Debating the Speed Limit – Helpful or Not?

[Rattlesnake Gal]

For a very long time now, the speed limit debate has been a very hot, controversial topic on the Forum. I’m curious - since the debate started, have these discussions changed your views in any way?

Please note: This is not a debate thread. Thanks!

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by Rattlesnake Gal

For a very long time now, the speed limit debate has been a very hot, controversial topic on the Forum. I’m curious - since the debate started, have these discussions changed your views in any way?

Please note: This is not a debate thread. Thanks!

I like your poll. One element or choice I would have liked to see is a choice that it hasn't changed your overall postion but has changed certain aspects.

For example, I am against the speed limits, but since debating and reading peoples views I could be in favor or a compromised bill. (provided the right one was put on the table) - side note if you want to discuss that there is already a thread set up for that. Please don't debate that here.

I think such a hot topic needs to be discussed, however since it is so controversal it will draw in some of the most extreme individuals and opinions as well.

I definately support the decision to have it as its own sub forum so that it does not monopolize the boating forum.

[granitebox]

Unfortunately, the vocal minority has long since defeated any usefulness of continued discussions.

[MAXUM]

What would really make this interesting would be to get some sort of metrics from MP in regards to issued citations and see what the spread is year to year, including current year to see what the trending data looks like. Crappy weather this year may skew the numbers down a bit, but in the interest of being objective it takes a review of physical evidence.

I honestly think that much of this debate, like any other is based solely on feeling or a single incident taken out of context. While all of us have our opinions, it tends to make a much stronger case if one's opinion is supported by actual numbers.

While I may support the idea of a speed limit, if the metrics don't show any kind of improvement then the law is obviously not working and therefore is not worthwhile. I do think that this should be reviewed over the course of several years, not a single season.

[chipj29]

I am not in favor of the speed limit, never have been. However, I have stopped engaging in arguments about it. I highly doubt I am going to be able to change anybody's mind on it. The one thing I do post about regarding speed limits is to try to correct any non-facts and mis-truths that are sometimes put out there.

[OCDACTIVE]

VERY Well said Maxum, I think a simple Thank You at the bottom was not sufficient in this case.

Even though we are on different sides of the debate I appreciate your views that a study needs to be conducted. I for one want to see what the MP says about the trial period. If 2 years wasn't long enough then perhaps extend it a year to finally prove one way or another whether the speed limits are needed.

I would be willing to continue on with the study until the data is made public, then go by what the MP recommends.

[ironhorsetim]

Originally Posted by Rattlesnake Gal

Please note: This is not a debate thread. Thanks!

That didn't take long

[Airwaves]

Actually yes the debate has been helpful to me.

When it first began I did not have a position one way or another and as I read the postings I determined that most of the people blaming speed for the problems on Lake Winnipesaukee were actually complaining about existing laws, most notably the Safe Passage Law, being violated so it pushed me into the opponents who want better enforcement camp.

Since the poll doesn't have an option along those lines, it only asks the questions assuming you went into the discussion with a position already in place, I won't vote.

[Rattlesnake Gal]

Guess I was being silly about hoping not to have a debate. It really isn’t the debate that I have an issue with, it is the nastiness that so often ensues.

This morning I actually started with nine choices for the poll, but a respected member of the Forum recommended that I narrow it down considerably.

Would the following questions make for a better poll?

No, I do not care about a speed limit on the lake, so these discussions do not affect me.

No, it hasn’t altered my views at all.

Yes, I was in favor of a speed limit, but now I am against it.

Yes, I was against a speed limit, but now I am in favor of it.

Yes, I was for a speed limit, but now I think only certain areas of the lake should have a speed limit.

Yes, I was against a speed limit, but now I think only certain areas of the lake should have a speed limit.

Yes, I was for a whole lake speed limit, but now I think a compromised speed limit that is a bit higher than the current one might be better.

Yes, I was against the speed limit, but now I think a compromised speed limit that is a bit higher than the current one might work out better.

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by Rattlesnake Gal

Guess I was being silly about hoping not to have a debate. It really isn’t the debate that I have an issue with, it is the nastiness that so often ensues.

This morning I actually started with nine choices for the poll, but a respected member of the Forum recommended that I narrow it down considerably.

Would the following questions make for a better poll?

No, I do not care about a speed limit on the lake, so these discussions do not affect me.

