One way or the other

[OCDACTIVE]

After setting up the last "compromise" Poll, it was suggested that if I make it one way or the other then we may see a different result. So with that said, If you had to choose which way it had to be. Current law 45 / 25 or no speed limit law..... What would you prefer?

[chmeeee]

Given some users' interpretation of the previous results (81% in favor of a speed limit?), I appreciate this poll.

[OCDACTIVE]

Yes that is exactly why I wanted to start this one.... Clear this up once and for all.

[Shreddy]

I would make the poll...no speed limit law/some form of a speed limit. More representative.

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by Shreddy

I would make the poll...no speed limit law/some form of a speed limit. More representative.

Ummmmmmmm.. There is one...

Please look at the other poll "Speed Compromise Poll"

I started this one because it was suggested that by having a different options as in the compromise poll the supporters / opponents would not have clear represenation. Vote here as if there was no other option, then vote there as to what you would like to personally see.

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

After setting up the last "compromise" Poll, it was suggested that if I make it one way or the other then we may see a different result. So with that said, If you had to choose which way it had to be. Current law 45 / 25 or no speed limit law..... What would you prefer?

Ohhh but OCD "this poll is in the BOATING forum." Therefore all results are completely false and biased.

Actually I wonder if Don would agree to let this poll hang out in the GENERAL DISCUSSION thread for all to vote upon? Could we also title it the Speed Limit Law Poll?

I know that even then the results will be challenged because some folks here would refuse to believe that this entire site www.winnipesaukee.com is overrun with Performance Boaters. I wish Don had a way to refute this claim. Perhaps every member should have to register whether or not they had a boat or not or whether or not that boat was a "Performance Boat" or not.

I guess it is extremely difficult to see the numbers come back time and time again and have to accept that fact that the SL supporters are in the minority. I wonder if one of the local newspapers could hire an independent research firm to do a poll? Would that once and for all prove the point? I know that I would love to see the Citizen publish a poll and subsequent article discussing the results. Any reporters read this forum????

[birchhaven]

to prove the polling sample, you could do another survey, so it make this whole thing like a multi question poll. The other poll should be " I voted in the 'one way or another' poll and I drive a _____. and the possible answer could be something like a "go fast boat" " a sail boat" a kayak" " I dont have a boat" etc..

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by hazelnut

Ohhh but OCD "this poll is in the BOATING forum." Therefore all results are completely false and biased.

Actually I wonder if Don would agree to let this poll hang out in the GENERAL DISCUSSION thread for all to vote upon? Could we also title it the Speed Limit Law Poll?

I know that even then the results will be challenged because some folks here would refuse to believe that this entire site www.winnipesaukee.com is overrun with Performance Boaters. I wish Don had a way to refute this claim. Perhaps every member should have to register whether or not they had a boat or not or whether or not that boat was a "Performance Boat" or not.

I guess it is extremely difficult to see the numbers come back time and time again and have to accept that fact that the SL supporters are in the minority. I wonder if one of the local newspapers could hire an independent research firm to do a poll? Would that once and for all prove the point? I know that I would love to see the Citizen publish a poll and subsequent article discussing the results. Any reporters read this forum????

No matter how / where / or what wording we use there will always be discussion as to the validity of any poll. If it went the other way then I am sure the discussion would not take place.

This is as clean cut as you can get it. Anyone on the entire forum: that is WINNEPESAUKEE.COM can vote here. Given it is a boating thread it is still published on the open forums. If someone who doesn't own a boat and feels passionate about their feelings I am sure they know where to go to discuss.

Even though it is in the boating catagory, it does not mean it isn't visited by Non-boaters. I have friends and family of friends who have called me to let me know that they have been reading these threads and they don't even own a boat.

Again, I think when the poll doesn't go in the way one wants it, then claiming it isn't valid is an unfortunate response.

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by birchhaven

to prove the polling sample, you could do another survey, so it make this whole thing like a multi question poll. The other poll should be " I voted in the 'one way or another' poll and I drive a _____. and the possible answer could be something like a "go fast boat" " a sail boat" a kayak" " I dont have a boat" etc..

Again it gets too conveluded. I started the compromise poll and that was taken out of context for being too comprehensive. So now I made a very simple poll that ANYONE can vote in. That way whatever boat you have go fast, sail, kayak or none at all, your vote counts just as much as anyone elses.

But feel free to start one up if you like.

[NoBozo]

I'm thinking this whole thing is more about Liberal Vs. Conservative than Kayaks Vs. GFBL. NB

[Lakegeezer]

Originally Posted by NoBozo

I'm thinking this whole thing is more about Liberal Vs. Conservative than Kayaks Vs. GFBL. NB

Which is the liberal point of view and which is conservative? The tactics of the pro SL crowd seemed to be out of the conservative playbook, using fear and Limbaughian style hyperbole, yet the nanny law was passed by a liberal controlled government.

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by Lakegeezer

Which is the liberal point of view and which is conservative?

Well USUALLY the conservative viewpoint would be one of personal responsibility and less government intrusion in our every day lives. The liberal viewpoint would be the way the state has been trending lately where they legislate to protect us from ourselves.

I'm just sayin' is all. ha ha ha

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by hazelnut

Well USUALLY the conservative viewpoint would be one of personal responsibility and less government intrusion in our every day lives. The liberal viewpoint would be the way the state has been trending lately where they legislate to protect us from ourselves.

I'm just sayin' is all. ha ha ha

Smart liberals are absolutely against it.

[Rattlesnake Guy]

Most of us have a combination of Liberal / moderate / conservative / libertarian views. While many of us tend to stay near one region of the spectrum or another, it is a bit simplistic to try to stereotype everyone. While I may dislike big government as well as speed regulation, someone else may dislike big government and want a speed limit. That's what makes this so hard. (and so much fun)

[ApS]

Originally Posted by hazelnut

"...Well USUALLY the conservative viewpoint would be one of personal responsibility and less government intrusion in our every day lives..."

1) In this case, "the intrusion" isn't Government: It's those 4½-tons of velocity multiplied by mass that can't be called back.

2) In this case, "personal responsibility" lies with the kayakers, skiers, tubers, swimmers, inflatables, canoes and rowboats—who, in their everyday lives, would be required to "make themselves visible" or get out of the way.

Originally Posted by hazelnut

"...The liberal viewpoint would be the way the state has been trending lately where they legislate to protect us from ourselves.

Yup. Bring back those grand old days of cigar smoking on commercial travel and in restaurants. Not to mention the good old days when we didn't have to "buckle up" and were able to spew that heady mixture of hydrocarbons and tetraethyl lead from our exhaust pipes.

(And those dizzying days before BWI).

Now them's wuz sum good ole days!

[tis]

Oh, APS, you can be so difficult. You KNOW that legislation does not stop every single problem. Life is life.

[Irrigation Guy]

Maybe a second poll listing the speed our boat is capable of. I have a pontoon and a sport(runabout)boat. My faster boat is capable of about 50mph, but I only know cuz a tried it once with a gps. My cruise speed is about 27 mph, and at night I would be breaking the law at that speed. To slow it down, I would need to trim it down(forcing the bow into the water)and reduce my effeciency.

I voted no speed limit, as I don't see faster boats being the safety issue. I see captains who are either ignorant or just don't care breaking the safe passage rule being the problem on a regular basis(like every weekend and multiple times).

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

1) In this case, "the intrusion" isn't Government: It's those 4½-tons of velocity multiplied by mass that can't be called back.

2) In this case, "personal responsibility" lies with the kayakers, skiers, tubers, swimmers, inflatables, canoes and rowboats—who, in their everyday lives, would be required to "make themselves visible" or get out of the way.


Yup. Bring back those grand old days of cigar smoking on commercial travel and in restaurants. Not to mention the good old days when we didn't have to "buckle up" and were able to spew that heady mixture of hydrocarbons and tetraethyl lead from our exhaust pipes.

(And those dizzying days before BWI).

Now them's wuz sum good ole days!

OK APS enjoy your plastic bubble that the government will be providing for you so that you don't accidentally bruise yourself or fall down. Oh my heavens.

Darwinism is not being given enough chance to thin the pack my friend. We're saving too many idiots.

[Mee-n-Mac]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

1) In this case, "the intrusion" isn't Government: It's those 4½-tons of velocity multiplied by mass that can't be called back.

I know that accuracy in hyperbole is not your forte but shouldn't that have been "4½-tons of mass multiplied by velocity" ?

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

2) In this case, "personal responsibility" lies with the kayakers, skiers, tubers, swimmers, inflatables, canoes and rowboats—who, in their everyday lives, would be required to "make themselves visible" or get out of the way.

And so what's to be made of the incident on Sunapee where a boat of less than 4½-tons mass travelling at a speed (see, that wasn't so hard was it ?) of less that 45 MPH mowed down a kayak (and nearly the kayaker) ? Will you now campaign that 45 MPH is too high for those "danged Sunapee boaters" ? Should water skiing be banned because there's a chance that a boater might, maybe not pay enough attention to what lies in front of him vs that which is towed behind him ? Are ski and wakeboard boats to be the objects of derision now ? Hmmmm, I wonder what emotionally overladen invectives can be dreamed up ? Oh well I'm sure you're up to the task !

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

Yup. Bring back those grand old days of cigar smoking on commercial travel and in restaurants. Not to mention the good old days when we didn't have to "buckle up" and were able to spew that heady mixture of hydrocarbons and tetraethyl lead from our exhaust pipes.

(And those dizzying days before BWI).

Now them's wuz sum good ole days!

They were sum good ole days weren't thay !! Except for the BWI, which in a lot of cases should stand for Boating While Inattentive.

[OCDACTIVE]

wow.. looking at the numbers, that is pretty overwhelming, in my opinion.. After some of the discussion in the compromise poll I would have thought this would have been closer... Pretty clear cut.

[onlywinni]

I am quite shocked by the results of this Poll.

I have heard from the SL Supporters the numbers were overwhelming that speed limits were wanted on Winni

For example:

Quarterly Survey – June 2005

The following results are based on 600 completed telephone interviews among a statewide random sample of adults in New Hampshire. Of the 600 interviews, 534 interviews were among registered voters (162 Republicans, 138 Democrats, and 234 undeclared voters). The interviews were conducted June 27 through 29, 2005.


Question wording and responses:

Do you favor or oppose a law that would impose speed limits for boats on large lakes in New Hampshire?

Boat Speed Limits
Favor 64%
Oppose 22%
Undecided 14%


-----------------------------

Could be because they polled people who do not own or operate boats on Winni and really do not understand the conditions on Winni.

A poll taken of actual captains and their passengers at Marinas and Public Docks would be much more accurate, similar to this poll I believe.

-----------

[Kracken]

Onlywinni,

So what you are saying here is that; you only want the opinion of people who have personal knowledge of boating and or the lake. You, in essence want people to give an educated evaluation on the merits of a speed limit but you want to here only from people who have an understanding of lake and seamanship.

That does not seem to be the way things happen. Every person in the country is allowed to vote no matter how ignorant they are. People can vote for somebody or something for any reason incuding: left, right, donkey, elephant, hair color or just because they like the sound of someones voice. It doesn’t seem like a vote based on a trivial thing like looks should equal a vote based on logic and policy…but it does. People who never pay taxes are allowed an equal voice to a taxpayer’s on how their money…no my money…no the government’s money is spent.

So basically what you are saying is: People who don’t have a vested interest on certain topics should not have a say.

Ok I am alright with that.

A closing thought.

I bet if you did a telephone poll and asked the question: Should there be a speed limit for airplanes over New Hampshire? You might end up with similar numbers to the lake speed limit poll.

Other useful telephone poll questions to ask the general public:

Should motorcycles be required to have airbags?
Should boats have headlights?
Should planes have horns?
Should there be a speed limit for bicycles?
Should submarines have directionals?

[VtSteve]

I know people outside of boating that are bewildered that there isn't a speed limit on lakes. So if you ask them the question

"Given that many people are afraid to get near the water for fear of being run over by a four-ton boat going 140 miles per hour, and that there are Children in the water, would you support our quest to make the lake safe for Families???? "

or

"Given that hundreds of people drown every year during the early spring when the water is Deathly COLD, don't you agree that there should be a law prohibiting boating until the water reaches a SAFE 62.768 degrees? We've had a 400% increase in fatalities this year alone on the big lake, and we need this law NOW!"


By the way, why Don't submarines have directional signals?

[Mee-n-Mac]

Originally Posted by onlywinni

I am quite shocked by the results of this Poll.
{snip-a-roo}
A poll taken of actual captains and their passengers at Marinas and Public Docks would be much more accurate, similar to this poll I believe.

Why so shocked ? The poll in this thread is a different question than the poll in your 2005 survey. That poll is more similar to the "compromise" poll. What I take from it is few like the present limits but most would like some limits. Buy alas "we" substitute someone's opinion as to what's good instead of using reason to determine any limits (and if they'd do any practical good). Naturally opinions will vary and so you end up with the kind of results we've seen to date in both the informal Winni polls and the more formal ones that we're paid for.

As to whom should be polled ... that's a good question. There's no requirement that voters be informed about the politicians they elect or on the referendums that come up so it's kinda hard to ask for it on lake speed limits (though it would be a good idea). These days it seems as if people feel their opinion should be heard even when they can't articulate how they formed it or why it has any validity.

[OCDACTIVE]

There hasn't been comments on here from the supporters because this is devistating to their case. The way this poll was listed is TOTALLY unbiased.

I don't know how the calls were made for the "state wide survey" or the exact questions phrasing, however I did watch the arguements on the House floor and with some of the rehtoric there you have to ask: How was that poll conducted?

If they said: as an example:

Would you support speed limits on lake winnipesaukee, which have proven to save hundreds of lives and remove dangerous speeders that keep many people away from the lakes region, hurting the economy?

The question obviously is biased and how could anyone say anything but: "yes I support speed limits" Again this is just and example...

Especially when they may or may not have any experience what so ever with boating on the lake.. All they have to compare it to (quoting from the Winnfabs website) a Walmart parking lot!!! Seriously.. How many Walmart parking lots can you fit into Paugus Bay alone? Let alone the Broads.

That is the difficulty with survey's conducted from one side or the other. Depending on how they are worded makes all the difference.

This particular survey was not asked in a biased way and proves that boaters of the lake, who actually have experience and understand the issues on the lake, overwhelmingly do not want the speed limit as it is currently in force.

Again by looking at the other "compromise" poll it appears that people are in favor of some type of compromise, but as stated over there by a supporter "if there were to be a one way or the other poll the results would be much different"

Apparently that wasn't the case....

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

There hasn't been comments on here from the supporters because this is devistating to their case.

How so? All this does is prove the obvious; that this forum is dominated by the GFBL crowd. All it does is put the imbalance in these threads into prespective. If you asked the same question on Offshoreonly.com, or Speedwake.com. or NHRBA.com, you'd see the exact same numbers (duh), but would that prove that a speed limit is not favored by the majority of NHers? Or that it is not working just great? OR that it should not be made permanent? Of course not. All it says is that wild horses do not want to be corralled. It doesn't take a poll to know that. Most people in NH have better things to do than weigh in on some GFBL self-poll.

Here's a real poll;
http://searchseacoast.com/news/02172006/news/88265.htm
"Poll: Most residents favor limits on boating speeds
The American Research Group telephone poll of 1,200 residents was commissioned by the New Hampshire Lakes Association. It was conducted Feb. 6 through Feb. 9 with an error margin of plus or minus 3 percentage points...When asked if the limits would make the waterways safer, 84 percent said yes, 9 percent no while 7 percent were undecided...Asked if the speed limits would make boating more enjoyable, 74 percent said yes, 5 percent no, and 21 percent were undecided...Eighty-one percent said they believe the limits will help the Marine Patrol enforce boating laws, while 11 percent said the limit would not help with enforcement and 8 percent were undecided. "

[pm203]

Originally Posted by elchase

How so? All this does is prove the obvious; [/I]"

That most people on this forum know the difference between right and wrong.

[OCDACTIVE]

Oh my!!! EL is back!!! did you get your 1200 hours on the lake this year?

[sunset on the dock]

Originally Posted by elchase

How so? All this does is prove the obvious; that this forum is dominated by the GFBL crowd. All it does is put the imbalance in these threads into prespective. If you asked the same question on Offshoreonly.com, or Speedwake.com. or NHRBA.com, you'd see the exact same numbers (duh), but would that prove that a speed limit is not favored by the majority of NHers? Or that it is not working just great? OR that it should not be made permanent? Of course not. All it says is that wild horses do not want to be corralled. It doesn't take a poll to know that. Most people in NH have better things to do than weigh in on some GFBL self-poll.

[/I]"

Exactly...and as noted earlier, 100% of the residents on our road associaion(approx. 25 people) are in favor of SL/and donation to WinnFabs. Our state reps/senate are not dumb enough to swallow a poll conducted on this forum!

[pm203]

Obviously the state representatives were dumb enough to swallow the Winnfabbs propoganda.They really do not have a clue. Just like the random survey that was done. Why don't we survey someone who really knows, like the entire Marine Patrol? What do you think they would say? By the way, I hope it wasn't someone in your road association that called in a fraudulent report on a speed boat over the weekend. The MP's investigated and found it to be a hoax. They weren't too happy.

[OCDACTIVE]

Again we woudn't be hearing this from the supporters if this poll went the other way.

First a compromise poll is set up where the majority is not happy with the current law.

It is then suggested that it would be a different story if people had to choose one way or the other.

Then this poll is set up.

The results are what they are.....

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by elchase

How so? All this does is prove the obvious; that this forum is dominated by the GFBL crowd.

Again this is quite an exaggeration. If you look at the poll of "how fast does your boat go" less the 20% have a boat that can exceed 60.. Some of those could easily be PWC as well.

When you have overwhelming results you can't say this forum is dominated by GFBL crowd. It is what it is.. I am sure if it went the other way the comments would be very different.

[sunset on the dock]

Poll whom you want, talk to whomever agrees with you...it won't change the fact that swimmers, sailors, lake front residents, kayakers, and many power boaters will be quite reluctant to give up the gains achieved over the last year. The speed limit has made Winnipesaukee a better, more tranquil lake to visit. The anti SL spin machine's propaganda about how the lake's region economy would go down the toilet never happened. Speed limits are here to stay and the real owners of the lake won't ever again let it be hijacked by a very loud minority of powerboaters.

[BroadHopper]

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

Poll whom you want, talk to whomever agrees with you...it won't change the fact that swimmers, sailors, lake front residents, kayakers, and many power boaters will be quite reluctant to give up the gains achieved over the last year. The speed limit has made Winnipesaukee a better, more tranquil lake to visit. The anti SL spin machine's propaganda about how the lake's region economy would go down the toilet never happened. Speed limits are here to stay and the real owners of the lake won't ever again let it be hijacked by a very loud minority of powerboaters.

Or angry lakefront property owners for that matter. The 25 at night is already showing its effect on our shores.

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

did you get your 1200 hours on the lake this year?

Good one. And so we again see why supporters shy away from these threads. If you post something that disagrees with the GFBL agenda, you are a troll or you are ridiculed over some unrelated issue.
No, I don't think 1200 hours is likely even though I'll be on the lake right up till ice-over, in one boat or another. Perhaps that makes you jealous. I also have a '60 T-bird in showroom condition in my garage. Want to poke fun at that? Is that relevant? I typically log near to or just over 1000 boating hours on Winni each year, from the first day I put my jon boat in, which is usually well before ice-out, until well into December. I love the lake and spend as much time on it as I can...especially the past two years when the high speed threat and annoyance has been all but eliminated. And I can say with certainly that my boating has never once intimidated or offended anyone else. Can you say the same? Whether fishing, sailing, or cruising to town, my boating does not impact anyone else's, or make any other boaters wish they had stayed home. I can truly say that I share the lake with all. Can you?

By the way, just how loud must one's boat be to gain membership into this "Thunder Cult"? Do you get to wear "Thunder Cult" helmets? Do you have "Thunder Cult" capes like Evil Kneivel? Sounds pretty silly to me, but then, to each his own.

And what ever happened to that "documentary" that you guys filmed a couple of weeks back? Is it still in editing?

[BroadHopper]

Originally Posted by elchase

I also have a '60 T-bird in showroom condition in my garage. Want to poke fun at that?

Sure. My '58 Satelite with a 426 wedge eats Chebbies and Phords for breakfast. Better not let it out of the garage!

[pm203]

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

Speed limits are here to stay and the real owners of the lake won't ever again let it be hijacked by a very loud minority of powerboaters.

