Winnipesaukee Forum - View Single Post

hazelnut · 10-28-2009, 07:15 PM

el,

While I applaud your efforts to prove your point (borderline flooding aside)most of the articles do lack hard numbers. "High Rate of speed" "Too Fast" "High Speed" could mean 25, 45, 55, 105, who knows. Also, percentage wise this probably wouldn't even register on any scale. .00000004% or something in terms of an issue of safety. Also you are digging and I mean digging. Look at the dates on these articles. This data hardly supports a law. If you want I'll cull the data for you and make a graph but we're looking at tiny tiny numbers here. Never mind the fact that there is nothing even close to being local. So while you keep digging keep in mind that all you are doing is furthering the stereotypical SL supporters Modus operandi and that is fear mongering. All these flooded posts amount to is a smattering of events scattered throughout several years globally. I mean you're even citing Australia here. I understand what you are trying to prove here but it falls short of any "proof" that Lake Winnipesaukee itself needs a speed limit. Boating can be dangerous, period end of sentence. The only way to guarantee the prevention of death by water/boating is to stay on the shore. So please go ahead on your fear campaign while the rest of us actually figure out how to make our lake safer.

I'll say it again as I've said it a thousand times. I don't own a GFBL boat I have no intentions of EVER EVER EVER buying one. I swear to god. I just want legislation that works. Not a feel good useless law that occupies time and resources that target a percentage of boaters on the lake that I feel are safe drivers already. I wish you could actually believe and understand that I gain or lose nothing personally from this law. I continued to boat as I normally boated every year as I have for 25+ years on this lake. Only I saw NO DIFFERENCE this year and it pissed me off. I was continually aggravated by discourteous inexperienced boaters putting themselves and my family in danger. None of these people were breaking any Speed Limit.

I just feel that "your side" is setting safety on the lake back decades all under the guise of ridding the lake of what your group considers undesirables. It's a dangerous gamble to take. You pretend that the lake got safer and ignore the real fact that it hasn't. So while I am happy for you that YOU are happy with your new law, I think it is unfortunate that the real issues of safety on the lake will go on ignored while you celebrate. If you actually cared about safety on the lake you would want to address the actual problems on the lake.

Thanks
H

10-28-2009, 07:15 PM	#109
hazelnut Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 1,348 Blog Entries: 3 Thanks: 508 Thanked 462 Times in 162 Posts	el, While I applaud your efforts to prove your point (borderline flooding aside)most of the articles do lack hard numbers. "High Rate of speed" "Too Fast" "High Speed" could mean 25, 45, 55, 105, who knows. Also, percentage wise this probably wouldn't even register on any scale. .00000004% or something in terms of an issue of safety. Also you are digging and I mean digging. Look at the dates on these articles. This data hardly supports a law. If you want I'll cull the data for you and make a graph but we're looking at tiny tiny numbers here. Never mind the fact that there is nothing even close to being local. So while you keep digging keep in mind that all you are doing is furthering the stereotypical SL supporters Modus operandi and that is fear mongering. All these flooded posts amount to is a smattering of events scattered throughout several years globally. I mean you're even citing Australia here. I understand what you are trying to prove here but it falls short of any "proof" that Lake Winnipesaukee itself needs a speed limit. Boating can be dangerous, period end of sentence. The only way to guarantee the prevention of death by water/boating is to stay on the shore. So please go ahead on your fear campaign while the rest of us actually figure out how to make our lake safer. I'll say it again as I've said it a thousand times. I don't own a GFBL boat I have no intentions of EVER EVER EVER buying one. I swear to god. I just want legislation that works. Not a feel good useless law that occupies time and resources that target a percentage of boaters on the lake that I feel are safe drivers already. I wish you could actually believe and understand that I gain or lose nothing personally from this law. I continued to boat as I normally boated every year as I have for 25+ years on this lake. Only I saw NO DIFFERENCE this year and it pissed me off. I was continually aggravated by discourteous inexperienced boaters putting themselves and my family in danger. None of these people were breaking any Speed Limit. I just feel that "your side" is setting safety on the lake back decades all under the guise of ridding the lake of what your group considers undesirables. It's a dangerous gamble to take. You pretend that the lake got safer and ignore the real fact that it hasn't. So while I am happy for you that YOU are happy with your new law, I think it is unfortunate that the real issues of safety on the lake will go on ignored while you celebrate. If you actually cared about safety on the lake you would want to address the actual problems on the lake. Thanks H

The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to hazelnut For This Useful Post: