you are stuck on the alcohol part of the thread.
In New Hampshire if you are convicted of DWI or OUI you loose you privilege to drive any motorized vehicle. But there is many times where an offender cannot be proven to be under the influence either due to improper handling or a case or just the timeline by which a test is performed, or due to a fancy lawyer who uses all the loopholes available to them.
I believe what they are trying to do is have a tool that allows them to revoke someone’s right to drive when they cannot prove they were impaired but that person used terrible judgment in operating a vehicle, boat etc. that may have come close to or did cause harm to others.
So in the Blizzard case it could have allowed them to use this law to revoke the right to drive for using very poor judgment in being out on the lake that night in a boat not equipped to operate safely in the conditions that were present when the accident occurred.
Same law could have been applied years earlier with the Littlefield case.
Not saying that Blizzard or Littlefield did or did not, just using them as an example.
Honestly a law like this makes a lot more sense then the speed limit one did.

[pawnshop]

I respectfully disagree with this law. I cannot see how it is practical to yank ones license to drive a car if they have been convicted of DUI on the lake? They are two seperate licenses. I don't agree at all that it is okay to drink and drive irresponsibly, but I cannot see the logic in this. If someone is intoxicated boating or driving a car, absolutely yank their license! But, to yank both for a violation on one...kinda silly in my opinion. What I think would be more effective is to automatically suspend ones license for about ten years on their first offense. Might see a lot less drunk driving.

[AC2717]

I agree with PawnShop
While I do not condone such a act, I think they are two different animals.
The main reason for for my point, is that Boating is a recreational activity (on lakes and while not on the clock obviously) where driving is not unless it is off roading or something to that affect.
There should be set laws and consquences for BWI but do not agree that one should effect the other


And then the always stand out point, those that do, even though they do not have a license they are going to drive or boat anyways, you see it all time on the road. Ho wmany tiems in the news do you see those getting in trouble even though they already have a suspended license

open to discussion

[Dave R]

I hope it does not pass. It's as arbitrary as revoking a hunting license or an electrician's license for a reckless operation of a car conviction.

[bigpatsfan]

Boating and driving a car are separate functions and have separate laws and it needs to stay this way.

For example having an open container on a boat is not a violation of boating laws… if we continue down this slippery slope having an open container on a boat will be illegal like is if for a car. Note that this is already the case in other States.

This means that if your passenger wants to have a glass of wine while sitting on your boat… poof you can be arrested and your boating and car license will be revoked.

You travel to close to another boat (safe passage violation) do you really want to lose your driving license or pay extra for your car insurance??

Basically this is a revenue grab …

[NoRegrets]

Originally Posted by Belmont Resident

I’m not sure why you are stuck on the alcohol part of the thread.
In New Hampshire if you are convicted of DWI or OUI you loose you privilege to drive any motorized vehicle. But there is many times where an offender cannot be proven to be under the influence either due to improper handling or a case or just the timeline by which a test is performed, or due to a fancy lawyer who uses all the loopholes available to them.
I believe what they are trying to do is have a tool that allows them to revoke someone’s right to drive when they cannot prove they were impaired but that person used terrible judgment in operating a vehicle, boat etc. that may have come close to or did cause harm to others.
So in the Blizzard case it could have allowed them to use this law to revoke the right to drive for using very poor judgment in being out on the lake that night in a boat not equipped to operate safely in the conditions that were present when the accident occurred.
Same law could have been applied years earlier with the Littlefield case.
Not saying that Blizzard or Littlefield did or did not, just using them as an example.
Honestly a law like this makes a lot more sense then the speed limit one did.

I included the booze issue as the initial post talked about reckless or intoxicated. Other posts also talked to the drinking and OUI is always a problem. I crafted my ideas based on the posts. I maintain a well stocked boat and marina spot but have never been stranded without a competent designated captain.

You make a good point about the potential use of this new law. My counter arguement is that if the court doesn't currently apply punishment firmly or consistantly it is improbable they will do any better with this new proposed law. My point is: Let's address what we feel is wrong with the current law (lack of punishment or got off easy or completely). The idea this is labeled a "Blizzard" issue seems like a knee jerk reaction and we are once again wasting time writing a law around common sense. Crank up the punisment if necessary but we already have too many laws and I do not believe this will change behavior.

If someone has a momentary lapse in judgement and a real "accident" on a trail or lake they could loose their means of transportation to and from work in a car.

Some of our courts have been either constrained by budget, politics, procedure, or backbone to convince me that they can connect the crime to a punishment. They wheels of justice need some alignment and placing more laws out there will only add more complexity that turn into legal loop holes.

B.R. -I enjoy your postings and hope to see you guys out on the lake.

[lawn psycho]

Originally Posted by upthesaukee

It is really a combination of a bunch of things. Lack of respect for others including excessive noise, the drinking, running their boats over your anchor lines...just a real combination of things. We may stop by if we have little grandkids, but only for a litlle while.

And you are correct, not worth loosing a license over. I can sit on my back porch and look over our stream, watch the birds and other wildlife and not have to worry about driving.

Be well, BR...now back to the thread at hand. Pass the law.

I disagree with your generalizations of the sandbars. Noise? Maybe once or twice a year would we encounter a radio too loud. As for drinking, your portrayal of the sandbars makes it seem like excessive drinking is the norm. Spending much more time in West Alton than in Braun Bay, it's just not true. It is mostly families out there sunbathing.

As far anchor lines, that's a two fold situation as some people use anchor lines that are way longer than needed as well. Strategic planning can help in this situation

I get tired of people ragging on the sandbars as it's a convenient target. If just one of the boats moved and set anchor in from of a camp instead, someone would complain then too.

And the NHMP stats don't line up with perceived issues at the sandbars either.

[BroadHopper]

Thru the years I've seen sandbar crowds on Winnipesaukee come and go. Some years are rowdy and some years are quiet. It is the nature of the beast. Winnipesaukee sandbars are over regulated and overpatrolled. That is probably why they are not self regulated.

The Winnisquam sandbar is the opposite, very little police presence. Rafting is prevalient and very little trouble to be had. The Winnisquam folks do a great job regulating themselves.

I find the same self regulation in my travels to other lakes and rivers in NH, including the Great Bay. It looks like we took it upon ourselves to be a police lake?

[Phantom]

Let's face it --

Like anything else, it always boils down to ......"a Few (bad apples) making a bad name for the Majority" and if I have learned one thing over the years about the Lake --- "wait a few years and it will change"

We too frequent the Sandbars and typically enjoy them.

Most are "Family" oriented and it is "boater neighborly" to mingle and meet new aquaintances. I truly enjoy it !

However, over the past few years with increased regulations (particulary on Braun Bay) I do admit that our favorite spot (not W Alton) gets overrun with a Party Crowd group (or Groups). This same group of boats week after week have no regard for Boater ettique when anchoring ... booms out their onboard stereo's ... and then commences Water Drinking Games (Frisbee Golf, football, volleyball etc) and then the "Language" begins to fly !! Let's be clear here -- These are NOT all GFBL's, in fact the majority are Cruisers

As we typically have our two (very young) Grandchildren aboard, we simply pull anchor and move to a more remote spot ---- Yes, they still exist where only 2-4 boats can fit.

Point is -- the damage was done years ago when the "No Rafting" rules went into effect on some of these spots ... forcing more boats into fewer legitimate areas