Are the "real owners "of the lake your neighborhood of 25? I didn't realize what a pompous group of individuals you are. And for the record, the speed boats have not gone away, still frequent the lake and still exceed the speed limits on a regular basis. So feel safer if that makes you feel better, but nothing has changed. Everything has remained the same for the "real owners" of the lake.

[Kracken]

You are absolutely right elchase and Sunset. Most people in this state and most people on Winnipesaukee.com don’t care a lick about speed limits on the lake. This poll PROVES that fact. Of the 4000+ members of winnipesaukee.com only 164 voted in this poll, that is 3.8%. That is a very low number considering this forum has members who are passionate about the lake. I believe these polls due give an accurate view of how people feel about the subject.

The catalyst to the speed limit bills passage was the incident involving Erica Blizzard. If that did not happen and the public interest in this legislation would not have been there. It was a devastating blow to speed limit oposition. It was purely a knee-jerk reaction to a tragedyand exploited by the Winnfabs. If there was even one instance of a GFBL traveling at a high speed causing serious injury or death than an valid argument could be made about limits being imposed.

If you really listen to the objections from some of the very vocal speed limit supporters it is easy to identify what their objectives are. They want to take “their” lake back. They want to limit the speed, size and noise generated by boats on the lake. I believe taking out the GFBL is step number one. The next step may be cruisers, then boats with 300+ and so on. Divide up and pick off the minorities one by one. The truth is they want to limit access to the lake. They supported the closing of Ames Farm and would also back anything that would keep the weekend warriors off their lake.

I am not saying all the people who support the speed limit have a hidden agenda. I am not about to accuse any supporters in this forum of such treachery, However they are alligning themselves with people do.

[sunset on the dock]

Originally Posted by pm203

Are the "real owners "of the lake your neighborhood of 25? I didn't realize what a pompous group of individuals you are. And for the record, the speed boats have not gone away, still frequent the lake and still exceed the speed limits on a regular basis. So feel safer if that makes you feel better, but nothing has changed. Everything has remained the same for the "real owners" of the lake.

Nothing has changed? All I have to do is look out my window (and even more important, LISTEN). The SL works and that message is reaching Concord.

[pm203]

Yes, I am certain that Concord is excited about something they have no idea about, nor care about.

[hazelnut]

The spin is ridiculous. My head is dizzy. The numbers have proven it time and time again that this site is NOT DOMINATED BY GFBL owners. You can kick scream and throw sand all you want but it does not make it true. You have deluded yourself into thinking this and you say it so many times that you actually believe yourself. It is hysterical. Stop though because you look more and more silly.

I still get a kick out of the other spin tactic that this law has somehow transformed the lake into some paradise? You are putting yourselves your family members and readers of this forum in jeopardy by suggesting that people should let their guard down. The lake is as crazy as ever and overrun with boneheads in bowriders. Sorry to burst your bubble but the SL law has had absolutely ZERO affect on the safety of the lake. The more you say it the more people are laughing at you. It is fun to read though so no need to stop I guess.

[Kracken]

[QUOTE=elchase;105228]Good one. And so we again see why supporters shy away from these threads. If you post something that disagrees with the GFBL agenda, you are a troll or you are ridiculed over some unrelated issue.../QUOTE]


Ok let me make sure I have this right.

Speed limit supporters are afraid of performance boats.

Speed limit supporters are afraid to post on this because they will be ridiculed?

I must have missed those posts. Some people have been ridiculed for making unsubstantiated claims without backing them up with facts or at least a link. Some people (on both sides) had the hammer dropped on them for making outrageous claims but quite often their statements and claims had nothing to do with a speed limit.

I don’t think anyone here really wants to silence the opposition. Most just want to debate topics and at times it’s damn entertaining. If you read the speed limit topics from beginning to end one can’t help but laugh. There are some really funny posts from a lot of people on both sides of the debate. Somebody should copyright or patent these threads and sell them. It’s a good read and a great distraction.

[Turtle Boy]

Originally Posted by elchase

I love the lake and spend as much time on it as I can...especially the past two years when the high speed threat and annoyance has been all but eliminated. And I can say with certainly that my boating has never once intimidated or offended anyone else. Can you say the same? Whether fishing, sailing, or cruising to town, my boating does not impact anyone else's, or make any other boaters wish they had stayed home. I can truly say that I share the lake with all. Can you?

EL...getting people to change their perspective is not always easy, especially in NH. I felt that this short story by Tupelo from last year summarizes some of the difficulties:

A Brief and Irreverent History of Early Motoring and Speed Limits on NH Highways by tupelo

In the early days of motoring in NH, most cars were small, underpowered and unreliable. Speed limits existed nowhere on NH roads and highways. However by the early 1920's , bigger and better cars, like Duesenbergs, were finding their way onto these roads. Some were capable of doing 65 MPH right through downtown Laconia. They were fast and fun. Accidents occasionally happened but they were few and infrequent. One day a fast, new Duesy raced through Center Harbor, just hitting a small boy who fortunately only broke his arm as he rushed to cross the street. His mother however did not consider this to be such an insignificant injury. She spoke out, saying these GFBL cars need to slow down....my son might well have been killed. "Fear monger, fear monger" soon echoed through the ranks of the GFBL cars owners, directed at this vilified mother. Other townfolk soon began discussing speed limits as well. "But we've never had speed limits" cried some of GFBL car owners." We're turning into a nanny state" cried others. Some even called it feel good legislation. Soon more and more people though were clamoring for some limits. A man named Helvey Sanders became interested as well and a grassroots organization was born. He even traveled to N.Y. where speed limits had been established years ago. He came back after talking with law enforcement officials there about how these limits were instituted and enforced. He even sent letters to the editor detailing how they worked. "Foul play" cried many of the GFBL car owners. "You didn't spell out exactly who you spoke with, when you spoke with them, what their snail mail addresses are. You must provide annotated references with all letters to the editor. No wonder newspaper subscriptions are declining. Your newspaper is a rag. Yellow journalism." Some even threatened to drive their cars back and forth in front of Mr. Sanders' house(there were of course no stalking laws at this time). Soon some car dealerships also weighed in claiming their customers were not feeling welcome in the state and were going to move to Vermont. Besides they said, how are you going to measure and enforce speed limits...radar hasn't been invented yet so surely it will not work on land.
The controversy heated up. A poll was taken of NH residents asking if they felt the roads would be safer if there were speed limits. Mothers, fathers, horse and buggy owners, even common pedestrians weighed in. This statewide NH poll showed 85% of the people were in favor of speed limits on the roads. "Wait, foul play" cried the Duesy owners and other GFBL groups. "This poll is invalid because you only should poll car owners. How can a man who only rides a horse have any say". Soon the GFBL's organized a club, though a few people who owned horse and buggies, also Model T's were encouraged to join to give the sense of a fair and balanced club. They even took their own poll that showed 85% of their members thought "reasonable and prudent" would be a better standard. There was still the occasional accident, but forth came the rallying cry "this accident never would have happened if the car hadn't blown its tire while going through town at 70 mph".
There was even the occasional accident attributed to alcohol intoxication. One GFBL crashed into Ye Olde Tamarack Restaurant in broad daylight doing 55 mph but when it was later found that the driver was intoxicated and had misinterpreted the meaning of "Drive-In",the GFBL car owners cried "See, this proves speed limits would never work...drunks would never obey them!"
By now there was interest in the legislature for establishing speed limits. The house in fact passed this new bill, HB 7. "Vote the bums out" was heard from the "no limits" crowd. One person was heard to say "If the old man of the mountain were still standing, he'd be shedding a tear right now". Another man said " It is still standing you idiot". Soon the senate passed HB 7 and then the governor signed as well. While the GFBL car crowd vowed to fight on, after 2 years when it was seen that the whole NH economy did indeed not collapse as had been warned, and people still found great enjoyment using their cars, the "no limits" crowd slowly faded away.




THE END

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by tupelo; 06-29-2008 at 07:39 AM

Originally Posted by Kracken

You are absolutely right elchase and Sunset.

Thanks. When a majority is so overwhelming, it usually is absolutely right.

Originally Posted by Kracken

Of the 4000+ members of winnipesaukee.com only 164 voted in this poll, that is 3.8%.

Based on the interest in this topic among the GFBL crowd, I'm sure that all 100% of the GFBL members voted and a negligible percentage of the non-GFBL members voted. Had all 4000+ voted, I'm sure you'd see numbers much closer to those ARG found in their legit poll. In fact, the numbers would have to agree within +/- 3%, according to the laws of statistics. Was the poll limited to logged-in members? To pre-existing members? It would be interesting to know how many voters were recruited from the other GFBL sites to vote in this "poll".

Originally Posted by Kracken

The catalyst to the speed limit bills passage was the incident involving Erica Blizzard.

Check your history. The bill had already passed the House and Senate by wide margins and was just awaiting the Governor's already-promised signature.

Originally Posted by Kracken

If there was even one instance of a GFBL traveling at a high speed causing serious injury or death than an valid argument could be made about limits being imposed.

Check your history. There have been numerous high-speed boating accidents on the lake. And please don't give the usual "prove it" response. The research has been done many times and posted on this forum. At least three GFBL boats have flipped on Winnipesaukee in the past ten years at speeds over 70MPH. Boats have been driven up onto islands numerous times at night at high speeds. Do some Googling. But don't rely on MP citation records...there was no speeding law to cite the drivers with.

Originally Posted by Kracken

If you really listen to the objections from some of the very vocal speed limit supporters it is easy to identify what their objectives are.

It sure is...because they say it over and over and over again. They want a lake that they feel safe boating on...like the one we saw this summer. It's telling that those who fought for the law are so happy with it, and those who opposed it are so unhappy with it. Doesn't that say it all? Who is more believable, the person who was a victim and now says "This law is working great, I don't feel victimized anymore, please keep it", or the person who was an offender and now says "This law is not working. I'm still offending as much as ever and nobody is doing anything about it...but please eliminate it." It defies logic to see so many former victims working so hard to keep a law and so many former offenders working so hard to remove the law if it is doing nothing. Of course it is effective. Otherwise, why all the fuss?

