View Single Post
Old 02-08-2006, 02:28 PM   #23
Evenstar
Senior Member
 
Evenstar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Littleton, NH
Posts: 382
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Cool

Quote:
Originally Posted by Seaplane Pilot
I've rarely seen any concern expressed by HB162 supporters over the fact that a 3-passenger personal watercraft can attain speeds far greater than 45 mph. On the contrary, they always seem to refer to a specific type of boat in their argument. If it really was a safety issue, the type of boat would not be an issue. Further proof that HB162 is a "cleansing" program.
This is just getting silly!

When most of "us" are using the term speeding "boat", we are referring to all high-speed water vessels, including PWC. We're just not singling out PWC, any more than we are singling out any other type of speeding "boat". After all the speed limit will limit the speed of all "boats".

I can't see that anyone here is picking on any particular kind of boat - other than the opponents to 162; who have singled out canoes and kayaks.
__________________
"Boaters love boats . . . Kayakers love water."
Evenstar is offline