Speed Limit test zones dead in the water!
 

There will be no test speed zones on Winni this year and we are now back to the statewide speed limit proposal.

Read all about it HERE in today's on-line edition of the Citizen!

Website to Oppose
 

Here is the link to submit your opposition to this ridiculous bill

http://www.opposehb847.com/

All should get involved!

Moving the Hazard
 

As a practical matter, all that the southernmost speed zone did was to move the hazard from one side of Rattlesnake Island to the other. The Broads side of the island devolved into "the passing lane".

Just visiting my MD-friend's place on Rattlesnake became even more a hit-and-miss proposal: just to wave "Hi" meant running the gauntlet twice.

As most in law enforcement will tell you, "You don't fix crime with enforcement, you just move it".

Barrett loses another round in his attempt to scuttle speed limits with an 8 year "Pilot Program".

I hope this doesn't effect any of those big money jobs in the boating industry he has been preparing for.

what are you even talking about?

Were they (winfabs) afraid the facts would get in the way of their agenda? certainly seems so after reading the article.

Facts don’t matter …
 

… because this is not a rational discussion. Interestingly enough I do not believe that it is based on fear either, although “terrified” and “anguished” people make for good theater during hearings. The push for speed limits is fueled by anger and the desire for revenge over the death of one of their friends. There is no reasoning or discussion with such single minded anger. A large speedboat was responsible for the death of their friend so these boats must be removed from the lake. Since it would probably be impossible to ban a specific boat type the next best thing would be to pass a speed limit that would limit the enjoyable use of such boats and make them “persona non grata” on the lake.

The only thing that facts could do in this case might be to slow up the progress toward a speed limit. It is no surprise that the pro speed limit organizations don’t want to be bothered with inconvenient facts that would impede their agenda.

I'm not sure responding to the "we need speed" crowd is worth the trouble anymore. Just read the latest on the fatal Maine boat disaster. How many politicians are going to read that and vote against speed limits.

This bill is a done deal. Even the leaders of the opposition know that now. And Barrett acknowledged it in the article.

"I still believe a statute is going to pass," said Barrett.

Its not we need speed crowd. Heck, my boat won't even hit 40. It's the personal responsibility, personal freedom, smaller government, etc. crowd. We're becoming a society where the government is taking more and more responsibility for our choices. Remember 1984? Once we go down that slope there's no coming back. I think you've been missing that message all along. Anyway, I'm done with this.

Did you even read 1984?

You equate a speed limit to 1984? Get a clue!

Unfortunately, the reason that we need laws (like a lake speed limit law), is that too many members of our society put their own freedoms above the freedom of others. There are just way too many self-centered people who feel that they have the "right" to do whatever they enjoy doing - reguardless on how it affects others.

I'm not saying that everyone (with a fast boat) feels that way, but I do believe that there are enough of them to justify a NH lake speed limit law - to protect the rights of others (especially those in smaller, slower boats) to safely use the same lakes. Otherwise those with the most horsepower win - they get to keep their freedom, while the rest of us lose some of our freedom.

I said I was done, but personal insults tend to require a response. YES I read it. 1984 posits a world where the government is totalitarian in word and deed. According to the government, this life must be endured for the collective good. If you can't see the parallel with losing personal freedom and personal responsibility, then I give up. Like I said I'm done. I hope you archive your utopia it's clearly different than mine.

So you don't think 1984 applies, how about if I paraphase 1934?

First they came for the fast boaters, and I did not speak out -
because I was not a fast boater.
Then they came for the rafters, and I did not speak out -
because I was not a rafter.
Then they came for the yachters, and I did not speak out -
because I was not a yachter.
Then they came for me - and there was no one left to speak for me.

Here's the article on WMUR's website.A lot of reteric from the pro speed limit groups but no opposing viewpoints.It's certainly not because everyones in favor.Hmmm.
http://www.wmur.com/news/13915326/detail.html

very well said.

The lack of response is not because there is no opposition.

It's because the opposition knows its all over.




Explain please why speed limits on lakes will bring about 1984, but speed limits on roads are ok? Or are you against them as well?

That's not how I see it.Most fair media will show both sides of a hotly debated story.

What's the issue?
 

I don't have a dog in this fight, but it seems to me that if part of the objection to the pilot was the 8-year duration, change it to a one-year pilot, get the information and make an informed decision. Common sense?

My honest opinion is that speed limit or no, it's not going to change anything of significance on the water: I think most boats out there are doing less than 45 MPH, 45+ MPH on a weekend is typically hard to do comfortably with the boat density and associated chop, and then if you even have some boats doing 45+, what's the likelihood of an enforcement officer being in the right place all the time to stop it? My read of MP's data collection to date seems to support the idea that few boats are in excess of 45. And if the even smaller population of night-time boaters is comfortable going over 25, have at it!