Originally Posted by The Big Kahuna

I have been out and about all summer in my GFBL

Is it just me, or does anyone else see the irony here? For those who don't know, "GFBL" stands for "Go Fast Be Loud". It was meant to be a derogatory term to show the obnoxiousness of the high-speed boating enthusiasts. But to show the mentality of the people it is directed at, they actually see it as a compliment and have adopted it to describe themselves and their boats... "We go fast and are loud"... "I have been out and about all summer in my fast and loud boat". And this is supposed to gain support for your cause in a reasonably conservative state? Why not just refer to yourselves as obnoxious? It is a direct synonym. "We are obnoxious"... "I have been out and about all summer in my obnoxious boat". It says so much about the problem that the people who oppose this law have no problem referring to themselves and their boats as "Go Fast and Be Loud". It's a real sympathy grabber.

[Kracken]

Elchase- Thanks. When a majority is so overwhelming, it usually is absolutely right.

Nice spin, I was referring to your assessment that this poll does not include the opinions of a significant number of winnipesaukee.com members. My point was that most people consider the speed limit debate insignificant.

Elchase- Based on the interest in this topic among the GFBL crowd, I'm sure that all 100% of the GFBL members voted and a negligible percentage of the non-GFBL members voted. Had all 4000+ voted, I'm sure you'd see numbers much closer to those ARG found in their legit poll. In fact, the numbers would have to agree within +/- 3%, according to the laws of statistics. Was the poll limited to logged-in members? To pre-existing members? It would be interesting to know how many voters were recruited from the other GFBL sites to vote in this "poll".

You are not suggesting “the other side” stuffed the ballot box are you? What evidence do you have of that? (See post about outrageous unsubstantiated claims)

Elchase - Check your history. The bill had already passed the House and Senate by wide margins and was just awaiting the Governor's already-promised signature.

The House passed the previous speed limit bills only to be defeated in the senate. On HB 847 the senate approved the bill by 14-10 one month prior to the accident. 14-10 is hardly an overwhelming number. However HB 847 is a 2 year law and is now being considered to override the sunset law conveniently around the same time as the trial of Erica Blizzard. Is it merely coincidence they want to make a temp law permanent right in the shadows of Erica Blizzards trial?

Elchase- Check your history. There have been numerous high-speed boating accidents on the lake. And please don't give the usual "prove it" response. The research has been done many times and posted on this forum. At least three GFBL boats have flipped on Winnipesaukee in the past ten years at speeds over 70MPH. Boats have been driven up onto islands numerous times at night at high speeds. Do some Googling. But don't rely on MP citation records...there was no speeding law to cite the drivers with.

Just the facts sir.

How many non-GFBL had accidents on the lake at speeds under 45 MPH in the past 10 years? Has there EVER been a boat to boat accident when a performance boat traveling at a high rate of speed on Lake Winnipesaukee?

Elchase- It sure is...because they say it over and over and over again. They want a lake that they feel safe boating on...like the one we saw this summer. It's telling that those who fought for the law are so happy with it, and those who opposed it are so unhappy with it. Doesn't that say it all? Who is more believable, the person who was a victim and now says "This law is working great, I don't feel victimized anymore, please keep it", or the person who was an offender and now says "This law is not working. I'm still offending as much as ever and nobody is doing anything about it...but please eliminate it." It defies logic to see so many former victims working so hard to keep a law and so many former offenders working so hard to remove the law if it is doing nothing. Of course it is effective. Otherwise, why all the fuss?

Yes some people (like you) want to feel safe while boating. Others would prefer to keep redundant and unenforceable laws off the books so the Marine Patrol can concentrate on the laws that actually make people safer.

[gtagrip]

It sure is...because they say it over and over and over again. They want a lake that they feel safe boating on...like the one we saw this summer. It's telling that those who fought for the law are so happy with it, and those who opposed it are so unhappy with it. Doesn't that say it all? Who is more believable, the person who was a victim and now says "This law is working great, I don't feel victimized anymore, please keep it", or the person who was an offender and now says "This law is not working. I'm still offending as much as ever and nobody is doing anything about it...but please eliminate it." It defies logic to see so many former victims working so hard to keep a law and so many former offenders working so hard to remove the law if it is doing nothing. Of course it is effective. Otherwise, why all the fuss?


Is this the same "safe" lake that you were on when the boat with the 25hp motor passed you within feet and you and your son just laughed, because if youhad been struck by it, there was no possible way that you could have been killed by it! Dude, give it a rest.

[pm203]

Bottom line is that all of the speed boats that I know of have not left and have no intention of leaving. And since that is what you really want, you still lose. There have been loud boats on the lake well before you got here and will be long after you are gone. But, if the law makes you feel better........

[sunset on the dock]

Originally Posted by elchase

Thanks. When a majority is so overwhelming, it usually is absolutely right.


Based on the interest in this topic among the GFBL crowd, I'm sure that all 100% of the GFBL members voted and a negligible percentage of the non-GFBL members voted. Had all 4000+ voted, I'm sure you'd see numbers much closer to those ARG found in their legit poll. In fact, the numbers would have to agree within +/- 3%, according to the laws of statistics. Was the poll limited to logged-in members? To pre-existing members? It would be interesting to know how many voters were recruited from the other GFBL sites to vote in this "poll".

Check your history. The bill had already passed the House and Senate by wide margins and was just awaiting the Governor's already-promised signature.

Check your history. There have been numerous high-speed boating accidents on the lake. And please don't give the usual "prove it" response. The research has been done many times and posted on this forum. At least three GFBL boats have flipped on Winnipesaukee in the past ten years at speeds over 70MPH. Boats have been driven up onto islands numerous times at night at high speeds. Do some Googling. But don't rely on MP citation records...there was no speeding law to cite the drivers with.

It sure is...because they say it over and over and over again. They want a lake that they feel safe boating on...like the one we saw this summer. It's telling that those who fought for the law are so happy with it, and those who opposed it are so unhappy with it. Doesn't that say it all? Who is more believable, the person who was a victim and now says "This law is working great, I don't feel victimized anymore, please keep it", or the person who was an offender and now says "This law is not working. I'm still offending as much as ever and nobody is doing anything about it...but please eliminate it." It defies logic to see so many former victims working so hard to keep a law and so many former offenders working so hard to remove the law if it is doing nothing. Of course it is effective. Otherwise, why all the fuss?


Is it just me, or does anyone else see the irony here? For those who don't know, "GFBL" stands for "Go Fast Be Loud". It was meant to be a derogatory term to show the obnoxiousness of the high-speed boating enthusiasts. But to show the mentality of the people it is directed at, they actually see it as a compliment and have adopted it to describe themselves and their boats... "We go fast and are loud"... "I have been out and about all summer in my fast and loud boat". And this is supposed to gain support for your cause in a reasonably conservative state? Why not just refer to yourselves as obnoxious? It is a direct synonym. "We are obnoxious"... "I have been out and about all summer in my obnoxious boat". It says so much about the problem that the people who oppose this law have no problem referring to themselves and their boats as "Go Fast and Be Loud". It's a real sympathy grabber.

And I think sympathy for the GFBL crowd will fall to a new nadir when Erica Blizzard's trial gets underway in a few weeks and more of the details surrounding the accident come to light. She, by virtue of her association with the NHRBA, became the GFBL's poster girl and many view her agenda to have been "party hearty, live free or die, and get outa my way so I can be fun, fast, and free".

[OCDACTIVE]

[QUOTE=elchase;105228]Good one. And so we again see why supporters shy away from these threads. If you post something that disagrees with the GFBL agenda, you are a troll or you are ridiculed over some unrelated issue.

By the way, just how loud must one's boat be to gain membership into this "Thunder Cult"? Do you get to wear "Thunder Cult" helmets? Do you have "Thunder Cult" capes like Evil Kneivel? Sounds pretty silly to me, but then, to each his own.

[QUOTE]

EL I was just razzing you a little.. Don't take it to heart...

Thunder Cult has nothing to due with noise. Would have been happy to explain if you were to have asked, but I appreciate the sarcasm.

The type of boat I own is an Active Thunder. Not a production boat. Only built to order.

When we go places: poker runs, gatherings etc. there are usually not too many of us and we all tend to get together. Over the years we have become good friends and another manufactorer jokingly one day said: Wow do those guys go everywhere together? they are like a cult... And thats how Active Thunder Cult Member was started.

Just ask if you would like to know.. No need to speculate.

[VitaBene]

Originally Posted by gtagrip

It sure is...because they say it over and over and over again. They want a lake that they feel safe boating on...like the one we saw this summer. It's telling that those who fought for the law are so happy with it, and those who opposed it are so unhappy with it. Doesn't that say it all? Who is more believable, the person who was a victim and now says "This law is working great, I don't feel victimized anymore, please keep it", or the person who was an offender and now says "This law is not working. I'm still offending as much as ever and nobody is doing anything about it...but please eliminate it." It defies logic to see so many former victims working so hard to keep a law and so many former offenders working so hard to remove the law if it is doing nothing. Of course it is effective. Otherwise, why all the fuss?


Is this the same "safe" lake that you were on when the boat with the 25hp motor passed you within feet and you and your son just laughed, because if youhad been struck by it, there was no possible way that you could have been killed by it! Dude, give it a rest.

No problem, it was a small boat and only 25 HP or thereabouts and you know the props stop on those little motors when they hit a body part (kind of like my son's toy bathtub boat with the electric motor). It would hardly make a mark. Merely a flesh wound! You could probably laugh it off.

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by VitaBene

No problem, it was a small boat and only 25 HP or thereabouts and you know the props stop on those little motors when they hit a body part (kind of like my son's toy bathtub boat with the electric motor). It would hardly make a mark. Merely a flesh wound! You could probably laugh it off.

Vita, I have always appreciated what you have said. You have always had some very good points but seriously I hope you are joking on this one.

The torque on a 25 horse motor can easily chew anyone up really really badly. I don't know if it could cut through bone but it sure would get there...

[BroadHopper]

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

Nothing has changed? All I have to do is look out my window (and even more important, LISTEN). The SL works and that message is reaching Concord.

Looking out my window I see erosion from all the boats that are limited to 25 at night. SL is not working in my neighborhood. It's WORST!

Maybe we should put a clause in the Shoreline Protection Act to eliminate the 25 at night.........................

[VitaBene]

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

Vita, I have always appreciated what you have said. You have always had some very good points but seriously I hope you are joking on this one.

The torque on a 25 horse motor can easily chew anyone up really really badly. I don't know if it could cut through bone but it sure would get there...

Sorry, I was being facetious based on this from this previous post by Elchase:

"Thanks Steve, I had a great day on the lake. It was hot and sunny here and Winnipesaukee was very busy, but very civilized again. Hope you enjoyed the day up on your lake.
I just can't get over the difference a simple little law has made. You might not be able to see that from your vantage in VT, but having been out on Lake Winnipesaukee for well over 600 hours so far this spring/summer, I have witnessed the improvement first hand.
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.
There are certainly Captain Boneheads driving craft of all sizes; little fishing boats, sailboats, cruisers, and GFBLs. And the SL certainly will not get them all off the lake or turn them into good boaters in all regards. But it is amazing how much less dangerous these Captain Boneheads in the smaller slower boats are than the Captain Boneheads driving 70 in big heavy boats. Its amazing how much less terrorizing boats are when they are heading at you at 25 mph than at 70.
You guys need to understand that laws like the SL are not caused by responsible drivers like you protest to be, but are caused by the idiots who have been terrorizing us because they drive like idiots, drive huge heavy boats, and drive them very fast in places where it is not "prudent" to do so. You guys had a good thing, and they ruined it for you...we didn't. Your anger should be directed at them, and not at those who simply want to recreate on the lake without undue fear or risk.
Focus your energies on saving the other lakes where you can still drive as fast as you want from SLs before you lose them too. Do this by going after the people who really cost you your freedom here...the Captain Boneheads who drive GFBLs. If you don't get them off Sunapee, Newfound, Champlain, and all the other still-unlimited lakes, then SLs are inevitable there too, and you will only have yourselves to blame for failing to recognize your true enemy while you still had time."

I'm just needling him a bit. Any prop that can move a boat is not going to give when hitting a person.

[hazelnut]

Vita,

I am sure elchase regrets posting this story as it absolutely 100% confirms what we have been saying. He posted this trying to prove a point and all he did was prove ours. I LOVE IT!!!!

I pray that the good elected representatives read his story and understand that is what we have been trying to say all along. The lake is overrun with Capt. Boneheads and that is the problem. Thanks elchase for posting this story it has helped immensely.

[Mee-n-Mac]

Originally Posted by hazelnut

Vita,

I am sure elchase regrets posting this story as it absolutely 100% confirms what we have been saying. He posted this trying to prove a point and all he did was prove ours. I LOVE IT!!!!

I pray that the good elected representatives read his story and understand that is what we have been trying to say all along. The lake is overrun with Capt. Boneheads and that is the problem. Thanks elchase for posting this story it has helped immensely.

To me it shows how emotionally driven this whole thing is. Elchase wasn't terrorized by the small boat but is by the large boat. He didn't worry about the small boat hitting them but assumes the large boat will hit them (until it misses and then no doubt it was pure luck). He thinks a 25 MPH hit from a small boat is no big deal !?! Whatever. I wonder how Elchase would feel about a 25MPH hit from a small car .... and then to be taken to the dock and tossed into the water. I hope he'd be wearing a PFD because I think it likely his swimming would be somewhat impaired after this "small" impact.

Originally Posted by Kracken

Nice spin, ...

Originally Posted by gtagrip

It sure is...

Originally Posted by pm203

Bottom line is ...

Originally Posted by VitaBene

No problem, ....

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

The torque on a 25 horse motor can ...

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

Looking out my window I see erosion ...

Originally Posted by VitaBene

Sorry, I was being facetious ...

Originally Posted by hazelnut

Vita,I am sure elchase regrets ...

Originally Posted by Mee-n-Mac

and then to be taken to the dock and tossed into the water....

Blah, blah, blah. You guys sound like a bunch of whiny little girls. You have nothing. The speed limit is working so good that the people who worked for it are happy with its results and want it made permanent. It is working so good that the people it was aimed to reasonably limit are being reasonably limited by it and want it eliminated. Enough said.

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

EL I was just razzing you a little.. Don't take it to heart...

Same here. I'm just playing too. I only give back the same to those who dish it out to me, assuming they should be able to take what they give.

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

Just ask if you would like to know.. No need to speculate.

Ok, so seriously; Do you guys have a theme song like Underdog? I think that would be pretty cool if you all rode around together in Thundercult costumes singing "There's no need to fear...Thundercult is here..."

[Mee-n-Mac]

Originally Posted by Mee-n-Mac

and then to be taken to the dock and tossed into the water....

Originally Posted by elchase

Blah, blah, blah. You guys sound like a bunch of whiny little girls. You have nothing. The speed limit is working so good that the people who worked for it are happy with its results and want it made permanent. It is working so good that the people it was aimed to reasonably limit are being reasonably limited by it and want it eliminated. Enough said.

Nice choice of selective quotation. Did you understand it before you selected it ? Let me help you. How well do you think you'd be able to swim after being struck by your 25 MPH boat ? I suspect not well at all. Seems to me your concern over being hit is as selective as your quoting ability.

And what I have is the ability to debate the matter without resorting to calling people names. You ... apparently not.

[chipj29]

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

Exactly...and as noted earlier, 100% of the residents on our road associaion(approx. 25 people) are in favor of SL/and donation to WinnFabs. Our state reps/senate are not dumb enough to swallow a poll conducted on this forum!

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

Poll whom you want, talk to whomever agrees with you...it won't change the fact that swimmers, sailors, lake front residents, kayakers, and many power boaters will be quite reluctant to give up the gains achieved over the last year. The speed limit has made Winnipesaukee a better, more tranquil lake to visit. The anti SL spin machine's propaganda about how the lake's region economy would go down the toilet never happened. Speed limits are here to stay and the real owners of the lake won't ever again let it be hijacked by a very loud minority of powerboaters.

Well, I hate to break it to you guys, but the shoreline residents are not the ONLY owners of the lake. I own just as much of it as you do, and I live 30 miles away. It is pretty obvious who the speed limit is catering to.

Originally Posted by elchase

Blah, blah, blah. You guys sound like a bunch of whiny little girls. You have nothing. The speed limit is working so good that the people who worked for it are happy with its results and want it made permanent. It is working so good that the people it was aimed to reasonably limit are being reasonably limited by it and want it eliminated. Enough said.


Same here. I'm just playing too. I only give back the same to those who dish it out to me, assuming they should be able to take what they give.


Ok, so seriously; Do you guys have a theme song like Underdog? I think that would be pretty cool if you all rode around together in Thundercult costumes singing "There's no need to fear...Thundercult is here..."

You only post for one reason... to try to protect what you believe to be YOUR lake. It is just as much mine as it is yours.

[sunset on the dock]

Originally Posted by chipj29

Well, I hate to break it to you guys, but the shoreline residents are not the ONLY owners of the lake. I own just as much of it as you do, and I live 30 miles away. It is pretty obvious who the speed limit is catering to.



You only post for one reason... to try to protect what you believe to be YOUR lake. It is just as much mine as it is yours.

And again...blah, blah, blah..so let's turn this into a class warfare issue. As if the GFBL boats don't cost a small fortune (though I hear the used ones are now a bit cheaper), not to mention the GFBL's that we see parked in front of lakefront homes. As mentioned earlier, people come here for peaceful recreation, and the owners of the lake, including non waterfront owners, swimmers, kayakers, sailors, people who live near the lake who don't don't enjoy all the benefits of lakeside living but still have to endure the noise all have a stake here. Sorry, but speed limits are here to stay.

[VtSteve]

I'd also like a law that mandates restaurants and bar owners keep a time log of drinks served their customers, by LAW. This would come in handy should, say, someone leave the docks of a restaurant and run over someone after consuming many drinks. Kind of a memory helper so to speak. No, it doesn't help to start a boating group to introduce speed limits that had nothing to do with the accident. Nice cover though.

One way or the other, someone's going to have to point out that things need to change the next few years. Perhaps a new law addressing the PFD issue for early season small boaters? They did that in New York, must be a good one.

[NoRegrets]

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

And again...blah, blah, blah..so let's turn this into a class warfare issue. As if the GFBL boats don't cost a small fortune (though I hear the used ones are now a bit cheaper), not to mention the GFBL's that we see parked in front of lakefront homes. As mentioned earlier, people come here for peaceful recreation, and the owners of the lake, including non waterfront owners, swimmers, kayakers, sailors, people who live near the lake who don't don't enjoy all the benefits of lakeside living but still have to endure the noise all have a stake here. Sorry, but speed limits are here to stay.

This is a public body of water owned by all. The definition of PEACEFUL RECREATION is as subjective as anything you try to imagine. Get a book from the library, sit in a sound proof room to block all undesired sounds, and declare it PEACEFUL RECREATION. I have never gone by a marketing slogan stating "Come to Winnipesaukee for PEACEFUL RECREATION".

This looks and sounds more like a class war waged by a a few bitter humans (grown up spoiled brats) that will never be satisified by sharing their precious toys or playground.

It is too bad there is not an intelligent way to evaluate bonehead actions and speed crimes to get a statistical measure of the true issue.

I do not have a loud fast boat but do not desire to eliminate the right of people to have and use them on a body that has had them since the 1920's.

I do not have a small boat but do not want to state that they are to dangerous to venture out into such a large body of water.

There is definitely room for all. One group has taken the first step to rule against another.

I am in the camp to eliminate the law and really address the bonehead issue.

[pm203]

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

. Sorry, but speed limits are here to stay.

And so are the speed boats. But, since loud ,fast boats were here before you were, shouldn't you leave if you don't like the noise? And speaking of noise, is it really that bad, say, when compared to a loud motorcycle? I can appreciate quiet, calm and tranquility like everyone else. I do know that during the week, I might actually experience it. On the weekends, I know its a luxury and probably won't happen. Whether it is a loud motorcycle, or a loud car radio pumping out bass, or a child screaming while tubing, the noise is there and I accept it for what it is. I may not like it, but I accept it. Can't you? Is it really that bad?

[ApS]

At exactly 10:20, on this eve of Labor Day Weekend, I was awakened by a loud, fast boat obviously exceeding the speed limit. A minute later, somehow unhappy with the existing "free expression of his ideas", he switched on his selective exhaust!

A few minutes of this, and he slowed to an idle, perhaps to "park" in the neighborhood of Camp Ossipee.

A minute later, he started gaining speed again when (unexpectedly to me in the darkness), the Marine Patrol stopped him with several widely-spaced electronic "beeps". The blue lights went on, and were still on at 11:19!

I called the MP's dispatcher, and she said she would "page the officer" regarding my "10-88" complaint of the selective exhaust.

There little else to report except that I could hear voices, a repeated cluncky mechanical sound like a boarding ladder might make, and that one of the flashers was missing part of its blue cover (making an occasional white light that flashed in synchrony with the blue lights).

***The officer "cleared" at 11:33PM. The sound upon departure was of twin outboards, so it was one of the MP's "RIBYs" that made the stop.

At 11:47, a deep rumble indicates that the offender is now departing, heading in the direction of Cow Island at about 25-MPH.

Let's see, now...where do I put this post?

[BroadHopper]

One weekend, someone called the MP and claim some kid was going 100 mph by his/her house. Come to find out someone had a little hydroplane with a 25 HP motor. Such a waste of time for the MP. Since the speed limit, people are over reacting................

[VitaBene]

Originally Posted by elchase

Blah, blah, blah. You guys sound like a bunch of whiny little girls. You have nothing. The speed limit is working so good that the people who worked for it are happy with its results and want it made permanent. It is working so good that the people it was aimed to reasonably limit are being reasonably limited by it and want it eliminated. Enough said.


Same here. I'm just playing too. I only give back the same to those who dish it out to me, assuming they should be able to take what they give.


Ok, so seriously; Do you guys have a theme song like Underdog? I think that would be pretty cool if you all rode around together in Thundercult costumes singing "There's no need to fear...Thundercult is here..."

Elchase, do us all a favor- if you are going to quote people, pull more than 2 or 3 words key phrases or words. "Parsing text" as others have called it is deceptive, misleading and hard to follow. Take a look at the back cover of the Harlequin romance you are reading and look at the superlatives heaped on that tome. It is pretty easy to pull a a word that suits your point out of many, isn't it? I quoted you in your entirety and would expect that you have the courtesy to do the same.

BTW have you ever exceeded the SL in that TBird on the street?

[ApS]

Originally Posted by chipj29

Well, I hate to break it to you guys, but the shoreline residents are not the ONLY owners of the lake. I own just as much of it as you do, and I live 30 miles away.

Living 30 miles away, you've probably never had a boat awaken you in the middle of the night. But then we'll hear, "We get awakened by loud motorcycles"!

We get awakened by both loud motorcycles and loud boats.

You probably can't conceive that a boat anchor can strike your house at night; or, should your house be located within 120-feet of a lake's shoreline, be struck by the boat itself.

(Consider also, that the boat may have nobody in it!)

On the eve of a Labor Day Weekend—a weekend when editors will be printing the headlines—there was the expected increase in the number of boats on the lake.

Towards evening, it was reassuring to see that many were traveling at speeds much slower than the required 25-MPH.

Many appear to be discovering the safer and relaxed boating Winnipesaukee experience that decades of residents had enjoyed before excessive speeds became an issue.

[sunset on the dock]

Originally Posted by pm203

And so are the speed boats. But, since loud ,fast boats were here before you were, shouldn't you leave if you don't like the noise? And speaking of noise, is it really that bad, say, when compared to a loud motorcycle? I can appreciate quiet, calm and tranquility like everyone else. I do know that during the week, I might actually experience it. On the weekends, I know its a luxury and probably won't happen. Whether it is a loud motorcycle, or a loud car radio pumping out bass, or a child screaming while tubing, the noise is there and I accept it for what it is. I may not like it, but I accept it. Can't you? Is it really that bad?

Nope, not this year!!!!!!

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

At exactly 10:20, on this eve of Labor Day Weekend, I was awakened by a loud, fast boat obviously exceeding the speed limit. A minute later, somehow unhappy with the existing "free expression of his ideas", he switched on his selective exhaust!

A few minutes of this, and he slowed to an idle, perhaps to "park" in the neighborhood of Camp Ossipee.

A minute later, he started gaining speed again when (unexpectedly to me in the darkness), the Marine Patrol stopped him with several widely-spaced electronic "beeps". The blue lights went on, and were still on at 11:19!

I called the MP's dispatcher, and she said she would "page the officer" regarding my "10-88" complaint of the selective exhaust.

There little else to report except that I could hear voices, a repeated cluncky mechanical sound like a boarding ladder might make, and that one of the flashers was missing part of its blue cover (making an occasional white light that flashed in synchrony with the blue lights).

***The officer "cleared" at 11:33PM. The sound upon departure was of twin outboards, so it was one of the MP's "RIBYs" that made the stop.

At 11:47, a deep rumble indicates that the offender is now departing, heading in the direction of Cow Island at about 25-MPH.

Let's see, now...where do I put this post?

The Choice was theirs, and I detest it when they use it that way at night. So, the MP happened to be there and made a stop. Good for them. The stop was for 14 minutes, including the swap of paperwork and all?

Perhaps the MP did the smart thing, and just let him know what he thought of using the SC like that at that hour, as well as to let him know Yes son, we are out here

Originally Posted by pm203

The crime today was that somebody( over the weekend) from Bear Island frauduently called in to the MP that a high performance boat was speeding through a no-wake zone...

Originally Posted by pm203

I hope it wasn't someone in your road association that called in a fraudulent report on a speed boat ...

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

One weekend, someone called the MP and claim some kid was going 100 mph by his/her house. Come to find out someone had a little hydroplane with a 25 HP motor. Such a waste of time for the MP...

This ever-changing and irrelevant story is getting old. Was it a performance boat or a little 25HP hydroplane? Was it called in from an island or a road association? How do you know? Was it in a no wake zone or in front of someone’s house? Are shorefront owners suddenly starting to call in these fictitious violations as part of some nefarious pro-speed limit conspiracy? How would this help their cause? It’s starting to sound like a big fabrication that just cannot be kept straight. It sounds more likely to me that the whole story is either made up or that some speed limit opponent is making these calls. Otherwise, its relevance eludes me. Is the point that shorefront owners cannot call the MP when they feel they are witnessing a violation or that boaters should be allowed to harass shorefront owners? The MP can take care of themselves. They know the source phone number of every call and would just cite the caller for filing a fraudulent report if that was the case. They require identification of every caller (I know). They will not respond to an anonymous complaint (I know). So clearly there is another motive to this repeated story about someone feeling that a boat was violating a law and reporting it to the MP. Why not just save us the suspense and come out with it?

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

Since the speed limit, people are over reacting................

You can say that again… and it’s not the shorefronters.

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by elchase

This ever-changing and irrelevant story is getting old. Was it a performance boat or a little 25HP hydroplane? Was it called in from an island or a road association? How do you know? Was it in a no wake zone or in front of someone’s house? Are shorefront owners suddenly starting to call in these fictitious violations as part of some nefarious pro-speed limit conspiracy? How would this help their cause? It’s starting to sound like a big fabrication that just cannot be kept straight. It sounds more likely to me that the whole story is either made up or that some speed limit opponent is making these calls. Otherwise, its relevance eludes me. Is the point that shorefront owners cannot call the MP when they feel they are witnessing a violation or that boaters should be allowed to harass shorefront owners? The MP can take care of themselves. They know the source phone number of every call and would just cite the caller for filing a fraudulent report if that was the case. They require identification of every caller (I know). They will not respond to an anonymous complaint (I know). So clearly there is another motive to this repeated story about someone feeling that a boat was violating a law and reporting it to the MP. Why not just save us the suspense and come out with it?
You can say that again… and it’s not the shorefronters.

el, get a clue the stories are two separate incidents. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out. Another chink in your armor I'm afraid. Everyone else seems to have their stories straight. You parse comments and jump all over people with little to no regard for facts. It's getting a tad embarrassing.

[pm203]

The Bear Island call-in was for a large speed boat and after a investigation was deemed a hoax by the MP. And, they had solid proof that it was a hoax. Looks like the Bear Islanders are now trying to control who idles by their island. Too bad it was a failure.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by VtSteve

"...The stop was for 14 minutes, including the swap of paperwork and all...?"

More like an hour.

Originally Posted by VtSteve

"...Perhaps the MP did the smart thing, and just let him know what he thought of using the SC like that at that hour, as well as to let him know Yes son, we are out here..."

Nobody was more surprised than I was that the MP was out there Friday night—and that late. Even the dispatcher apologized for the late hour, regarding her error in taking my I.D. info.

I can find out what transpired: The boat is a green Cris Craft, operating out of Wolfeboro's P. Point cottages. (And is operating noisily today! )

My spies tell me that the voices heard were the MP and the offender. The MP stated, "When I put my blue lights on, you are to stop".
Noisy offender states: "OK".

So what does amplified exhaust noise do to enhance one's enjoyment of the lake at 10:20 PM, anyway?

I can't think of a single soul who can answer that, yet there are those opponents insistent on "Silent-Choice" (so-called) being made legal.

[KonaChick]

Originally Posted by pm203

The Bear Island call-in was for a large speed boat and after a investigation was deemed a hoax by the MP. And, they had solid proof that it was a hoax. Looks like the Bear Islanders are now trying to control who idles by their island. Too bad it was a failure.

I hope this has no truth to it. Who in their right mind would make up a story about a fictious GFBL boat speeding just for a hoax? If it's true it's deeply disappointing and saddens me. I hope it's not.

Originally Posted by hazelnut

el, get a clue...You parse comments...

Ok Sherlock, so assuming there are all these sudden false alarms being called in, why does this belong in a speed limit thread? Violating a no wake zone or shoreline are other laws having nothing to do with the SL. What would this con artist gain by calling in from different places about different boats? Why would a SL supporter want to drag the MP in over a boat that did not exist? Sounded a bit fishy to me. But then, I don't have a clue because I parse quotes .

Originally Posted by pm203

The Bear Island call-in was for a large speed boat and after a investigation was deemed a hoax by the MP. And, they had solid proof that it was a hoax. Looks like the Bear Islanders are now trying to control who idles by their island. Too bad it was a failure.

Hoax? Conspiracy? Sounds like someone needs to loosen his tin foil hat.

Originally Posted by KonaChick

I hope this has no truth to it. Who in their right mind would make up a story about a fictious GFBL boat speeding just for a hoax? If it's true it's deeply disappointing and saddens me. I hope it's not.

Don't worry Konachick. I called to Glendale and they had no idea what this was about. Never heard of even one such false alarm, never mind three. Said it never happened. As confused as me about the reason for such a tale. Confirming what I said before, they have a record of the source number of every call-in and if someone calls they will only send out a boat if they know who the caller is. If someone made a false report and they had "solid proof", they'd cite them. This is clearly a tale..or two...or three...for what purpose we will never know. Perhaps they are trying to gain sympathy for GFBL's, but then, why say it was a hydroplane? Perhaps they are trying to rally up dislike for the people on Bear Island, but then, why go after the road association?
Anyway, wasn't it a great day out there today? What a summer! Heading up the Bay for an ice cream after dinner...nice and slow.

[chipj29]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

Living 30 miles away, you've probably never had a boat awaken you in the middle of the night. But then we'll hear, "We get awakened by loud motorcycles"!

We get awakened by both loud motorcycles and loud boats.

You probably can't conceive that a boat anchor can strike your house at night; or, should your house be located within 120-feet of a lake's shoreline, be struck by the boat itself.

(Consider also, that the boat may have nobody in it!)

On the eve of a Labor Day Weekend—a weekend when editors will be printing the headlines—there was the expected increase in the number of boats on the lake.

Towards evening, it was reassuring to see that many were traveling at speeds much slower than the required 25-MPH.

Many appear to be discovering the safer and relaxed boating Winnipesaukee experience that decades of residents had enjoyed before excessive speeds became an issue.

I can conceive that a motorcycle or a car/truck/any vehicle could hit my house at any time. That was the risk I took when I bought my house. Same with you, whether it be your house in Florida or your house in NH.

There are laws on the books regarding loud cars/trucks/motorcycles etc. Do they make the drivers go slower? Probably not.

Again, Lake Winnipesaukee is owned by me, you and all the other residents of NH. One owns no more than another. Isn't that beautiful?

[BroadHopper]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

At exactly 10:20, on this eve of Labor Day Weekend, I was awakened by a loud, fast boat obviously exceeding the speed limit. A minute later, somehow unhappy with the existing "free expression of his ideas", he switched on his selective exhaust!

A few minutes of this, and he slowed to an idle, perhaps to "park" in the neighborhood of Camp Ossipee.

A minute later, he started gaining speed again when (unexpectedly to me in the darkness), the Marine Patrol stopped him with several widely-spaced electronic "beeps". The blue lights went on, and were still on at 11:19!

I called the MP's dispatcher, and she said she would "page the officer" regarding my "10-88" complaint of the selective exhaust.

There little else to report except that I could hear voices, a repeated cluncky mechanical sound like a boarding ladder might make, and that one of the flashers was missing part of its blue cover (making an occasional white light that flashed in synchrony with the blue lights).

***The officer "cleared" at 11:33PM. The sound upon departure was of twin outboards, so it was one of the MP's "RIBYs" that made the stop.

At 11:47, a deep rumble indicates that the offender is now departing, heading in the direction of Cow Island at about 25-MPH.

Let's see, now...where do I put this post?

Just went over the MP log today at Glendale. This incident is not logged in.

[Rinkerfam]

I for one do not feel the least bit "safer" since the speed limit has taken hold. Hazelnut hit it right on the head. The lake is overrun with captain b-heads. I have been boating on Winnipesaukee for some 25 years ( all of them piloting family runabouts that are far from GFBL's). I have never been in an uncomfortable situation that derived from a boat traveling at a high rate of speed. All of my safety concerns involve other vessels coming too close to me and or not understanding who has the right of way in a given situation. Every time out so far this season I have had to slow down or alter course all the while being the stand on vessel. This is so frustrating. I have even witnessed boats passing between myself and Marine Patrol at a distance far less than 150' from both myself and the MP boat (and yes I dropped to idle speed). As far as Sunset On The Dock's perception of the lake being a kinder gentler place this year, I think the weather and the economy have far more to do with it than any speed limit.

Originally Posted by Rinkerfam

I for one do not feel the least bit "safer" since the speed limit has taken hold....

As Howie Carr would say "Of course you don't". And of course the rest of your GFBL buddies on this forum don't. And smokers are united in the belief that the laws against smoking in restaurants have not done a thing to make dining more enjoyable. And junkies are united in the belief that drug laws have been useless. And illegal aliens are united in the belief that border security is a waste of time. If we let the offenders decide which laws to keep on the books, we'd have lawless bedlam. That's why we don't let prisoners vote.
But the bottom line is that the people who fought so hard for this law are very happy with it and want it kept and the cowboys it was aimed to slow down are very unhappy with it...and that says it all. The more you guys complain about the law, the more you show how effective it has been. If this law had done nothing, then you guys would be out buzzing around the lake instead of spending your days on this forum complaining about it.

[BroadHopper]

Originally Posted by elchase

That's why we don't let prisoners vote.

Wrong again buddy! Prisoners are allowed to vote by sending in an absentee ballot to their home town. Why do you make up all these lies....

[KonaChick]

I don't understand how complaining or trying to change a law makes it "effective". That does not compute....

[Lakegeezer]

Originally Posted by elchase

But the bottom line is that the people who fought so hard for this law are very happy with it and want it kept and the cowboys it was aimed to slow down are very unhappy with it...and that says it all.

That does not say it all. Boaters with slower boats are also unhappy at the class warfare strike in the false name of safety.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by pm203

The Bear Island call-in was for a large speed boat and after a investigation was deemed a hoax by the MP. And, they had solid proof that it was a hoax. Looks like the Bear Islanders are now trying to control who idles by their island. Too bad it was a failure.

Why would someone need to make up a story about high speed boats going past Bear Island????

Boats go through the Bear Island NWZ at high speed EVERY DAY and EVERY NIGHT. If I called the Marine Patrol every time this happened I would be on the phone several times a day.

OK, this is only about 1% of the boats that go through the NWZ. But if you think this is not happening then you do not have a clue!

Funny thing, while I was typing this I just watched two PWCs go though full speed.

[Airwaves]

Originally posted by APS

At exactly 10:20, on this eve of Labor Day Weekend, I was awakened by a loud, fast boat obviously exceeding the speed limit. A minute later, somehow unhappy with the existing "free expression of his ideas", he switched on his selective exhaust!

At 11:47, a deep rumble indicates that the offender is now departing, heading in the direction of Cow Island at about 25-MPH.

So the boat's exhaust woke you up and you could tell from the sound that he was "obviously exceeding the speed limit"?

He switched his exhaust to quiet and you're complaining? I don't have a boat with this kind of exhaust but I was under the impression that a switchable exhaust is not lawful in NH, so by making his boat quiet, possibly so he wouldn't disturb you, he broke the law.

At 11:47 your superhuman hearing once again came into play and you determined he was heading toward Cow Island, with his loud exhaust, at 25 miles an hour?

We don't need radar...we have APS!!!!

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

At exactly 10:20, on this eve of Labor Day Weekend, I was awakened by a loud, fast boat obviously exceeding the speed limit. A minute later, somehow unhappy with the existing "free expression of his ideas", he switched on his selective exhaust!

APS.. I have seen you make this statement in past threads complaining about noise and selective exhaust....

I am not saying your opinion on noise or speed is invalid, for everyone has the right to their opinion.

However when you say "he switched to his selective exhaust" this can not happen..

There is no "switchable" (not selective) exhaust out there for a GFB that can be switched at over 3000 RPM.. You would blow your motor. I have been looking into getting them for mine and have many friends who have them. (not on the lake mind you)... These are called "Captains Call, or Silent choice"

Both of which are the same thing and can only be activated under 3000 rpm's for the very expensive ones or 2200 rpms for the most common.

So if you would like to comment on how a loud fast boat woke you up... that is perfectly fine and you have every right to tell your story.. But lets not add drama to it....

[sunset on the dock]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

Wrong again buddy! Prisoners are allowed to vote by sending in an absentee ballot to their home town. Why do you make up all these lies....

I didn't think prisoners could vote either. Maybe there are some states with some exceptions but here is some info from Michigan. I would hardly describe el's comment as "making up lies". How do you know so much about prisoners voting rights?

Here's the story from Michigan:


Can someone convicted of a felony register and vote? Can a person confined in jail or prison register and vote?
MCL 168.492a reads: "A person confined in a jail, who is otherwise a qualified elector, prior to trial or sentence may, upon request, register under section 504. The person shall be deemed a resident of the city, township, and address at which he resided before confinement. A person while confined in a jail after being convicted and sentenced shall not be eligible to register."

MCL 168.758b reads: "A person who, in a court of this or another state or in a federal court, has been legally convicted and sentenced for a crime for which the penalty imposed is confinement in jail or prison shall not vote, offer to vote, attempt to vote, or be permitted to vote at an election while confined."

Given the above restrictions, a Michigan resident confined in jail or prison that is awaiting arraignment or trial is eligible to register and vote. A Michigan resident who is serving a sentence in jail or prison after conviction cannot register or vote during his or her period of confinement. After a Michigan resident who is serving a sentence in jail or prison is released, he or she is free to participate in elections without restriction.



SHAME ON YOU EL...YOU SHOULD HAVE QUALIFIED YOUR COMMENT. PRISONERS NOT YET CONVICTED CAN VOTE ABSENTEE. Oh brother. Hey el, didn't one of your posts say something to the effect that if you said August occurred in summer then people on this forum would find a way to disagree with you?

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

Wrong again buddy! Prisoners are allowed to vote by sending in an absentee ballot to their home town. Why do you make up all these lies....

Wrong again buddy! http://www.idebate.org/debatabase/to...hp?topicID=515 "Only two US states (Maine and Vermont) permit prisoners to vote, although Utah and Massachusetts also did so until 1998 and 2000 respectively." While you guys are so quick to call everyone else a liar, you have no trouble just throwing anything out as fact and have been able to get away with it because you had chased all those who disagreed with you away. Start doing your homework, like I do, before you make things up.

Originally Posted by hazelnut

...little to no regard for facts. It's getting a tad embarrassing.

I agree.

Originally Posted by Kracken

Just the facts sir.

Exactly. Could not have said it better. Thanks.

Originally Posted by KonaChick

I don't understand how complaining or trying to change a law makes it "effective". That does not compute....

It's sad that you can't understand this. If a drunk approached you and complained that he thought the DUI laws weren't doing anything and should be repealed to purge the statutes of a meaningless law, would you believe him? Would you be more appreciative of our DUI laws or less? If a guy in a big speedboat approached you and said "we don't need a speed limit...trust me, I'll behave. All I really care about is purging our statutes of meaningless laws" would you believe him? Want to by some magic beans?

Originally Posted by Lakegeezer

Boaters with slower boats are also unhappy at the class warfare strike in the false name of safety.

