elchase

Did you just make that up? They certainly were not "asked to provide a survey". In fact, if you look back at the history, you'll see that they took it upon themselves to conduct a contrived and unscientific "survey" that most impartial observers said did more to slow boats down before clocking them than it did to see covertly what was really going on out there. And the Legislature saw through this attempt to circumvent and sidetrack the pending legislation and got upset, actually publicly scolding the MP over it...so the "survey" was debunked and discontinued. The MP did a wonderful job last summer by accident. It must have killed them to see things slow down so much that they could only find one speeder all summer. But the truth eventually surfaces, no matter how hard some try to obscure it. If boaters are not speeding, you just can't give out tickets. Because "their enjoyment" prevents "mutual enjoyment". It's not all about making sure that the high-speed crowd enjoys the lake, its about making it mutually enjoyable for a variety of co-existable uses. Its either a choice of the need-for-speed over everything else or a choice of everything else over the need-for-speed. Which do you think a legislator is going to choose?

Sanctioned racing under the supervision of the MP over a closed-off portion of the lake, as has always been the tradition until the advent of the GFBL, boat can still be a tradition. Nobody is going to object to a return of the weekend of offshore boating races...provided it is appropriately planned, noticed, and supervised. As to the "need for speed" this sounds like something worthy of therapy.

Please tell me exactly how many of these were citizens of NH, how many times each voted under different names and from different computers, how they were RANDOMLY SELECTED, and how you can be sure of all this. Otherwise, these are not "polls" just because you call them "polls". They are recruitment sheets.
I loved the CG thread until it morphed into just one more Anti-SL clone. It gave me a chance to enlighten readers to how CG categorizes fatalities according to the speed that the boat of the victim was in...so that if a 85MPH cigarette boat runs over a stationary canoe, it is a 0MPH fatality, not an "excessive speed" fatality.
Exactly. Boating is a huge source of income for the state and we can't risk that income just to satisfy the "need for speed" of a tiny few.