What are we really debating here? I just don't see this making any difference if it passes or not. I'm now on the sidelines with Paugus Bay Resident on this one ;)

We are debating the future of the lake. It will make a huge difference!

Its not really about how fast a given boat goes. It IS about the direction the lake community is taking. I don't care if they hand out a lot of tickets or not.

When the speed limit passes the lake will take a step back from the more speed, more horsepower, more noise direction we are in now.

Most of the high speed boats will go somewhere else. I'll say that again so it can sink in. THEY WILL GO SOMEWHERE ELSE!!!!

The lake will never go back to "Golden Pond". But it is a big step in that direction.

Ever since the speed limit debate began we have been told by the opposition that if it passes the lakes area will be economically devastated.

They claim that millions in high speed boat sales, service, hotel and restaurant revenues will be lost. Many people testified to this at the hearings two years ago.

Now we are supposed to believe that nothing will be changed by a speed limit! The old argument was not working so they will try a new one.

Boats that have moved another body of water can not be breaking the speed limit on Lake Winnipesaukee. That makes a speed limit self enforcing. They will not be speeding, because they will not be here!

And the lake will be a little quieter, less hectic and less polluted.

Seeing as how speed limits on roads don't prevent people from driving at whatever speed they deem reasonable, what makes you think it will be any better on a lake? Where the officer to driver ratio is lower, and then travel lanes are less predictable, and it's harder to setup a speed trap?

A speed limit on the lake will only become a revenue stream to whomever ends up enforcing it.

As for the speedboats going someplace else, I also doubt that. There are really no other nearby inland lakes large enough to make their use fun, and a lot of their owners seem to have a vested interest in Winnipesaukee (slips, condos, homes, etc).

True enforcement may also become a bit of an issue, as speedometers are not a given on boats like they are on cars, so there will be a lot of "warnings" written. The sending units for many speedo's on boats are easily fouled, resulting in inaccurate readings.

Enforcement of existing rules (150', etc) would probably provide more of a reduction in annoyance than yet another law. If current laws aren't enforced well, what is so special about a speed limit law that makes people think it will have any realistic impact?

Islander you are insane!
 

Edit: I meant Island Lover in the title, But rereading it is appropriate for both parties!

The opposition is very much alive. Growing everyday, and its because of people like you and your ranting and raving. For that I thank you. Here's the deal folks for those of you that don't know.

Round 1 Winnfabs lost HB 162 in the Senate.

Round 2 Winnfabs invokes their right to petition the Commissioner.

Round 3 Starts because Winnfabs finds out Commissioner is not going to step on Legislatures toes, thus HB 847 is born. Round 3.1 is that the committee on HB 847 decides to table the bill until there is more data, that is supposed to come from the petition that WINNFABS brought to the commissioner.

Today round 3.2 WINNFABS finds out what their petition would have really meant, meaning the fact WE DO NOT NEED a speed limit, so what do they do. WINNFABS makes sure to scuttle THEIR OWN PETITION. Now for those faithful forum readers, it is obvious that they are not only out for the GFBLs as they call them, the recent thread on rafting shows that the same people want to get rid of the Big Obtrusive Cabin Cruisers....

In the end, they want, loons calling as they pass by in birch bark canoes.....

It is time that they are called out for what they are. Extremists, Winnfabs will win if the public believes their nonsense. I am here to tell you all, Stand up, be counted make the time to beat these people back! Come to the hearings, take the day off work if you have to. I have, many others have, if you don't we will all lose our ability to enjoy our lakes. Unless you have that birch bark canoe they all want to see.....

Its not the speed of a boat that is scary, its all the boats violating the 150 foot rule.

Noise is an issue on some boats and going 45 mph or less isn't gonna change that. Sorry.

Pollution is a result of the shear number of boats not the few that are going over 45 mph.

One member in particular from Bear island has stated in the past that their boat often exceeds 45 mph(even 60). I wonder if they are aware its causing alot of pollution while doing that scary excessive speed?

I just wish the MP would spend more time enforcing the 150' rule.

Who cares how fast a boat is going in the wide open spaces anyway? Geesh.

You are so right, Paugus, don't quit, we need people like you to speak for our rights. I get very frustrated getting in these kinds of discussions too. And JRC, I agree, very well said. And Local Realtor, I totally agree, it is the 150 rule which is NOT enforced. Evenstar is too young to realize that laws are made for those who don't need them. The others won't follow them anyway. My bitch is why do so many people get involved in this who don't live on or even near the lake. Why does someone who lives in say, Manchester and never comes here, care? Many of these surveys include these people who have no clue.

Hey! Lighten up. Islander is entitled to express an opinion here and we are all entitled to our opinion of that opinion. Leave the psycobable out of it. The insults too. :eek:

Yes the argument has changed from it will destroy the economy to it will not change a thing. If it will not change anything, then there is no reason not to give it a try.

If it doesn't work I will be in favor of a repeal.

Speed limits failed in the Senate by two votes. Those Senators have been replaced.