You mean the kayakers and camp directors look down on the people in the Thundercult with their $200000 boats? This one went way over my head. Are people with minivans that believe in highway speed limits just practicing class warfare? This one is a real stretch. This is better than the "discrimination against a certain class of boater" theory.

Had a wonderful afternoon out there. There is nothing better to a sailor than a late summer westerly breeze across the Broads. I probably approached the speed limit myself a few times. Saw numerous patrol boats. Saw hundreds of boaters enjoying the lake. But never saw a single boat that looked to be breaking the SL law. What a great way to close out the best summer in years.

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by elchase

You mean the kayakers and camp directors look down on the people in the Thundercult with their $200000 boats?

are you really trying to make this personal? I may not agree with your posts but I have not made any personal attacks. I will gather that this was just a razzing and let it pass. Otherwise I would suggest that you read the forum rules on keeping on topic.

[Resident 2B]

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

I didn't think prisoners could vote either. Maybe there are some states with some exceptions but here is some info from Michigan. I would hardly describe el's comment as "making up lies". How do you know so much about prisoners voting rights?

Here's the story from Michigan:


Can someone convicted of a felony register and vote? Can a person confined in jail or prison register and vote?
MCL 168.492a reads: "A person confined in a jail, who is otherwise a qualified elector, prior to trial or sentence may, upon request, register under section 504. The person shall be deemed a resident of the city, township, and address at which he resided before confinement. A person while confined in a jail after being convicted and sentenced shall not be eligible to register."

MCL 168.758b reads: "A person who, in a court of this or another state or in a federal court, has been legally convicted and sentenced for a crime for which the penalty imposed is confinement in jail or prison shall not vote, offer to vote, attempt to vote, or be permitted to vote at an election while confined."

Given the above restrictions, a Michigan resident confined in jail or prison that is awaiting arraignment or trial is eligible to register and vote. A Michigan resident who is serving a sentence in jail or prison after conviction cannot register or vote during his or her period of confinement. After a Michigan resident who is serving a sentence in jail or prison is released, he or she is free to participate in elections without restriction.



SHAME ON YOU EL...YOU SHOULD HAVE QUALIFIED YOUR COMMENT. PRISONERS NOT YET CONVICTED CAN VOTE ABSENTEE. Oh brother. Hey el, didn't one of your posts say something to the effect that if you said August occurred in summer then people on this forum would find a way to disagree with you?

What do Michigan laws have to do with New Hampshire or Lake Winnipesaukee and why is this post posted on the Lake Winnipesaukee web site?

I thought this site was for things that pertain to Lake Winnipesaukee and the New Hampshire lakes region. If there is a site for Lake Michigan, LakeMichigan.com, perhaps you can post this stuff there. It does not belong here. Please read the rules.

R2B

[VtSteve]

Glad to hear everyone had a great weekend.

[sunset on the dock]

Originally Posted by Resident 2B

What do Michigan laws have to do with New Hampshire or Lake Winnipesaukee and why is this post posted on the Lake Winnipesaukee web site?

I thought this site was for things that pertain to Lake Winnipesaukee and the New Hampshire lakes region. If there is a site for Lake Michigan, LakeMichigan.com, perhaps you can post this stuff there. It does not belong here. Please read the rules.

R2B

How foolish of me...how could anything happening beyond our great state's borders have any relevance to the Granite State. My bad. I promise never again to bring up anything having to do with any state other than NH, especially New York (Lake George) and Maine (Long Lake, I have "NO PATIENCE" for that lake)!

[Rinkerfam]

elchase, did you pay attention to the content of my post? I do not operate a GFBL. My boat barely exceeds the 45mph daytime limit. I have three young children(9,6 &2). I have no hidden agenda here regarding GFBL's. My stand on the speed limit debate from day one has been that stronger (any actually) enforcement of the 150' rule and the right of way rules would make for a safer lake. Adding another law to the books when perfectly serviceable laws are left largely unenforced makes no sense to me. Unnecessary legislation is as wasteful as unnecessary litigation as far as I'm concerned.

[trfour]

Originally Posted by Rinkerfam

elchase, did you pay attention to the content of my post? I do not operate a GFBL. My boat barely exceeds the 45mph daytime limit. I have three young children(9,6 &2). I have no hidden agenda here regarding GFBL's. My stand on the speed limit debate from day one has been that stronger (any actually) enforcement of the 150' rule and the right of way rules would make for a safer lake. Adding another law to the books when perfectly serviceable laws are left largely unenforced makes no sense to me. Unnecessary legislation is as wasteful as unnecessary litigation as far as I'm concerned.

Absolutely correct, Rinkerfam! Unfortunately getting everyone on the same page is the difficult part.... I guess common sense is allocated instead of nourished, and some just don't have a clue.

[VitaBene]

Originally Posted by Rinkerfam

elchase, did you pay attention to the content of my post? I do not operate a GFBL. My boat barely exceeds the 45mph daytime limit. I have three young children(9,6 &2). I have no hidden agenda here regarding GFBL's. My stand on the speed limit debate from day one has been that stronger (any actually) enforcement of the 150' rule and the right of way rules would make for a safer lake. Adding another law to the books when perfectly serviceable laws are left largely unenforced makes no sense to me. Unnecessary legislation is as wasteful as unnecessary litigation as far as I'm concerned.

Rinker,

That is what most of us have been saying to El all along but for some reason it is much easier for argument's sake to assume everyone who opposes a SL does so because we want to go faster than 45 (or 50 because the MP would have to give you that for wiggle room) instead of better enforcing the current laws you note.

[BroadHopper]

Originally Posted by VitaBene

Rinker,

That is what most of us have been saying to El all along but for some reason it is much easier for argument's sake to assume everyone who opposes a SL does so because we want to go faster than 45 (or 50 because the MP would have to give you that for wiggle room) instead of better enforcing the current laws you note.

I agree with the majority of you. Just because I have a Formula, the SL proponents think it is a GFBL. The silent thunder exhaust is one of the quietest in the industry. I only have a small block in a big heavy boat. I can just baely go fast enough to enjoy my sport of bare foot skiing.

It is well known that the next target is large cruisers. The proponents have been talking about that during the public hearings.

The biggest problem is the boneheads. Instead of addressing the problem they are compounding it with more laws. The SL law is expensive. Laser guns had to be bought and MPO's have to be extensively trained. Along with the budget cut, I can see why there is less patrolling on our waters. It is Bonehead territory! I don't feel safe at all this year. Labor day weekend is a disaster waiting to happen. I'm surprised that it was safe.

The SL law has merit. The reasonable and prudent clause as well as attaching the offense to the driver's license are reasonable additions.

[OCDACTIVE]

Hey Vita,

Totally off topic, but just wondering what is the:

GSBQ Bowrider Club ?

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

Hey Vita,

Totally off topic, but just wondering what is the:

GSBQ Bowrider Club ?

Let me guess.


GO SLOW BE QUIET

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by elchase

And so we again see why supporters shy away from these threads. If you post something that disagrees with the GFBL agenda, you are a troll or you are ridiculed over some unrelated issue.

Really?

I love the lake and spend as much time on it as I can...especially the past two years when the high speed threat and annoyance has been all but eliminated. And I can say with certainly that my boating has never once intimidated or offended anyone else. Can you say the same? Whether fishing, sailing, or cruising to town, my boating does not impact anyone else's, or make any other boaters wish they had stayed home. I can truly say that I share the lake with all. Can you?

Absolutely. Yes I can.

By the way, just how loud must one's boat be to gain membership into this "Thunder Cult"? Do you get to wear "Thunder Cult" helmets? Do you have "Thunder Cult" capes like Evil Kneivel? Sounds pretty silly to me, but then, to each his own.

Ridicule El?

You've simply reduced your arguments down to a single denominator. You have no facts, restate the same notions that many disagree with regarding safety this year, then you label anyone disagreeing with you a GFBL supporter. And routinely denigrate them and others on the lake.

All this time you are on the lake countless hours, and never witness the boneheads that others do. You seem to have the time on the lake, why not go to the NWZ at Bear Island and see what's going on over there. Today would be good since it's still a holiday weekend officially.

If you are right El, then absolutely nothing needs to be done again on the lake, it's all just fine now.

[VitaBene]

Originally Posted by VtSteve

Let me guess.


GO SLOW BE QUIET

Steve nailed it! There is no real club but I thought it would help show that while there are some fast boats on the forum, the majority are not so fast family bowriders. Though I guess in the interest of full disclosure, I will have to admit that I hit my all time high of 47 Saturday.

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by VitaBene

Steve nailed it! There is no real club but I thought it would help show that while there are some fast boats on the forum, the majority are not so fast family bowriders. Though I guess in the interest of full disclosure, I will have to admit that I hit my all time high of 47 Saturday.

I thought so as well... but I didn't want to speculate as to the meaning and thought it best to ask first...

47??? did you have your radar detector with you?

I can see the headlines now "VITA CAUSES HORRORS ON THE BIG LAKE"

LMAO!

Glad you are boating.. I was up to my arms in oil and grease this weekend... Pulled the supercharger off and cleaned the entire engine compartment.. Getting her ready for her long tow to Virgina....

Still was a beautiful day yesterday to be working on the boat.. Got myself a few Landshark lagers and went to town....

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by VtSteve

You've simply reduced your arguments down to a single denominator. You have no facts, restate the same notions that many disagree with regarding safety this year, then you label anyone disagreeing with you a GFBL supporter. And routinely denigrate them and others on the lake.

Unfortunately this is very common with the other sides argument. If you look at Sunsets Posts at no point are they focused at anyone in particular but are based on opinon and he rationalizes his thoughts to make his points. He does a very good job at staying on topic and isn't here just to cause trouble. I applaud him for his methods. I may not agree with what he says but he is here to discuss in an objective and healthy manner. Cheers!

There are others that have an agenda and this poll does not help them in anyway. They only appear or troll when things are not going their way in hopes to hijack the thread or better yet get it shut down by getting people off track and bickering.

I implore people to stay on topic and discuss the poll as it was set up for.

If noise and exhaust is your issue I know there is a thread set up for that.

If the merits of the speed limit are what you would like to discuss there is a thread for that as well, as is a compromise thread, how fast your boat goes, Safety issues, etc.

Don't let trolls drag down particular threads and make them become un-useful, best to ignore and stay on track.

Carry on..