What Speed Limit ???????? - Page 3

VitaBene · 11-04-2009, 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

Ummm. This is Hugh.

I think you meant...getting back to the "train wreck" that is the Speed Limit.

If you are going to get involved here, you should read the posts. Your new merry man, Yosemite is the one who does not know the difference between Hugh and huge. Please see post #173 where he tried to poke fun at Hazelnut, 4th or 5th line from the bottom.

Unlike you, I will direct you to the entire post so it can be read in context instead of your "parsing" of text while cobbling together one of your responses.

sunset on the dock · 11-04-2009, 12:30 PM

whoa...things are getting a little out of control here. No one(pro or con SL) on this SL forum is a girl scout from what I can see. El has often been on the receiving end of the personal insults...so what if he's able to give it back? We're all big boys and girls here and if we can dish it out we need to be able take it.

DEJ · 11-04-2009, 12:35 PM

Some here on both sides of this issue "toe" the line, some step over it which I believe has happened here.

hazelnut · 11-04-2009, 12:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

whoa...things are getting a little out of control here. No one(pro or con SL) on this SL forum is a girl scout from what I can see. El has often been on the receiving end of the personal insults...so what if he's able to give it back? We're all big boys and girls here and if we can dish it out we need to be able take it.

I'm sorry Sunset but go right ahead and spend the next two hours looking over my posts if you want but I have never ever even come close to what trash was posted here today.

I may have had disagreements with you or some others but I have never called anyone's profession, gender, sexuality, into question.

While I am not surprised by the post I am disappointed that people here were subjected to it.

gtagrip · 11-04-2009, 12:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DEJ

Some here on both sides of this issue "toe" the line, some step over it which I believe has happened here.

Agreed! And we know who that is!

sunset on the dock · 11-04-2009, 01:33 PM

Like I said, I've seen plenty of trashing coming from the Sl opposition as well. And I've seen supporters called stupid, pond scum, idiots,liar, and the list goes on and on. What strikes me is that a couple of those prime offenders who taunt and insult some of their fellow forum members are the first to run crying to Don when they get a dose of their own medicine.

DEJ · 11-04-2009, 01:38 PM

I rest my case, thank you.

DoTheMath · 11-04-2009, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

Opponents are "figuring out" Winnipesaukee safety?

Take a look at what has appeared on the Internet, and how "funny" a 100-MPH speed is to ONE OF YOUR OWN:

"...I was anchored just east of Welch Isl. and I had a 40' cat run off my bow about 50' out at a solid 100! I thought my windshield was toast just from the noise...I think I was a bit too close to the course, but it was soooooo worth it.

A few of my buddies were getting ready to jump overboard out of fear...
too funny...!

Funny thing here APS - do you know what this quote was referring to!? I DO! It was back when we had the offshore races up here for a short stretch - once again, pulling quotes out of context to drive your agenda. That was MY boat, AND we were just inside the outer edge of the buoy-line of the course, where technically we shouldn't have been AND it was one of the race boats that was approaching AND that comment was made in-jest. But hey, you keep manipulating quotes and deliver your propaganda to the masses in hopes someone will care and listen.

Nice try - keep digging!

DEJ · 11-04-2009, 02:00 PM

He is a great story teller, deserves an Emmy IMO.

DoTheMath · 11-04-2009, 02:02 PM

Why is everyone getting so nasty over in this thread - it is / was very civil in the other threads... Everyone take a step back, take a series of deep breaths and relax. We were making good progress toward a middle-ground of sorts, let's not blow it with name calling and insults. Just stick to the facts, stand your ground and make your point(s) and work toward a solution that will appease (most) everyone. Picking on spelling or grammatical errors, professions, etc... isn't doing anyone any good - and it is causing a loss of focus on the points-at-hand.

I tell my wife all the time, life is short - we only go this way once - when we are gone, we're gone for a loooooong time!

So make the most of your time here, live life to the fullest and if you don't like onions on your burger, order it without!

DoTheMath · 11-04-2009, 02:08 PM

How about we try this as a little exercise?

Let's all post our ages - seriously - as a reminder of just how old we are and how old we "should" act.

I'll start - I just turned 41.

Kracken · 11-04-2009, 02:11 PM

You have been scouring the web to give the members of Winnipesaukee.com the most accurate and relevant articles related to dangers of high speed boating. I couldn’t help but notice that on post #177 your article is from MSNBC.

You have made it clear what side of the aisle you are on.

My question is:

What would you be doing even reading an article from MSNBC, and why would you believe it was not fictional?

hazelnut · 11-04-2009, 02:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

Like I said, I've seen plenty of trashing coming from the Sl opposition as well. And I've seen supporters called stupid, pond scum, idiots,liar, and the list goes on and on. What strikes me is that a couple of those prime offenders who taunt and insult some of their fellow forum members are the first to run crying to Don when they get a dose of their own medicine.

Say what you will Sunset but that post was so way out of bounds beyond anything I have ever "dished out." It was pretty disgusting and uncalled for.

I agree that I have dished out my fair share but if you call that "a dose of (my) own medicine," I strongly disagree.

I love giving it out and taking it back but this one crossed the line big time. Uncalled for and way way inappropriate.

I'm ready to move on and put it (him) way back in the rearview mirror. I was told (warned) by many individuals (pro and against SL) on this forum not to get involved in discussions with elchase and now I know why. I am absolutely done with him and now have moved him to ignore status.

gtagrip · 11-04-2009, 02:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DoTheMath

How about we try this as a little exercise?

Let's all post our ages - seriously - as a reminder of just how old we are and how old we "should" act.

I'll start - I just turned 41.

Just turned 43.

sunset on the dock · 11-04-2009, 02:25 PM

Part of my point Hazelnut, not directed entirely at you, is why for example, wasn't there this much indignation when EL was falsely accused of illegal fishing. It's a 2 way street. That accusation was not uncharacteristic of the barbs being slung El's way.

hazelnut · 11-04-2009, 02:36 PM

Let me further add that this entire tangent of the argument was and is my fault. I stuck my nose in and I shouldn't have. Many forum members prior to elchase have, in the heat of the argument, called people's intellect into question regarding a slip of the keyboard with regard to both grammar and spelling.

It was a tactic I saw a couple of forum members using time and time again. When I read and react to a post I usually base my response on the content of the post. Some people, whether they had no real rebuttal or not, chose to resort to trying to paint the responders as stupid because they misspelled or misused a word.

This tactic wore thin with me and I finally snapped when I saw what I perceived as another attempt by a forum member discrediting a post from someone else based on a spelling mistake.

It wasn’t even my post! So I stuck my nose in and have regretted it since I hit the post button.

I apologize to all that have been subjected to reading the thread. I also want to apologize to YosemiteSam. I generally do enjoy your posts. While I disagree with your stance on the SL I think you are a good sport and I enjoy trading barbs with you. I think people misunderstand your humor sometimes and take it personally or take it as an attack. So I’m sorry I was rude to you in my follow up post after you so aptly caught my major mistake as I was pointing out a mistake in the other post.

I’m taking DTM’s advice and stepping back and taking a breath here. I really think that there are great people on both sides of the issue. SOTD, while we have traded jabs I think you do a good job making your case for the most part. I really think that one person on this forum who makes so much noise has driven a spike between both sides of the argument. Whether or not that was his mission he has succeeded. I really think honest to goodness debate on the matter could take place between many of us. If you go back and research the forums you’ll see that one member has made it his mission to ensure that this does not happen. I was told that was the case by many and I never believed it until now, shame on me.

DEJ · 11-04-2009, 02:37 PM

Good move Hnut.

hazelnut · 11-04-2009, 02:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

Part of my point Hazelnut, not directed entirely at you, is why for example, wasn't there this much indignation when EL was falsely accused of illegal fishing. It's a 2 way street. That accusation was not uncharacteristic of the barbs being slung El's way.

Agree. I stayed so far out of that forum thread.

Yosemite Sam · 11-04-2009, 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hazelnut

I also want to apologize to YosemiteSam. I generally do enjoy your posts. While I disagree with your stance on the SL I think you are a good sport and I enjoy trading barbs with you. I think people misunderstand your humor sometimes and take it personally or take it as an attack. So I’m sorry I was rude to you in my follow up post after you so aptly caught my major mistake as I was pointing out a mistake in the other post.

That's Ok.....thank you!
I admit I am hard to understand sometimes.

11-04-2009, 04:33 PM

You'll all note that my attacks are always responses to attacks that had been directed at me. I am like Israel...I only strike in retaliation. And I'm not going to shy from defending myself just because some of you can't take it. Meanwhile, there are a few of the cult (you know who you are) who follow me around and attack every time I post. If I post on another thread about fishing, they suddenly appear to disagree with and insult me. If I post on another thread about sailing, they suddenly appear to disagree with and insult me. Hazelnut's attack at me was unprovoked, personal, rude, hate-filled, based on her error about the source of the original misspelling, and childish...who has the time to be spell-checking and grammar checking each others' posts? Get a life. My original post was not directed at her, was not insulting, and was no cause for her attack. I got no apology for that and still no apology when I pointed out her error. "Don, please protect me, Ed fights back and I don't like when people do that. Please kick him off the board." Sexist? "Smarmy" was your own word, not mine, and I never knew it was sexist. "Don, a man called me "smarmy" back after I called him "smarmy". Please sanction him." (Hazel, note my placement of the period inside the quotation mark in this instance? http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/2932 ). And saying I am insulting your sexuality is outrageous. How could I even know of your sexuality? When did you even disclose it? Where did I insult it? I have several gay friends and am very tolerant about alternative lifestyles. Don't call me a racist and don't call me a homophobe unless you can back it up lady. I've never seen such a glass-house crybaby. Keep your personal opinions about me to yourself and I'll keep mine to myself. But if you want to throw gasoline, I'm throwing it back until I am kicked off the forum...and don't cry when you get burned. I'd never strike a woman, but I'd certainly fight back verbally.
You started this one. My response was in kind. You sound like a whiny little girl to everyone except your own gang, who will side with you and against me no matter what you do anyway.

Now, so as to not waste this opportunity to further educate;
Laconia Citizen
Laconia, NH
Monday, July 5, 2004
Two thrown from boat in Alton not injured
By KRISTA MARRS
Staff Writer
ALTON — Two boaters thrown from a vessel in The Broads Saturday evening were not injured.
Andrew Rocco, 36, of Exeter was operating his 30-foot cigarette power boat on Lake Winnipesaukee in the area between Parker and Rattlesnake Island just before 5:30 p.m. when Marine Patrol officials said Rocco went into a tight turn and rolled the boat.
Rocco and his passenger, Kimberly Dailey of Portsmouth, were ejected but were not injured.
A boat passing by stopped to help Rocco and Dailey get out of the water. The boat was later recovered from the water.
Marine Patrol was assisted by the Wolfeboro Fire Rescue Department.
The incident is being investigated by Marine Patrol Officer Michael Vito, Supervisor Dave Gunter and Sgt. Eric Robertson.

The investigation found nothing they could charge Rocco with. He was sober, was luckily not within 150 ft of shore or another boat, and there was no speed limit then. Of course if it had happened this summer, they could have charged him with speeding and tagged his driving record too.
Why is this stuff so easy for me to find yet you guys keep saying "We can't find where there has ever been a high speed accident on Winnipesaukee."? (Hazel, see http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/2932 before you insult my question mark placement).

DEJ · 11-04-2009, 04:38 PM

You were wise to do that Hnut.

gtagrip · 11-04-2009, 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elchase

You'll all note that my attacks are always responses to attacks that had been directed at me. I am like Israel...I only strike in retaliation. And I'm not going to shy from defending myself just because some of you can't take it. Meanwhile, there are a few of the cult (you know who you are) who follow me around and attack every time I post. If I post on another thread about fishing, they suddenly appear to disagree with and insult me. If I post on another thread about sailing, they suddenly appear to disagree with and insult me. Hazelnut's attack at me was unprovoked, personal, rude, hate-filled, based on her error about the source of the original misspelling, and childish...who has the time to be spell-checking and grammar checking each others' posts? Get a life. My original post was not directed at her, was not insulting, and was no cause for her attack. I got no apology for that and still no apology when I pointed out her error. "Don, please protect me, Ed fights back and I don't like when people do that. Please kick him off the board." Sexist? "Smarmy" was your own word, not mine, and I never knew it was sexist. "Don, a man called me "smarmy" back after I called him "smarmy". Please sanction him." (Hazel, note my placement of the period inside the quotation mark in this instance? http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/2932 ). And saying I am insulting your sexuality is outrageous. How could I even know of your sexuality? When did you even disclose it? Where did I insult it? I have several gay friends and am very tolerant about alternative lifestyles. Don't call me a racist and don't call me a homophobe unless you can back it up lady. I've never seen such a glass-house crybaby. Keep your personal opinions about me to yourself and I'll keep mine to myself. But if you want to throw gasoline, I'm throwing it back until I am kicked off the forum...and don't cry when you get burned. I'd never strike a woman, but I'd certainly fight back verbally.
You started this one. My response was in kind. You sound like a whiny little girl to everyone except your own gang, who will side with you and against me no matter what you do anyway.

Now, so as to not waste this opportunity to further educate;
Laconia Citizen
Laconia, NH
Monday, July 5, 2004
Two thrown from boat in Alton not injured
By KRISTA MARRS
Staff Writer
ALTON — Two boaters thrown from a vessel in The Broads Saturday evening were not injured.
Andrew Rocco, 36, of Exeter was operating his 30-foot cigarette power boat on Lake Winnipesaukee in the area between Parker and Rattlesnake Island just before 5:30 p.m. when Marine Patrol officials said Rocco went into a tight turn and rolled the boat.
Rocco and his passenger, Kimberly Dailey of Portsmouth, were ejected but were not injured.
A boat passing by stopped to help Rocco and Dailey get out of the water. The boat was later recovered from the water.
Marine Patrol was assisted by the Wolfeboro Fire Rescue Department.
The incident is being investigated by Marine Patrol Officer Michael Vito, Supervisor Dave Gunter and Sgt. Eric Robertson.

The investigation found nothing they could charge Rocco with. He was sober, was luckily not within 150 ft of shore or another boat, and there was no speed limit then. Of course if it had happened this summer, they could have charged him with speeding and tagged his driving record too.
Why is this stuff so easy for me to find yet you guys keep saying "We can't find where there has ever been a high speed accident on Winnipesaukee."? (Hazel, see http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/2932 before you insult my question mark placement).

Elchase, I believe Hazelnut has mentioned time and again that he is a male and not a female. So everytime you mention that he is a girl/women or lady is insulting. I think you do this on purpose and then cry victim. Get your facts straight. Oh, that's right, facts aren't important to you.

Ryan · 11-04-2009, 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elchase

The investigation found nothing they could charge Rocco with. He was sober, was luckily not within 150 ft of shore or another boat, and there was no speed limit then. Of course if it had happened this summer, they could have charged him with speeding and tagged his driving record too.
Why is this stuff so easy for me to find yet you guys keep saying "We can't find where there has ever been a high speed accident on Winnipesaukee."? (Hazel, see http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/2932 before you insult my question mark placement).

Could you please use one of your remaining 4 posts to answer this for me:

How fast was he going?

Thanks.

VtSteve · 11-04-2009, 05:04 PM

The only thing I've gotten out of this latest series of attempts to rile everyone up is this. El missed the point in this horrific accident he listed.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/b...7RlLGo2mH3wSmO

"Two fishermen told cops they saw the boat speeding under the Goose Creek Bridge a minute or so before the crash.
The speed limit under the bridge is 5 mph."

Huh, imagine that.

hazelnut · 11-04-2009, 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yosemite Sam

That's Ok.....thank you!
I admit I am hard to understand sometimes.

Not so much, I really do get your sense of humor. I think others will also appreciate it. No matter your position on certain topics.

I really appreciated your take on my "polling."

Don't shy away from posting as I think you said you were going to do on another forum. I'd rather see your perspective around these parts.

DoTheMath · 11-04-2009, 05:09 PM

Wow - elChase, what gives!? (Although I have you blocked as you just bring this place down, I got to read your post as quoted by gtagrip). Hazelnut apologized for what went down earlier, was the bigger MAN (HE is not a woman) and offered the "olive branch" if-you-will. "Sam" accepted and let it go, why are you so bent on carrying on? Let it go and move on - we get you are all about standing up for yourself, and have a strong opinion on the SL, but you need to chill out. Really, is it beyond you to just say "gee thanks, that was much appreciated and I know things can get heated here, I too am sorry for getting so wound up, etc...". It's like you are trying to be this literary (forum) martyr or something just to hold your ground - is that your goal? I love a good debate as much as the next guy (or gal), but everyone has their limits - and we are all adults here, aren't we!? Do everyone - most importantly yourself - a favor and just step away from the computer, take a few deep breaths, grab a nice glass of McCallan 25 and chill.

The thing we seem to lose sight of about the lake is this - we all love the lake, in our own way. Be it in a kayak, canoe, bowrider, old woody, or a big fast performance boat. And at the end of the day, safety seems to be the primary concern for all - I know it is for my friends and family. Go out, have fun and enjoy the lake and BE SAFE!

Peace!

11-04-2009, 09:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ryan

How fast was he going?

Obviously way too fast. You guys always say that 60 is slow enough to ensure that accidents like this can't happen, so I'd say he must have been going over 60, right?

Quote:

Originally Posted by gtagrip

Elchase, I believe Hazelnut has mentioned time and again that he is a male and not a female.

I never saw such mention and did not realize this and did not assume him a girl to insult. Since "Hazel" is a girl's name, I don't think the faux pas was all that outrageous...but nevertheless, I give Hazelnut my most sincere apology for wrongfully assuming he was a girl. I will not make the same mistake again.
However, calling a guy a "sexist" implies that he is denigrating women. I never did any such thing. Saying that someone is insulting your sexuality implies that he is denigrating your sexual preference. I never did any such thing. If Hazelnut is going to throw such spears, he either has to learn what they mean or back up the accusations. All I did was make a mistake about the gender of a member who's moniker sounds feminine. And unlike Hazelnut, I am man enough to apologize succinctly and directly when I make a mistake.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DoTheMath

Hazelnut apologized for what went down earlier, was the bigger MAN (HE is not a woman) and offered the "olive branch" if-you-will.

Show me where Hazelnut apologized to me for calling me smarmy, the "spelling police" and attacking me. He apologized to those who had to read his rants, and to Sam. He expressed his regret for having written his post, which is a world different than an apology. There has yet been no apology to me for saying that I am smarmy, saying that I think I am the spelling police, being my grammar police, and otherwise inserting himself into a matter that was none of his business for the sole purpose of attacking me. And I'm also still waiting for this "bigger man" to apologize to me for earlier calling me a liar. I won't hold my breath.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DoTheMath

"Sam" accepted and let it go, why are you so bent on carrying on?

Sam was apologized to. I wasn't.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DoTheMath

Let it go and move on ... you need to chill out. ..you are trying to be this literary (forum) martyr ...Do everyone - most importantly yourself - a favor and just step away from the computer, take a few deep breaths, grab a nice glass of McCallan 25 and chill.

No offense DTM, but I take my life lessons from a higher source. Your group makes a habit of lecturing as if you are a group of social elites. Every now and then, one of you climbs up on the lecturn and starts preaching to me about how I am "swarmy" and what I need to do to improve myself. No thanks. If I want a lesson, I'll take it from someone who I admire and respect. I have found little reason to respect or want to emulate the social skills of a single one of you. And even if I did, I don't come to this forum for counseling. I'm sure you are not interested in my opinions about what you need to do to be a better person, right? This is an Anti Speed Limit thread. If a single one of you would limit your input to your reasons for opposing the speed limit and stop the insulting, and stop giving me cause to insult back, then we could have the civil debate you all claim to seek. But as long as the bunch of you keep lobbing grenades and then crying "foul" when I throw one back, this debate is never going to climb out of the gutter.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Airwaves

So you've changed your screen name?

What? Here we go again. Where did you get this one? This is exactly what I mean. You guys are a bunch of phonies. You don't want to debate the speed limit, you want to fight...so long as no one fights back.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Airwaves

I believe that was the underage teen who got drunk and took his mother's boat.

Oh, then never mind. I guess a teenager hitting me in his mother's boat can't hurt...especially if he didn't have permission to use it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Airwaves

I don't have anyone on ignore.

Please put me on ignore. PLEASE.

Here is another high speed accident that happened on Winnipesaukee before we had a speed limit;
Laconia Citizen
Laconia, NH
Wednesday, July 21, 2004
Two escape injury after being thrown from boat
By RICH BERGERON
Staff Writer
GILFORD — Two occupants of a boat were thrown from the craft but were unhurt when the boat hit a submerged object and flipped over on Lake Winnipesaukee near Carr Point in Gilford.
According to Marine Patrol officials, the boat being driven by Thomas Madden of Salem was traveling at a high rate of speed when it hit the object and overturned Sunday night. The accident caused both the driver and passenger to be ejected from the boat.
A passing boater arrived on the scene to assist the victims and also helped tow the boat to shore. There were no injuries.

Now someone please tell me how this one is not relevant to a discussion about the need for a speed limit on Lake Winnipesaukee (or lack thereof).

VtSteve · 11-04-2009, 10:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elchase

Oh, then nevermind. I guess a teenager hitting me in his mother's boat can't hurt...especially if he ddidn't have permission to use it.

.

Perhaps it wouldn't matter if it were a smaller boat right El? Nothing to worry about as long as it's not a five-ton craft?

If you could put your intellect to good use instead of games, it would be well-served.

And yes, that's a compliment

sunset on the dock · 11-05-2009, 05:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elchase

Here is another high speed accident that happened on Winnipesaukee before we had a speed limit;
Laconia Citizen
Laconia, NH
Wednesday, July 21, 2004
Two escape injury after being thrown from boat
By RICH BERGERON
Staff Writer
GILFORD — Two occupants of a boat were thrown from the craft but were unhurt when the boat hit a submerged object and flipped over on Lake Winnipesaukee near Carr Point in Gilford.
According to Marine Patrol officials, the boat being driven by Thomas Madden of Salem was traveling at a high rate of speed when it hit the object and overturned Sunday night. The accident caused both the driver and passenger to be ejected from the boat.
A passing boater arrived on the scene to assist the victims and also helped tow the boat to shore. There were no injuries.

Now someone please tell me how this one is not relevant to a discussion about the need for a speed limit on Lake Winnipesaukee (or lack thereof).

El, whatzamatter with you...of course there is no relevance here...the driver was from Salem for cryin' out loud. We've already established a couple of weeks ago that people from Salem don't count! Get with it!

Yosemite Sam · 11-05-2009, 07:37 AM

In todays GSN there is a want ad for a Marine Patrol officier Traninee.
I think they have the date a little screwed up...it states "effect January 2, 2009. Maybe it should say 2010.
This would be a good job for elchase...Yes or No??

chipj29 · 11-05-2009, 07:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elchase

Here is another high speed accident that happened on Winnipesaukee before we had a speed limit;
Laconia Citizen
Laconia, NH
Wednesday, July 21, 2004
Two escape injury after being thrown from boat
By RICH BERGERON
Staff Writer
GILFORD — Two occupants of a boat were thrown from the craft but were unhurt when the boat hit a submerged object and flipped over on Lake Winnipesaukee near Carr Point in Gilford.
According to Marine Patrol officials, the boat being driven by Thomas Madden of Salem was traveling at a high rate of speed when it hit the object and overturned Sunday night. The accident caused both the driver and passenger to be ejected from the boat.
A passing boater arrived on the scene to assist the victims and also helped tow the boat to shore. There were no injuries.

Now someone please tell me how this one is not relevant to a discussion about the need for a speed limit on Lake Winnipesaukee (or lack thereof).

How fast was the boat going? What was considered to be a high rate of speed in 2004? And the most important question is this: would a speed limit have prevented this accident?

11-05-2009, 11:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chipj29

How fast was the boat going?

Way too fast. You guys say 60 is slow enough to ensure that stuff like this can't happen, so I guess that suggests he was going way over 60. You tell me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by chipj29

What was considered to be a high rate of speed in 2004?

Even if the lake was more crowded today than in 2004 (the only thing I can think of that would change the definition of "too fast") I think an impartial viewer of even minimal intelligence would conclude that he was going at a speed that would be too fast in any year.

Quote:

Originally Posted by chipj29

And the most important question is this: would a speed limit have prevented this accident?

No, the most important question (in my opinion) is this: would a speed limit have been more likely to reduce or increase the chances of such accidents on our lake?
Remember, there was not a single accident on Lake Winnipesaukee last summer that anyone can say even might have been caused in whole or in part by excessive speed. So the SL is batting 1000 so far. It is not going to stop all speeding or eliminate all accidents, but it is surely not going to increase either.

Here's a bass boat going too fast and crashing; http://www.break.com/index/painful-bass-boat-crash.html
It does not tell us his exact speed, his age, or whether he had his mother's permission, but impartial viewers of the video can draw their own conclusions about whether he was speeding and whether things like this are more or less likely to happen on a lake with a 45MPH speed limit.
While some will say "he was violating the safe passage law anyway", as if that forgives his speed, we used to see the bass boats fly by in such proximity to each other at such speeds every time one of the tourneys started. This summer I'd see them go by in the same tight groupings, but much slower. It is my opinion (might not be yours) that these two boats in the video would not have been flying around filming each other at such high speeds in the first place on a lake with a 45 MPH speed limit, and that this is therefore another accident that our speed limit would have prevented from happening on Winnipesaukee.
Please don't respond with questions to me about the video. It speaks for itself. My posting is moderated and my opportunities to answer are limited. And please don't respond with insults. If you want to avoid the bickering as you all claim, just reply with statements telling us why you think this is more or less likely to happen on a lake with a 45MPH speed limit.

Kracken · 11-05-2009, 12:02 PM

ED, The operator was breaking at least 4 laws before the crash. Why would a 5th law change the outcome?

OCDACTIVE · 11-05-2009, 12:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kracken

ED, The operator was breaking at least 4 laws before the crash. Why would a 5th law change the outcome?

This is what I have been saying all along. Where is the improved safety? why would one more law have changed either of the tragic accidents that the SL supporters continously use as examples? It doesn't make sense just to add another law on top of multiple other laws that are being broken.

sunset on the dock · 11-05-2009, 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kracken

ED, The operator was breaking at least 4 laws before the crash. Why would a 5th law change the outcome?

Because he might have been going slower?

Sure glad it's illegal for a guy like that to go faster than 45 MPH on our lake. And jeez, the noise those things make. Just one more thing contributing to Winnipesaukee's bad rep, IMHO.

DEJ · 11-05-2009, 12:38 PM

Quote:

Remember, there was not a single accident on Lake Winnipesaukee last summer that anyone can say even might have been caused in whole or in part by excessive speed.

I guess you forgot about the Treasure Island accident, clear case of excessive speed.

Kracken · 11-05-2009, 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

Because he might have been going slower?

You are joking right?

DoTheMath · 11-05-2009, 12:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DEJ

I guess you forgot about the Treasure Island accident, clear case of excessive speed.

Treasure Island...!? Which one was that?

VtSteve · 11-05-2009, 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DoTheMath

Treasure Island...!? Which one was that?

Haven't seen an update as of yet.

"According to a Marine Patrol report, the two were were in a boat being piloted by Robin Pyburn, 50, of Alton, that was attempting to return to the West Alton Marina. Those onboard apparently became disoriented in the dark and spent several hours trying to find the marina. At about 8:15 p.m., the boat traveled inside a buoy and became grounded on the rocks it hit. Sapier and and Panella were thrown forward at impact, when the sustained their non-life threatening injuries. The Alton Fire Boat responded to a subsequent 911 call and transported everyone to shore. Treasure Island — also known as Redhead Island— is a small island located just east of Sleepers Island.

http://www.laconiadailysun.com/Lacon...2009/10/8L.pdf "

So imagine this, a smaller boat was traveling around for "several hours" , become disoriented, then went aground at 8:25 PM. At the very least, it's a good example of not knowing where you are and poor navigation. They probably should have been going slower due to their Disorientation, but given the injuries, they probably weren't going that fast. If they had been traveling around for hours, it would have been daylight for most of their cruise. So if they were disoriented, it surely wasn't caused by darkness.

Some people didn't like this accident, because it looked like operator error in navigation, and it wasn't a GFBL boat.

BroadHopper · 11-05-2009, 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VtSteve

Some people didn't like this accident, because it looked like operator error in navigation, and it wasn't a GFBL boat.

I don't think it matters to the SL supporters. Any accident is a speed accident.

hazelnut · 11-05-2009, 07:51 PM

Has any one of the SL supporters ever answered the question as to why Marine Patrol (ya know the guys on the front line) have generally not supported the measure.

I bring this up because my Brother-In-Law took the class this past summer and he told me that his instructor, a veteran of the force, said the Speed Limit Law was a joke.

So what is the spin? Why would the guys and gals who enforce it also "roll their eyes" at the law? Wouldn't you consider their opinion higher than any one of us?

Just curious?

DoTheMath · 11-06-2009, 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VtSteve

Haven't seen an update as of yet.

"According to a Marine Patrol report, the two were were in a boat being piloted by Robin Pyburn, 50, of Alton, that was attempting to return to the West Alton Marina. Those onboard apparently became disoriented in the dark and spent several hours trying to find the marina. At about 8:15 p.m., the boat traveled inside a buoy and became grounded on the rocks it hit. Sapier and and Panella were thrown forward at impact, when the sustained their non-life threatening injuries. The Alton Fire Boat responded to a subsequent 911 call and transported everyone to shore. Treasure Island — also known as Redhead Island— is a small island located just east of Sleepers Island.

http://www.laconiadailysun.com/Lacon...2009/10/8L.pdf "

So imagine this, a smaller boat was traveling around for "several hours" , become disoriented, then went aground at 8:25 PM. At the very least, it's a good example of not knowing where you are and poor navigation. They probably should have been going slower due to their Disorientation, but given the injuries, they probably weren't going that fast. If they had been traveling around for hours, it would have been daylight for most of their cruise. So if they were disoriented, it surely wasn't caused by darkness.

Some people didn't like this accident, because it looked like operator error in navigation, and it wasn't a GFBL boat.

YES! Now I remember - CLEAR case of excessive speed!

Kracken · 11-06-2009, 09:32 AM

Hazelnut,

I don’t know why this is so difficult to understand.

The Winnfabs and supporters are far more knowledgeable of water safety, boating, accident reconstruction and statistical analysis than the New Hampshire Marine Patrol and the Coast Guard.

It’s just like politicians knowing more about healthcare than doctors and community organizers understanding warfare better than generals.

Come on Hazelnut, quit thinking like a scofflaw cowboy and get with the program.

Bear Islander · 11-06-2009, 10:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hazelnut

Has any one of the SL supporters ever answered the question as to why Marine Patrol (ya know the guys on the front line) have generally not supported the measure.

I bring this up because my Brother-In-Law took the class this past summer and he told me that his instructor, a veteran of the force, said the Speed Limit Law was a joke.

So what is the spin? Why would the guys and gals who enforce it also "roll their eyes" at the law? Wouldn't you consider their opinion higher than any one of us?

Just curious?

Your experience is different from mine. I have spoken with Marine Patrol officers that were in favor of a SL. Also one of the legislators that gave heavy support to the SL is a former Marine Patrol Officer.

Sometimes the answer you get is the one you are looking for.

OCDACTIVE · 11-06-2009, 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Your experience is different from mine. I have spoken with Marine Patrol officers that were in favor of a SL. Also one of the legislators that gave heavy support to the SL is a former Marine Patrol Officer.

Sometimes the answer you get is the one you are looking for.

Welcome back BI, haven't seen you around for awhile...

I have the opposite. I spoke to 9 different MP officers over the course of last year. In each situation they said they did not support it and one said it can't be enforced. (everything was off the record of course)

Ryan · 11-06-2009, 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

Welcome back BI, haven't seen you around for awhile...

I have the opposite. I spoke to 9 different MP officers over the course of last year. In each situation they said they did not support it and one said it can't be enforced. (everything was off the record of course)

How about an 'on the record' quote from the Director of the Division of Safety Services.

Quote:

Barrett said that, from the experience from the pilot program Marine Patrol implemented last summer, there is not a large number of boats that exceeded the speed limit.

"I don't think that the fact that it's now in effect is going to make any monster change," said Barrett.

DEJ · 11-06-2009, 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Sometimes the answer you get is the one you are looking for.

Exactly. Same applies for a state wide poll.

VitaBene · 11-06-2009, 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Your experience is different from mine. I have spoken with Marine Patrol officers that were in favor of a SL. Also one of the legislators that gave heavy support to the SL is a former Marine Patrol Officer.

Sometimes the answer you get is the one you are looking for.

I see it from 2 sides:

1) MP would like it to give them another reason to pull you over- to check if you have been drinking too much, safety check, certicate check.

2) On the other hand they know it is difficult to accurately measure on water. What degree of wiggle room do you apply as an MPO? On 93 I figure I am generally OK at 73/74, will it be 50/30 on water?

Anyhow, I vow to be more civil as well. And apologize for escalating and or starting trouble especially with YS. I pushed my internet rule beyond the boundary I set for forum behavior-"only say here what you would in person"

11-06-2009, 12:25 PM

Can someone tell me how to post a screen shot of that post on OffshoreOnly from a while back where a longtime member and avid high-speeder had an epiphany and gave over 60 links to other OSO threads about then-recent high-speed accidents and eulogized about all of the members who had been killed?
The post used to be at http://www.offshoreonly.com/forums/g...awakening.html, but it and all of the linked reports were deleted soon after it was posted and the poster was soundly reprimanded by his buddies for "admitting the dangers of high-speed boating to our enemies" and "giving ammunition to the gray hairs". I have a jpg but don't know how to post it.
The message says;
"In light of the few tragic accidents in the past few days and weeks, I started thinking back to how many unfortunate incidents I've been saddened by in my 4 years on OSO. I started digging through old threads and I was amazed how many hispahs have happened in a few short years to many of our family and friends. I found more than I could have imagined...It's far too heartbreaking reading all these stories, it would be prudent of all of us to take every possible precaution, so that we don't have to read any more accident reports. Let this be a reminder of how fragile we all are, and how quickly the one thing we all love and enjoy can come back and harm us in no more than a heartbeat."
He then goes on with a huge list of links to threads about high-speed boating accidents that other OSO members had had, MOST of them involving fatalities.
Of course, the only relevance this all has to the benefits of keeping the speed limit on Lake Winnipesaukee is that all those othe accidents "happened on water."

Ryan · 11-06-2009, 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elchase

Can someone tell me how to post a screen shot of that post on OffshoreOnly from a while back where a longtime member and avid high-speeder had an epiphany and gave over 60 links to other OSO threads about then-recent high-speed accidents and eulogized about all of the members who had been killed?
The post used to be at http://www.offshoreonly.com/forums/g...awakening.html, but it and all of the linked reports were deleted soon after it was posted and the poster was soundly reprimanded by his buddies for "admitting the dangers of high-speed boating to our enemies" and "giving ammunition to the gray hairs". I have a jpg but don't know how to post it.
He then goes on with a huge list of links to threads about high-speed boating accidents that other OSO members had had, MOST of them involving fatalities.
Of course, the only relevance this all has to the benefits of keeping the speed limit on Lake Winnipesaukee is that all those othe accidents "happened on water."

I'm sure it's a really robust collection of accidents. Keeping relevance in mind, if you could just narrow it down to the accidents that happened on Winni, it will save us cowboys a LOT of time. Thanks in advance!

OCDACTIVE · 11-06-2009, 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ryan

I'm sure it's a really robust collection of accidents. Keeping relevance in mind, if you could just narrow it down to the accidents that happened on Winni, it will save us cowboys a LOT of time. Thanks in advance!

oh my... i see from your quote of EL we are over in OSO now...

El just razzing.... but have you tried posting there? Might not be as welcoming. LOL...

VtSteve · 11-06-2009, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

oh my... i see from your quote of EL we are over in OSO now...

El just razzing.... but have you tried posting there? Might not be as welcoming. LOL...

Like everywhere else, there's a variety over there as well. People with a knee-jerk reaction to anything they don't like, and those that actually have some responsibility. There's a lot of great boaters over on that site, including people from waaaaay back in the boating days. El should spend some time looming at a certain poster's posts to see who's a leader and who's not. PS: safety isn't something that comes into play at a certain boat length or horsepower.

ishoot308 · 11-06-2009, 02:38 PM

"PS: safety isn't something that comes into play at a certain boat length or horsepower."

VTSTEVE;

I think that is one of the smartest comments I have heard regarding the S/L debate!

Dan

Bear Islander · 11-06-2009, 03:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

Welcome back BI, haven't seen you around for awhile...

I have the opposite. I spoke to 9 different MP officers over the course of last year. In each situation they said they did not support it and one said it can't be enforced. (everything was off the record of course)

I was off trekking the Inca trail to Machu Picchu in Peru. I even swam in a glacial lake at 14,000 feet. Lots of fun, the Andes are awesome!

I will not agree that a SL can't be enforced. However even if true it doesn't change anything. We have lots of laws that can't be enforced. Laws are a social mediator of relations between people. A socially agreed upon standard of behavior.

There are many laws that carry no penalty, they exist to draw a line of public morality, that a responsible citizen should not cross. Most of us will obey the law even if the chances of being caught and punished are zero.

DEJ · 11-06-2009, 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

I will not agree that a SL can't be enforced. However even if true it doesn't change anything. We have lots of laws that can't be enforced. Laws are a social mediator of relations between people. A socially agreed upon standard of behavior.

There are many laws that carry no penalty, they exist to draw a line of public morality, that a responsible citizen should not cross. Most of us will obey the law even if the chances of being caught and punished are zero.

Even the experts who stated the following "Barrett said that, from the experience from the pilot program Marine Patrol implemented last summer, there is not a large number of boats that exceeded the speed limit.

"I don't think that the fact that it's now in effect is going to make any monster change," said Barrett".

So in summary you see a need for a law that is not necessary according to the experts?

gtagrip · 11-06-2009, 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

I was off trekking the Inca trail to Machu Picchu in Peru. I even swam in a glacial lake at 14,000 feet. Lots of fun, the Andes are awesome!

I will not agree that a SL can't be enforced. However even if true it doesn't change anything. We have lots of laws that can't be enforced. Laws are a social mediator of relations between people. A socially agreed upon standard of behavior.

There are many laws that carry no penalty, they exist to draw a line of public morality, that a responsible citizen should not cross. Most of us will obey the law even if the chances of being caught and punished are zero.

Glad to see you back as well. Although we don't see eye to eye on the SL debate, I do enjoy your lucid posts on the subject.

OCDACTIVE · 11-06-2009, 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

I was off trekking the Inca trail to Machu Picchu in Peru. I even swam in a glacial lake at 14,000 feet. Lots of fun, the Andes are awesome!

I will not agree that a SL can't be enforced. However even if true it doesn't change anything. We have lots of laws that can't be enforced. Laws are a social mediator of relations between people. A socially agreed upon standard of behavior.

There are many laws that carry no penalty, they exist to draw a line of public morality, that a responsible citizen should not cross. Most of us will obey the law even if the chances of being caught and punished are zero.

Wow.. SL supporters please pay attention to BI.. his posts are very intuitive.... Although I totally disagree... His points are very well thought out.

I feel if a law can not be enforced or if it is not payed attention to it shouldn't be on the books because it is not working. It is simply another law that stretches the enforcement budget. Not another tool to keep the lake safe. The more laws the bigger the governement, the bigger the government the less freedoms for its citizens. Not what the framers had in mind. I realize this is very general but it is at the heart of my personal ideologies.

OCDACTIVE · 11-06-2009, 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

I was off trekking the Inca trail to Machu Picchu in Peru. I even swam in a glacial lake at 14,000 feet. Lots of fun, the Andes are awesome!

I will not agree that a SL can't be enforced. However even if true it doesn't change anything. We have lots of laws that can't be enforced. Laws are a social mediator of relations between people. A socially agreed upon standard of behavior.

There are many laws that carry no penalty, they exist to draw a line of public morality, that a responsible citizen should not cross. Most of us will obey the law even if the chances of being caught and punished are zero.

If possible would love to see / hear more about the latest adventure!!

BroadHopper · 11-06-2009, 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

I was off trekking the Inca trail to Machu Picchu in Peru. I even swam in a glacial lake at 14,000 feet. Lots of fun, the Andes are awesome!

Wish I had the opportunity to join you. Full of history in that area!

Some of my retirement dream is to trek the Appalachian from Georgia to Maine, The Sierra trail from Arizona to British Columbia, as well as cruise the intercoastal from Maine to Key West. But treking the Inca trail tops them all.

Glad you had a great time and that you are back safe.

hazelnut · 11-06-2009, 04:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Your experience is different from mine. I have spoken with Marine Patrol officers that were in favor of a SL. Also one of the legislators that gave heavy support to the SL is a former Marine Patrol Officer.

Sometimes the answer you get is the one you are looking for.

Ok point made. I just thought Barrett had gone off the record so to speak as opposed to the law. The instructor, a veteran, that my bro-in law had this summer was emphatic in his disdain with regard to the law. Could be a case of it's all in who you talk to.

Welcome back.

Bear Islander · 11-06-2009, 09:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

If possible would love to see / hear more about the latest adventure!!

If you go to www.icetent.com you can then click on "Machu Pichu" or "My Blog" for photos and descriptions.

VtSteve · 11-06-2009, 10:16 PM

I always enjoy it when other people can live life to the fullest, and just do it. Congrats BI.

ApS · 11-07-2009, 07:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kracken

"...The operator was breaking at least 4 laws before the crash..."

Those laws—if ably prosecuted—could lead to a Felony conviction in CRIMINAL Court.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kracken

"...Why would a 5th law change the outcome...?"

The "5th law" anticipates a possible stressful and expensive conviction for a Felony.

The Speed Limits law is exercised in CIVIL Court, where there are no CRIMINAL repercussions on one's CRIMINAL record.

(There is only the usual mailed-in fine, and points on one's record—where states have "reciprocity" with New Hampshire).

A "summons" received by the offender alerts that boater to the watery misbehaviors/hazards already addressed by those time-tested Coast Guard rules.

Can anyone remember all those maritime rules?

Has anyone forgotten that there is a Speed Limit on Winnipesaukee?

hazelnut · 11-07-2009, 10:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

If you go to www.icetent.com you can then click on "Machu Pichu" or "My Blog" for photos and descriptions.

Have you ever thought of trying out for "The Amazing Race?"

Bear Islander · 11-08-2009, 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hazelnut

Have you ever thought of trying out for "The Amazing Race?"

Survivor is my show. Amazing race is all about who gets the cab driver that speaks English. Besides you need a partner, and no way my wife is doing that.

On December 7th I will be sitting in my rocket in the Mojave desert. No flying, just publicity, but it might make the local news.

DEJ · 11-08-2009, 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

Has anyone forgotten that there is a Speed Limit on Winnipesaukee?

There has been a speed limit for many years on every NH lake.

Gavia immer · 11-08-2009, 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DEJ

There has been a speed limit for many years on every NH lake.

Day and night?

11-08-2009, 11:43 AM

They think this cabin cruiser was sitting still when it was shattered by a "speeding in the dark" 45-ft Sonic "c-boat" (can't spell out what type of boat it was) and almost cut in half, so the Coast Guard counted these SIX FATALITIES in the 0-10MPH category. Since none of the "c-boat" occupants were killed, and we don't know their exact speed anyway (they could not estimate from the wreckage and he would not admit)...there is no inclusion in any of the CG's high-speed categories of any of these deaths, and "high speed" is not even listed as a factor.
Why again can't accidents like this happen on Winnipesaukee if we end the Speed Limit? We do have both of these types of boats here and our "c-boat" drivers insist that they will return to going as fast as they can at night here again once they get rid of that darned SL;
http://www.rbbi.com/folders/acc/ftla...laud2.htm#usa1
Note that the "c-boat" owner lived to kill another day (live free or die).

DEJ · 11-08-2009, 12:03 PM

Yes day and night.

Airwaves · 11-08-2009, 12:27 PM

Originally posted by APS

Quote:

The Speed Limits law is exercised in CIVIL Court, where there are no CRIMINAL repercussions on one's CRIMINAL record.

(There is only the usual mailed-in fine, and points on one's record—where states have "reciprocity" with New Hampshire).

Actually, the RSA provides the following penalty for violation of the section, no mention of any fines (mailed-in or otherwise) so it will involve court time!

Quote:

XI. Any conviction under this section shall be reported to the commissioner of the department of safety, division of motor vehicles, and shall become a part of the motor vehicle driving record of the person convicted.

Gavia immer · 11-08-2009, 01:47 PM

45/25?

Do we each have a Blackberry? LOL.......

sunset on the dock · 11-08-2009, 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elchase

They think this cabin cruiser was sitting still when it was shattered by a "speeding in the dark" 45-ft Sonic "c-boat" (can't spell out what type of boat it was) and almost cut in half, so the Coast Guard counted these SIX FATALITIES in the 0-10MPH category. Since none of the "c-boat" occupants were killed, and we don't know their exact speed anyway (they could not estimate from the wreckage and he would not admit)...there is no inclusion in any of the CG's high-speed categories of any of these deaths, and "high speed" is not even listed as a factor.
Why again can't accidents like this happen on Winnipesaukee if we end the Speed Limit? We do have both of these types of boats here and our "c-boat" drivers insist that they will return to going as fast as they can at night here again once they get rid of that darned SL;
http://www.rbbi.com/folders/acc/ftla...laud2.htm#usa1
Note that the "c-boat" owner lived to kill another day (live free or die).

Can't quite see the relevance here EL to Winnipesaukee and our SL:
1) The accident happened in Florida.
2) Alcohol was involved.
3) The accident occurred in November; there is minimal boating activity on Lake Winnipesaukee at that time of year.
4) The accident happened on salt water which has a higher density and more buoyancy than fresh water.
5) There are alligators in Florida and none in New Hampshire.

Airwaves · 11-08-2009, 03:17 PM

Sunset posted:

Quote:

Can't quite see the relevance here EL to Winnipesaukee and our SL:
1) The accident happened in Florida.
2) Alcohol was involved.
3) The accident occurred in November; there is minimal boating activity on Lake Winnipesaukee at that time of year.
4) The accident happened on salt water which has a higher density and more buoyancy than fresh water.
5) There are alligators in Florida and none in New Hampshire.

1) No safe passage law in Florida
2) In 1997 no boater education was required in Florida
3) The accident occured in November...12 years ago!
4) The United State Coast Guard and New Hampshire Marine Patrol list NH as the safest state in which to boat in New England and in the top 4 in the United States of America before the silly speed limits law went into effect but after mandatory education!
5) Boating safety has improved by leaps and bounds in the past dozen years mostly because of boater education!

Posted by Elchase:

Quote:

Note that the "c-boat" owner lived to kill another day (live free or die).

The operator that was boating drunk was convicted of 6 counts DUI manslaughter and sentenced to 85 years in prison! At least according to the link that you provided.

11-08-2009, 06:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

Can't quite see the relevance here EL to Winnipesaukee and our SL:
1) The accident happened in Florida.
2) Alcohol was involved.
3) The accident occurred in November; there is minimal boating activity on Lake Winnipesaukee at that time of year.
4) The accident happened on salt water which has a higher density and more buoyancy than fresh water.
5) There are alligators in Florida and none in New Hampshire.

Sunset,
I'm finally starting to understand the argument about drinking as an excuse for speeding. It's not a question of danger, its a question of blame. You see, if you are drunk, then you aren't really responsible for what you do. So if you fly around in your boat while drunk and run over another boat and kill someone, or run your boat up onto their shore front and kill one of your passengers, it's obviously dangerous, but is not really your fault. The fault then falls to the manufacturer of your GPS or the owner of the hotel next to the place where you got drunk, unless the hotel is on the list of businesses that did not support the speed limit. The logic is tough to understand at first, but if you have a few drinks in you it all starts to make sense.
We've all heard over and over again in these threads how it was really the owner of Church Landing who is at fault for Mr. Hartman's death because he leased to the restaurant who hired the bartender who served Mr. Littlefield some of his drinks, and because Church Landing is on the list of businesses that supported the speed limit. But Naswa is ok to liquor up its boating patrons all day long, and the Wolfetrap is never held to account for over serving boaters, because these businesses opposed the speed limit. Get it? Church Landing killed Mr. Hartman, but Wolfetrap did not kill Ms. Beaudoin. Confused? Just have another drink before you try to make sense of all this.

NoRegrets · 11-08-2009, 08:02 PM

I am still puzzled by the postings of historical accidents in all the different threads posted by one forum member. It seems that the only thing that would make sense would be to eliminate all boats that have the potential for killing. I find the logic of these posting of no value unless one plans to never venture out on the water. Is it a possible attempt to goad others into mean spirited interactions and get another thread closed?

sunset on the dock · 11-08-2009, 08:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elchase

Sunset,
I'm finally starting to understand the argument about drinking as an excuse for speeding. It's not a question of danger, its a question of blame. You see, if you are drunk, then you aren't really responsible for what you do. So if you fly around in your boat while drunk and run over another boat and kill someone, or run your boat up onto their shore front and kill one of your passengers, it's obviously dangerous, but is not really your fault. The fault then falls to the manufacturer of your GPS or the owner of the hotel next to the place where you got drunk, unless the hotel is on the list of businesses that did not support the speed limit. The logic is tough to understand at first, but if you have a few drinks in you it all starts to make sense.
We've all heard over and over again in these threads how it was really the owner of Church Landing who is at fault for Mr. Hartman's death because he leased to the restaurant who hired the bartender who served Mr. Littlefield some of his drinks, and because Church Landing is on the list of businesses that supported the speed limit. But Naswa is ok to liquor up its boating patrons all day long, and the Wolfetrap is never held to account for over serving boaters, because these businesses opposed the speed limit. Get it? Church Landing killed Mr. Hartman, but Wolfetrap did not kill Ms. Beaudoin. Confused? Just have another drink before you try to make sense of all this.

EL,
Now I'm really getting confused. Airwaves says your Florida example has no relevance in part because boater education has now made boating safer but what if a boater on Lake Winnipesaukee who may have been drinking is also a graduate of a boater safety course (think Erica Blizzard)? Does that mean that boater safety courses are irrelevant because drunks may forget what they learned in the course? And what if they borrowed the boat without permission and are the graduates of such a course and do they teach you in the course that you shouldn't take out someone's boat without permission? But are you less responsable for taking the boat if you've been drinking? How about if the bartender who served excessive amounts of alcohol is also a graduate of a boater education course? Does that make it better or worse? What if the bartender is for or against the SL? What if the bartender is from another state like Florida, then does it negate the whole argument? Please get back to me with the answers before next summer.