The petition was for a lakewide speed limit. Barrett decided that meant an 8 year test study in two small areas. Just a delay tactic.

The only thing it will change is limiting the rights of a specific type of boat that is capable of exceeding an arbitrary line in the sand.

If we want the lake to be a safer place, then we all should join together and ask the MP to step up enforcement of the 150' rule.

I also would like to ask: If a boat is going in excess of 45 mph and is no where near another boat, why is that unsafe?

Islander obviously feels that 60+ mph is safe, or they likely wouldn't be traveling on the lake at those speeds endangering us all, so to speak.

I have to disclose that Island Lover, Islander and Bear Islander all post from the exact same Metrocast IP number.

Thank you Webmaster for being forthcoming!
 

I will try and reel in my emotion and keep my posts civilized. But this is just the type of thing that fires me up. Obviously 1 person trying to look like 3 or more by using different screen names. That is a tactic the pro speed side has used from the beginning. Remember they are the ones telling us that there are thousands of speed limit supporters. Why do I always see the same half dozen at the hearings then???? Maybe the 6 are the thousands. After all perception is reality!

D-oh, a farce, just like the cause he/she is fighting for. Legislators, please pay attention and don't allow a one man band to dictate policy. Everything this person says is wrong and a sham.

Edit,

You know this type of dishonesty, and that is what it is, really ticks me off. This person should be ashamed of themself, like I said before, these people or should I say this person will resort to any DISHONEST tactic to gain what she wants. IL, Islander, BI, please don't go away mad, just go away.

The webmaster never said we were one person, just the same ip.

Didn't say you weren't either. Are you saying you're not one person?

Don't get the noose just yet :D :D

Although Islander and Island Lover are indistinguishable, Bear Islander has a different tone. I suspect husband and wife, with wife playing two roles. I could be wrong, maybe a third party is in the mix, a daughter perhaps.

Or maybe Bear Islander is a great actor. He has the willpower and stamina to get to the North Pole, he may stop at nothing to get this law passed.

Does it really matter that much? They all just parrot the WinnFabs talking points.

JRC, Good call, I too have thought Bear Islander and Islander were husband and wife. Ever see that Verizon commercial about another companies network when verizon compares themselves to the other network and all the cardboard people fall down? I guess Winfabs is the same type of organization with all those cardboard figures. :laugh:

In my post above I was asking them to come on the record and clear things up. They have the opportunity but seem to have decided to leave the dark cloud hanging over the whole charade. Big Surprise.

For those that haven't read it before, I'll say it again, my boat will barely go 50 mph, so speed limits really don't effect me. It's this style of getting things done that has got really got my hackle up.

I am just one person. The same ip only implies the same neighborhood. The webmaster however, by linking me with a member that has a public identity, seems to have violated his own TOS. If you can't discredit the message, discredit the messenger!

I hope and pray that the Legislators voting on this bill are taking into consideration MORE than 1, 2 or 3 people's opinions on a message board!! I'm confident that BOTH sides of the argument have many supporters..not just 1 or 2. On the flip side, still undecided on a speed limit. I have no problem with my boat as 45 is plenty fast for me and around 30 I'm usually screaming at my hubby or kiddos to slow down anyway...but...my jetski is a different thing altogether. Going 45 is fast but I've gone a lot faster at times while still obeying boating laws. Slowing down when I needed to wasn't a problem. It's also extremely difficult to NOT go over 45...I've tried to keep the throttle at 45 consisently and you just can't do it. Technically if there were a speed limit I could be stopped if I was clocked at 46....it's just a difficult thing to control.

Sorry, wrong again. that ip address is for a single cable modem (metrocast was mentioned). what the webmaster said was fact. you are signing in from the same cable modem; it is NOT the neighborhood. unless your whole neighborhood is sharing one cable modem (and this is probably ILLEGAL or certainly could be prosecuted by Metrocast should that be the case), the webmaster is indisputably correct.

Thank you for confirming, in a round about way, that an ip address can be shared by a neighborhood.

Now you can call Metrocast on Monday and turn us in.

Perhaps they're using a NAT?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_address_translator

I smell a rat.......
 

Maybe you should turn him in! :laugh:

Oh what a tangled web we weave, When first we practice to deceive! - Sir Walter Scott

Islander, Island Lover, Bear Islander...whichever he is, wrote:
If what doesn't work?

There are no speed limits now and there hasn't been a speed related fatality or accident that I am aware of since safety certificates became widespread in NH.

To legislators reading this, the problem isn't speed, it's the violation of the 150 foot rule. If that is enforced accidents will be reduced.

As far as WinnFABS getting the plug pulled on the pilot program it seems to me that the information being collected was NOT proving their point, so another end run was needed!

A new law isn't needed, just enforcement of laws already in place, and for that matter an MP officer can cite someone if they believe he/she is operating a boat at excessive speed for the conditions.