No, it hasn’t altered my views at all.

Yes, I was in favor of a speed limit, but now I am against it.

Yes, I was against a speed limit, but now I am in favor of it.

Yes, I was for a speed limit, but now I think only certain areas of the lake should have a speed limit.

Yes, I was against a speed limit, but now I think only certain areas of the lake should have a speed limit.

Yes, I was for a whole lake speed limit, but now I think a compromised speed limit that is a bit higher than the current one might be better.

Yes, I was against the speed limit, but now I think a compromised speed limit that is a bit higher than the current one might work out better.

I like this MUCH better. Would give a much more overall idea where people stand.

[Airwaves]

I appreciate what you're trying to do Rattlesnake Gal, but even those 8 questions still assume the reader had a position on SL before the debate started.

What I am saying is that the debate shaped my opinion I didn't come into the debate with an opinion one way or another.

I can't believe I am the only one.

[NoRegrets]

I have really enjoy these debates. They are enlightening, entertaining, and frustrating at times. Sometimes emotions overrun ones behavior but I believe this is to be expected due to passion applied to an individual’s core beliefs or values.

Frustration comes when all don't see an issue from the same perspective and we have trouble getting the idea to be accepted.
The entertaining and enlightening attributes happen when individuals take the time to really put thought into threads and replies. I have read some of the best thoughts that have been well articulated through this written medium from both sides of the speed issue. I truely feel it is a privilege to be a part of this forum in general.

I know some do not like the excessive bantering and have stated that they stay away from the speed issue but look through it and allow the frustration to burn off. There are plenty of golden thoughts here and you never know when they will show up. Much like this thread!

For the record - I have not changed my position but value the forum threads.

Thanks Rattlesnake Gal!

[KonaChick]

To be honest when I first learned of the Speed Limit Law legistlature was trying to pass I did not think of it as a big deal at all, what could be bad about speed limits. The more I educated myself on this law and read posts here I quickly understood it had nothing to do with "speed" at all. I'm grateful to have had the opportunity to read both sides and come up with my own conclusion.

[Rattlesnake Gal]

This is getting tough with only 10 poll questions.

Okay Airwaves, what if a poll were to say...

For a very long time now, the speed limit debate has been a very hot, controversial topic on the Forum. I’m curious - since the debate started, have these discussions helped you to form an opinion or have they changed your views in any way?

No, I do not care about a speed limit on the lake, so these discussions do not affect me.

No, it hasn’t altered my views at all.

Yes, it helped me decide that I am in favor of a speed limit.

Yes, it helped me decide that I do not support a speed limit.

Yes, I was in favor of a speed limit, but now I am against it.

Yes, I was against a speed limit, but now I am in favor of it.

Yes, I was for a speed limit, but now I think only certain areas of the lake should have a speed limit.

Yes, I was against a speed limit, but now I think only certain areas of the lake should have a speed limit.

Yes, I was for a whole lake speed limit, but now I think a compromised speed limit that is a bit higher than the current one might be better.

Yes, I was against the speed limit, but now I think a compromised speed limit that is a bit higher than the current one might work out better.

[jmen24]

I have one suggestion and that presents a question.
This poll or "revised" poll has questioned that would need to be answered by potential non-boating folks as well as folks that would not touch the SL sub-forum with a 10 foot poll.

I would suggest that in order to get a wider view of the members of this forum regarding the debates that have taken place, this needs to be ?stickied? at the top of the General discussion forum with a lock on posting.

That is the question, can Don lock a poll so that it cannot be posted in? That way the people that do not want to hear it, can vote and move on there way, the folks that do there are plenty of threads to suit their fancy.

This expanded view will also give Don the feelings of the majority of the members and whether he would entertain allowing these debates to continue. Not my view, but it came to me that this would be a side affect to this.

[onlywinni]

Originally Posted by Rattlesnake Gal

For a very long time now, the speed limit debate has been a very hot, controversial topic on the Forum. I’m curious - since the debate started, have these discussions changed your views in any way?

Please note: This is not a debate thread. Thanks!

I actually wish I never found this Forum. Before I found this forum I thought all of us(Winni Community) got along. I used to waive at all my fellow Captains and all the people taking photos of me...oh I mean my boat , (probably 3-4 times everyday I am out)

Now I realize how many people hate me, because I choose to operate a Performance Boat. I never realized that my boating enjoyment has traumatized and ruined so many people's lives and experiences on the Lake. Now I dont want to waive at anybody, because that will be the next complaint..>Go Fast Captain waiving while operating his 5000 pound death machine

Back on point..I think the debate on this forum is a waste of time. People have dug their heels in...the fight will be in Concord if there is a fight not on here...

Just my 2 cents

[OCDACTIVE]

I think there will be a lot more to discuss if there is any bills ever submitted. At this point I think we are just milling in circles

[Lakepilot]

I think any law should address a real issue. I've been boating on Winni for over 40 years and honestly I can't remember a time when absolute speed was an issue. I can remember a lot of times when a boat was going too fast given the circumstances. But to put a limit on absolute speed when the the times I wished for a law were someone going too fast relative to the situation seems wrong.

The speed limit on the road coming up from Alton to Wolfeboro is 55, then it drops to 40 and finally to 35. When Kingswood is in session it drops even further. The speed limit on the roads is not absolute. It considers the size of the road, the congestion in the area and whether school is in session or not.

Why is the lake any different? It's not absolute speed that is a problem, it's the speed relative to the situation.

[NoRegrets]

Well said Lakepilot! You said so much in a few words.

[VtSteve]

Good points made. Only Winni, there may be a few that hate your boat, but I doubt it's a high percentage. There are positives in this entire debate, perhaps some good things can come of it. Heck, even in politics sometimes good things happen

The common sense people need to come together over all of the safety issues and deal with facts. I doubt speed limit supporters, other than possibly Mr. Weeks and Mr. Chase, want to go around spreading false statements and innuendo to support their cause. And you're correct, they do not like you and want you gone. Their character and credibility was gone a long time ago, along with their humanity.

But that's them, what do you people want? There are suggestions and opinions of some SL supporters that are very good ones, and they bring up problems that need to be addressed. Before the class warfare heated up again here, there were some great discussions.

OCD and many others bring up the boneheads and enforcement. DaveR mentioned that he's felt at ease leaving Alton Bay (?) not worrying so much about being passed at high speed from behind. I saw the lake and community coming together to Discuss lake issues in a positive way. It was when enforcement and slow-speed infractions were being brought up, that some particularly nasty people came on board to disrupt.

I don't know about you, but I don't make conclusions about anything until all the facts are in. Unlike some in the pro SL crowd, I prefer to get actual statistics and facts, not make them up as I go along. Just as in real life politics today, the people that just want things better on the lake need to speak up. If you can read a letter from Jack Weeks or Ed Chase and not wince a bit, there's probably nothing anyone can say that would matter to you. If you support the SL, but don't agree with their tactics nor their misstatements, then join the rest of the Boaters and start working on the real issues.


With few exceptions, I think the discussions have been positive, at least open and revealing. Regardless of anything, people should pay attention to the facts.

[MAXUM]

OK common folks can't we at least agree to the poll questions?

Too funny!

Sorry I just couldn't resist!

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by MAXUM

OK common folks can't we at least agree to the poll questions?

Too funny!

Sorry I just couldn't resist!

I disagree with that question.


Sorry neither could I..

[MAXUM]

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

VERY Well said Maxum, I think a simple Thank You at the bottom was not sufficient in this case.

Even though we are on different sides of the debate I appreciate your views that a study needs to be conducted. I for one want to see what the MP says about the trial period. If 2 years wasn't long enough then perhaps extend it a year to finally prove one way or another whether the speed limits are needed.

I would be willing to continue on with the study until the data is made public, then go by what the MP recommends.

Welcome! We may not agree in principal as to what we personally feel about this, but unlike most at least the two of us agree on the most important thing. Look at the evidence and base a decision on that alone. Provided that's how things go down, I'm cool with accepting the outcome even if it doesn't include a speed limit. See OCDACTIVE if everyone were like the two of us this world would be a wonderful place

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by MAXUM

Welcome! We may not agree in principal as to what we personally feel about this, but unlike most at least the two of us agree on the most important thing. Look at the evidence and base a decision on that alone. Provided that's how things go down, I'm cool with accepting the outcome even if it doesn't include a speed limit. See OCDACTIVE if everyone were like the two of us this world would be a wonderful place

Cheers... After this is all over lets meet up at the Naswa! Just may take us a lot less time or a lot more time to get there.

[MAXUM]

Not that much into the Naswa scene, but would love to catch up with you at some point next summer. I've sadly already winterized my boat and she's been laid up in the garage till next season.

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by MAXUM

Not that much into the Naswa scene, but would love to catch up with you at some point next summer. I've sadly already winterized my boat and she's been laid up in the garage till next season.

Next season is a definate... Mine needs to be fixed over the winter and will be ready to rock next year...

I am sure we can find some place fun..

Braun Bay?

[ApS]

Originally Posted by Rattlesnake Gal

For a very long time now, the speed limit debate has been a very hot, controversial topic on the Forum. I’m curious - since the debate started, have these discussions changed your views in any way?

Please note: This is not a debate thread. Thanks!

I've stayed out of this particular poll and thread—and the "non-debate" that followed it—but now...?

1) Views aren't likely to be changed when Supporters' questions and troubling news-item facts are ignored, ridiculed, or "put on ignore" by Opponents, as recent activity at this SL thread is displaying. What's the purpose, then, of the closed-off "Opposer's Thread"???

With reckless disregard for NH's new law, it's like carrying on a jailhouse conversation—a healthy discussion can't take place!

2) Why have pages and pages gone on and on to describe one member's particular new boat (and its abused and broken engine), with not the slightest attempt to bring repair and repainting dollars to our Lakes Region?

3) One SL poll begins with:

"...it was suggested that if I make it one way or the other then we may see a different result..."

The object of a poll is not to seek "different results" through multiple polls on the same subject!

4) A truly representative poll of Winnipesaukee could have taken one week: A poll that has been represented to reflect the views of Winnipesaukee-only members, has been allowed to accumulate "new votes"—for months!

5) Why have pages and pages gone on with "chat", when "chat" is not permitted here?

(PLUS a slew of other forum violations).

What is the relevance of repair shops and parts dealerships 11-hours-drive from our Lakes Region—to tourism, activities or topics IN the Lakes Region?

-->Anyway, this nation's largest Internet forum refers to any thread such as "My New—Anything" as an off-topic "Vanity".

(With total justification, IMO).
.
.

Four killed in this one and ten others injured, but it was in Australia, so it means nothing to those in NH;
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2...02/2021516.htm

That was the last of my five post limit. See you tomorrow with five more of these. I swear, there must be ten thousand of them to show you. Each one worse than the last.

[DEJ]

OCD, Braun bay is a must next year once you get her back in the watter.

[chipj29]

Originally Posted by elchase

Four killed in this one and ten others injured, but it was in Australia, so it means nothing to those in NH;
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2...02/2021516.htm

That was the last of my five post limit. See you tomorrow with five more of these. I swear, there must be ten thousand of them to show you. Each one worse than the last.

Please post the text in the article that relates this accident to excessive speed (over 45/25). Thanks in advance.

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

I've stayed out of this particular poll and thread—and the "non-debate" that followed it—but now...?

1) Views aren't likely to be changed when Supporters' questions and troubling news-item facts are ignored, ridiculed, or "put on ignore" by Opponents, as recent activity at this SL thread is displaying. What's the purpose, then, of the closed-off "Opposer's Thread"???

With reckless disregard for NH's new law, it's like carrying on a jailhouse conversation—a healthy discussion can't take place!

2) Why have pages and pages gone on and on to describe one member's particular new boat (and its abused and broken engine), with not the slightest attempt to bring repair and repainting dollars to our Lakes Region?

3) One SL poll begins with:


The object of a poll is not to seek "different results" through multiple polls on the same subject!

4) A truly representative poll of Winnipesaukee could have taken one week: A poll that has been represented to reflect the views of Winnipesaukee-only members, has been allowed to accumulate "new votes"—for months!

5) Why have pages and pages gone on with "chat", when "chat" is not permitted here?

(PLUS a slew of other forum violations).

What is the relevance of repair shops and parts dealerships 11-hours-drive from our Lakes Region—to tourism, activities or topics IN the Lakes Region?

-->Anyway, this nation's largest Internet forum refers to any thread such as "My New—Anything" as an off-topic "Vanity".

(With total justification, IMO).
.
.

APS and those interested Please see my response in the proper thread. New Boat see you out there.

[DEJ]

Looks like you need to add another poster to your ignore list. Helps lower blood pressure also.

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by DEJ

Looks like you need to add another poster to your ignore list. Helps lower blood pressure also.

no.. although APS sometimes makes comments that are debatable thats what this is for.

Surprisingly enough I support APS in his efforts. Although I disagree with many aspects of his thoughts on the matter he has always stayed true to his own opinions. He keeps his posts very much to the point. And frankly no hidden agenda.

You can look back for years and you can sum up his position in one sentance:

He doesn't like GFB for the noise they make, the speed limit is just the beginning in which to reduce GFB's and noise.

A valid opinion and he has stuck to it with his thousands of multipost postings

APS please correct me if I am wrong in my interpretation after reading hundreds of your posts.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

"...Surprisingly enough I support APS in his efforts. Although I disagree with many aspects of his thoughts on the matter he has always stayed true to his own opinions. He keeps his posts very much to the point. And frankly no hidden agenda..."

Supporters all have their individual reasons. My points are decidedly different than Bear Islander's, who now needs to focus his gaze at the 2008 Coast Guard stats under "Horsepower".

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

"...A valid opinion and he has stuck to it with his thousands of multipost postings...APS please correct me if I am wrong in my interpretation after reading hundreds of your posts..."

OK... (And I won't call you "insurgents", or the "Taliban of the Lake").

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

"...He doesn't like GFB for the noise they make, the speed limit is just the beginning in which to reduce GFB's and noise.

Correction: The ILLEGAL noise GFBs make—hence—GFBL).

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

"...You...can sum up his position in one sentance...":

Try these sentences :

1) If a GFBL concern for other boaters could be summarized in one word, it would be "Dismissive".

What compromise offered by Supporters was EVER adopted by Opponents?

2) Too few of your dozen Opponents has ever commented on Winnipesaukee's natural splendors.

(Natural splendors don't include the bar-scene "mutual admiration" of plastic boats having expensive paint jobs done hours away from the New Hampshire economy).

3) Too few have ever shown concern for the rights of other boaters. They want to "share the lake", but complain about the sailboats, the bowriders and the pontoon boats in their way—the kayaks that "can't be seen".

4) None has ever shown concern over their part in wildlife mortality.

5) None have ever been seen picking up storm debris.

6) This year, ONE has been praised for towing another boat! Can someone tell me why that is even significant?

Is it "The Exception that Proves the Rule"?

7) Boating used to be polite—with mutual waves—and relatively care-free; today, it's always "Do Unto Others", until someone gets "done".

8) Today, many must look over our shoulder at any approaching noise, and some of us are on dry land !!!

9) After DECADES of Lake Winnipesaukee quietude, too many oversized six-wheel trailers deliver too many oversized OCEAN-design racers to this INLAND lake, who now ILLEGALLY take oversized advantage of "The N. H. WAY", while taking too many oversized chunks out of other boaters' ACRES of scenic enjoyments on clear water—while trying to breathe clean air.

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

"...APS sometimes makes comments that are debatable thats what this is for..."

Debate is what is supposed to occur at a Forum.

Although we are all invited to share the bandwidth here, a cult of perceived power is shutting off debate!

A monopoly of Authoritarianism has been brought to a forum formerly devoted to a free expression of ideas; indeed, the SL subforum has become the "camel's nose under the tent" of the 1st Amendment!

(Which, BTW, parallels events seen in today's headlines ).

[Lakegeezer]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

A monopoly of Authoritarianism has been brought to a forum formerly devoted to a free expression of ideas; indeed, the SL subforum has become the "camel's nose under the tent" of the 1st Amendment!

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The members of this forum, or even Don, are hardly the Congress. I don't think its the Camel's nose you see, but perhaps it is the Fox's.

This guy in TN was "allegedly driving his bass boat at a high rate of speed while intoxicated when he crashed into a pontoon boat", but since he was drinking, I guess his speed was irrelevant (WINK). Luckily, he came out of the accident ok and only killed the lady in the pontoon boat, so he gets to kill again. She was just putting along, so the CG will list this one as a "0-10MPH" fatality and you guys can tell us how this proves that it is more dangerous to go slow in a pontoon boat than it is to go 80 MPH in a bass boat. Which I guess is true on lakes that allow bass boats to go 80 MPH;
http://www.ucmessenger.com/news.php?viewStory=29223

I just don't understand how a website hosting a "debate" about Speed Limits would not want to allow me unlimited posting of all of these high speed boating fatalities. But since I'm only allowed to show you 5 of them a day, I guess I'll just have to keep everyone in suspense until my next window opens.

[Lakegeezer]

Originally Posted by elchase

I just don't understand how a website hosting a "debate" about Speed Limits would not want to allow me unlimited posting of all of these high speed boating fatalities.

The most recent article noted:

"There is no speed limit on Clear Lake. There are, however, federal laws that apply. Dodd noted that Perdock had been in violation of Rule 5 (Lookout), Rule 6 (Safe Speed), Rule 7 (Risk of Collision) Rule 8 (Action to Avoid Collision), Rule 13 (Overtaking), and Rule 25 (Sailing Vessels Underway and Vessels Under Oars).

Here is a key point of many against renewal of the speed limit law. There are existing rules that apply to high speed accidents. There is no question accidents happen because boat captains go. However, the captain should be allowed to judge the safe speed, not the non-boaters of the state.

Posting examples of high speed crashes is trolling, not contributing to the debate, unless there is a point to be made. Why is a artificially set speed limit needed to trump Federal Rule 6?

[VitaBene]

Originally Posted by elchase

This guy in TN was "allegedly driving his bass boat at a high rate of speed while intoxicated when he crashed into a pontoon boat", but since he was drinking, I guess his speed was irrelevant (WINK). Luckily, he came out of the accident ok and only killed the lady in the pontoon boat, so he gets to kill again. She was just putting along, so the CG will list this one as a "0-10MPH" fatality and you guys can tell us how this proves that it is more dangerous to go slow in a pontoon boat than it is to go 80 MPH in a bass boat. Which I guess is true on lakes that allow bass boats to go 80 MPH;
http://www.ucmessenger.com/news.php?viewStory=29223

I just don't understand how a website hosting a "debate" about Speed Limits would not want to allow me unlimited posting of all of these high speed boating fatalities. But since I'm only allowed to show you 5 of them a day, I guess I'll just have to keep everyone in suspense until my next window opens.

Why don't you start your own Winnipesaukee forum and then you can make the rules.

Most people understand that there is a time and a place to go fast in a boat (including a sailboat). When alcohol is injected into the equation, the ability to determine the time and place is skewed and the operator's skills are dulled.

Regarding this story, it was only a little bass boat- aren't you the character who laughed off a fishing boat speeding (as defined by your anecdotes and the NH 150' rule) by you and your son within 10' and then waved and held up a beer?

Yup, it was you:

Originally Posted by elchase

I did see one of those Capt Boneheads in a non-GFBL that you guys keep talking about. My son and I were drifting about 25 feet south of the lit buoy off Welch, casting worms at the buoy for bass. A larger boat was coming along south of us, heading east to west with a little hydroplane running next to him on his north side. The bigger boat was going to pass south of us about maybe 100 to 200 feet (who can tell the difference?), and the little boat was heading straight at us. It looked like a little 14-foot or so homemade thing with a 20HP Johnson on it. We could see the smiling driver looking right as us as he approached, so we never got scared, just confused and annoyed. I figured he had to change course a bit and expected that was going to cut just north of the buoy, which would still put him only 30 or 40 feet from us, but to our astonishment, he passes right between us and the buoy. Right over our lines, not more than 10 feet from us at no less than 25 miles an hour. We're holding out our arms in a "what the heck?" gesture, and he gives us a big smile and holds up his beer. I looked at my son and we both broke out laughing. This was stupid enough to be comical. I know people say "10 feet" when it was really 50, but this was 10 feet. I was close enough to the buoy to cast beyond it and this guy split the difference.
But then I realized that never once did I get scared. If the guy had hit us dead-on there certainly would have been some damage but that little thing would not have killed us. I compared this to how heart-stopping-scared I've felt in past situations where I've had big heavy cigarettes coming at me at 60 or 70 miles an hour, even when much further away. Usually you can only see the big hull and wonder whether the driver can see you or is even looking. While this guy was driving as bad, he simply was not putting us at the same risk. His boat was small, and it was only going 25 or so.

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by Lakegeezer

The most recent article noted:

"There is no speed limit on Clear Lake. There are, however, federal laws that apply. Dodd noted that Perdock had been in violation of Rule 5 (Lookout), Rule 6 (Safe Speed), Rule 7 (Risk of Collision) Rule 8 (Action to Avoid Collision), Rule 13 (Overtaking), and Rule 25 (Sailing Vessels Underway and Vessels Under Oars).

