View Single Post
Old 08-05-2009, 04:23 PM   #38
Bear Islander
Senior Member
Bear Islander's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,685
Thanks: 23
Thanked 363 Times in 170 Posts

Originally Posted by VitaBene View Post
BI, I am confused now. I agree with your statement about her speed not being reasonable and prudent given the conditions but wasn't that language in there prior to the new RSA? ...
NO! There was NO "Reasonable and Prudent" law before HB847. This is one point that I have been trying to make to the opposition for years and they simply will not believe it. Again, there was NO Reasonable and Prudent law before January 1, 2009.

HB847 IS the Reasonable and Prudent speed law. Before that all you had was the "Careless and Negligent Operation of Boats" law quoted above. That is a catch all law that can mean just about anything and doesn't mention speed in any way.

That is why this accident is such a good example of what the SL law is trying to prevent. Even if the speed was below 25 the boat was in violation because it was not Reasonable and Prudent speed AND not operated in a way to prevent hitting the shore. Two other important parts of the speed limit law.
Bear Islander is offline