View Single Post
Old 11-19-2009, 01:06 PM   #596
Airwaves
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: I'm right here!
Posts: 1,153
Thanks: 9
Thanked 102 Times in 37 Posts
Default

Originally posted by elchase
Quote:
An MP boat and a police boat went out and fished their bodies aboard and drove them to shore. These boats were plenty large enough for the conditions on the lake that day, and the officers did not even need to get wet. If we did not have the SL in effect that day, I'd agree that going out to retrieve these bodies endangered the officers' lives, but only due to the dangers of getting run down and cut in half by a speeding cigarette boat. Since the SL was in effect that day, that risk was eliminated and these guys faced little more risk on the lake than had they stayed ashore
From this post it is OBVIOUS that YOU HAVE NEVER been part of a SAR (Search and rescue) operation! In every case there are dangers to the rescue boat and crew yet you try to dismiss it as if you are walking across the school yard and picking up a piece of paper.

Originally posted by elchase in response to a comment hoping legislators are reading this:
Quote:
they are focusing on the sheer volume of crashes and deaths resulting from boats going too fast, losing control, and colliding into one another or into shore. While they had been told that high speed boating is safe and that deaths were a rarity...a fluke...they are seeing evidence that proves otherwise.
What "evidence" would that be? Certainly nothing you have presented from NH or Lake Winnipesaukee because the evidence pertaining to NH and Lake Winnipesaukee proves that speed was never a problem and is not a safety issue, however fear mongering certainly is a problem!
Airwaves is offline