Here is a key point of many against renewal of the speed limit law. There are existing rules that apply to high speed accidents. There is no question accidents happen because boat captains go. However, the captain should be allowed to judge the safe speed, not the non-boaters of the state.

Posting examples of high speed crashes is trolling, not contributing to the debate, unless there is a point to be made. Why is a artificially set speed limit needed to trump Federal Rule 6?

Anyone that has taken the time to read about the spectacular accidents from around the world, throughout the years, has obviously seen patterns that are fairly consistent. Most of the accidents violate at least one of the existing laws, no matter what state or country they take place in. While I still adhere to promoting additional enforcement and training, there is hardly anything law enforcement can do to prevent these accidents, unless they happen to be lucky enough to be in the right place at the right time, or have already locked up previous offenders.

El pointed to many accidents, the vast majority involving alcohol, many are directly related to negligent and dangerous operation. I read many of the boating website forums, including most of the offshore and speed boat forums. It's pretty easy to not only see which posters are not the safest around, and the increasing trend towards reigning in these boaters. The majority of Poker Run organizers, boat club organizations, and many race-oriented people, call for more enforcement. They are seeing a pattern towards inexperienced people in high-powered boats, reckless younger people (mostly) endangering themselves and others by drinking while boating. They are seeing their sport being hurt. Insurance coverage has gotten very expensive for these boats, and PR organizers have adopted many new rules, and even tossed people out of the PR if viewed as negligent or dangerous.

El pointed to an accident where the offending operator was in a NWZ. A certain organization was up in arms, and calling for speed limits in an entire bay. Then, they read the facts. Of course, seeing their sailboat club's tenders and race crew speeding dangerously close to other boats in a NO WAKE ZONE at the country meeting didn't help their case

There are people, like Dave Patnaude of the NJPPC, that deserve the commendation and respect of all boaters for their hard and continued efforts to keep boating safe. It's people like him that are serious about safety and their love of boating. Not lip service or arrogant attitudes towards others, they actually do things, and for all boaters, not just their preferred style.

Organizations like this need to be setup in all areas. They are the advocates of safety, training, and fun for all. They also can serve as effective advocates when people that are less than genuine attempt to inject new laws and rules they know nothing about.

And for those that feel victimized by posting limits and the like. You're definitely not alone here. I've attempted to discuss facts and opinions, without spamming and flooding. I feel the vast majority of my posts have had good intentions, trying to sort out facts from fiction, and trying to solve real problems. Some don't agree with this I'm sure, so be it. If I post garbage, I expect to be called on it, like everyone else. If proven wrong, I accept that and move on with newfound knowledge.

I encourage everyone to read the articles El posts here. Really read them. Many I've read before, along with lengthy discussions on many boards he hates. Believe me, there is definitely momentum in the safety arena, and many want it to start at the dealer level as well. I also would like to reign in problem boaters everywhere, as I want to be safe along with my family on the water. I've been working on different proposals and scenarios that would try to do just that. Winnipesaukee is a fairly small body of water comparatively speaking, and would be a great spot to do a study of this type. No surveys, no wild fabrications, just real life on the water.

There are boatloads of people on this forum that have the common sense many were not born with. They understand the lake and boating, and remain open-minded towards what's really happening. Rarely do good solutions come from bureaucrats or agenda-filled organizations. Good solutions come from real people that have open minds and good intentions.

Here's a guy who crashes into a boat at "very high speed", but since his blood alcohol was below the legal limit, they had to let him go without charges. It was "just an unfortunate accident". Five were killed;
http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2..._boating_crash

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by elchase

Here's a guy who crashes into a boat at "very high speed", but since his blood alcohol was below the legal limit, they had to let him go without charges. It was "just an unfortunate accident". Five were killed;
http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2..._boating_crash

So El, a 22' Crownline bowrider had a bad accident. And the driver blew a .035. You're shooting blanks now, and you know it.




"Larizza said he did not want to release the decision in the case until speaking with victims and their families.

The boat crashed into the tugboat about a mile north of the Palm Valley Bridge. The Crownline boat was traveling at an estimated 30 to 35 mph when the accident occurred, according to information provided after the accident.

I"