VtSteve · 11-08-2009, 09:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

Can't quite see the relevance here EL to Winnipesaukee and our SL:
1) The accident happened in Florida.
2) Alcohol was involved.
3) The accident occurred in November; there is minimal boating activity on Lake Winnipesaukee at that time of year.
4) The accident happened on salt water which has a higher density and more buoyancy than fresh water.
5) There are alligators in Florida and none in New Hampshire.

Here's the real relevance Sunset, be sgure to wipe the smirk off your face after reading

"Six die in Broward Intracoastal boat collision

Ft Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel
25 November 1997
FORT LAUDERDALE - Six people were killed and two injured late Monday when a Cigarette-style boat slammed into a smaller boat from behind on the Intracoastal Waterway just south of the Sunrise Boulevard bridge.
A 45-foot Cigarette-type named "Merrymaker" was traveling north, "apparently at a high rate of speed," about 11:25 p.m. when it struck a 31-foot cabin cruiser named "Bill it" from behind, cutting it in half and killing all six people on board. Authorities have not determined the speed of the larger boat, but the speed limit is 25 mph in that area of the waterway.
"It was a gory scene," said Fort Lauderdale Fire Battalion Chief Tom Fredricks.

The speedboat continued north, striking a dock about a block north, then came to a stop in the water.
"

The next time you have a smart remark to make, better finish reading first. Same goes to El. Real boaters have no use for such rubbish.

Resident 2B · 11-08-2009, 11:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

EL,
Now I'm really getting confused. Airwaves says your Florida example has no relevance in part because boater education has now made boating safer but what if a boater on Lake Winnipesaukee who may have been drinking is also a graduate of a boater safety course (think Erica Blizzard)? Does that mean that boater safety courses are irrelevant because drunks may forget what they learned in the course? And what if they borrowed the boat without permission and are the graduates of such a course and do they teach you in the course that you shouldn't take out someone's boat without permission? But are you less responsable for taking the boat if you've been drinking? How about if the bartender who served excessive amounts of alcohol is also a graduate of a boater education course? Does that make it better or worse? What if the bartender is for or against the SL? What if the bartender is from another state like Florida, then does it negate the whole argument? Please get back to me with the answers before next summer.

More smoke and more spin!!

Come on folks! Now you are even making yourselves dizzy!

The point you folks are pretending to miss, by the way I seriously doubt you are missing anything, is that the laws that were in place before the SL were being broken, or would have been broken if the incidents actually happened in NH, by most of the operators responsible for the incidents you bring forward. Therefore, what is the real value in adding another law, other than to push a certain group of boaters off the lake? That is your real agenda now isn't it.

Facts are, if the boating public became more aware of the laws effective in 2008 and if MP had more resources to enforce these well thought out laws, the lake would be a better place.

I realize that as long as Fast Boats are on the lake, you and your buddies will not be satisfied. Therefore, we continue to get barraged with your smoke and mirror campaign.

R2B (Proud owner of a bow rider, top end 44 mph)

chipj29 · 11-09-2009, 07:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VtSteve

Here's the real relevance Sunset, be sgure to wipe the smirk off your face after reading

"Six die in Broward Intracoastal boat collision

Ft Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel
25 November 1997
FORT LAUDERDALE - Six people were killed and two injured late Monday when a Cigarette-style boat slammed into a smaller boat from behind on the Intracoastal Waterway just south of the Sunrise Boulevard bridge.
A 45-foot Cigarette-type named "Merrymaker" was traveling north, "apparently at a high rate of speed," about 11:25 p.m. when it struck a 31-foot cabin cruiser named "Bill it" from behind, cutting it in half and killing all six people on board. Authorities have not determined the speed of the larger boat, but the speed limit is 25 mph in that area of the waterway.
"It was a gory scene," said Fort Lauderdale Fire Battalion Chief Tom Fredricks.

The speedboat continued north, striking a dock about a block north, then came to a stop in the water.
"

The next time you have a smart remark to make, better finish reading first. Same goes to El. Real boaters have no use for such rubbish.

Wait a second...are you saying that there was indeed a speed limit in place at the time of that accident? And are you also saying that the speed limit failed to save the lives of those 6 innocent people? How can that be? The speed limit is about safety! It is supposed to protect us all!

hazelnut · 11-09-2009, 07:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chipj29

Wait a second...are you saying that there was indeed a speed limit in place at the time of that accident? And are you also saying that the speed limit failed to save the lives of those 6 innocent people? How can that be? The speed limit is about safety! It is supposed to protect us all!

So what you're saying is someone broke the Speed Limit law and in fact the Speed Limit Law in place did not work to prevent this tragedy. But I was told by the people on this message board that it was the security blanket we all needed. I am so confused right now.

11-09-2009, 07:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NoRegrets

I am still puzzled by the postings of historical accidents in all the different threads posted by one forum member.

NG, You would be absolutely AMAZED at the number of emails I have received thanking me for these posts and for enlightening of the extent of this problem. If one was only to read these anti speed limit threads, one would think that it is safe to have boats buzzing around a crowded lake at whatever speeds the drivers felt appropriate. Some people had even bought the tripe about there never having been a high-speed accident on Winnipesaukee and were startled to learn that was a lie many times over.
Once people (including several legislators by the way) see how wide spread and deadly this problem is, it wakes them right up to the reality.
Whether you and your seven buddies want to pretend this has no relevance to the dangers of high-speed boating, on Winnipesaukee and everywhere else, is not of consequence to me. You are not the readers I am aiming at. It is my opinion that this stuff has more relevance than simply "it happened on water", and we each have a right to our own opinins in America, right? And you have the right to put me on "ignore" if you don't want to read it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by VtSteve

The next time you have a smart remark to make, better finish reading first. Same goes to El. Real boaters have no use for such rubbish.

"rubbish" is a matter of opinion. I think most of your posts are "rubbish", so I ignore them unless they are directed to or mention me...as you did here again. I swear you do this just to attract my response and get the threads shut down. The real "rubbish" to me is the silly notion that driving drunk excuses speeding, or that a high-speed accident by an identical boat on a similar lake is irrelevant. I don't think anyone of intelligence is really buying that "rubbish".
As to the case where there was an accident in a 25MPH zone. That is a tragedy. And I'm sure that we will still have an occasional tragedy like that on Winnipesaukee under our SL. Nobody said the SL will cure all of our problems or make boating completely safe. It is merely one more stone in a wall of safety that makes the lake a better place for boating for all. No single stone is going to make the lake safer by itself. But surely there will be far fewer of these tragedies with a SL than without. We still have highway deaths, but thank God we have speed limits on our highways and it is not "every man for himself" like it used to be on Winnipesaukee, or we'd surely have thousands more.
Now I really wish that you'd put me on "ignore" and stop mentioning me, as you simple can't seem to avoid being personal and it is really taking these threads down. Sometimes I think you are just trying to get the threads closed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Resident 2B

That is your real agenda now isn't it...I realize that as long as Fast Boats are on the lake, you and your buddies will not be satisfied.

You're getting personal again. Stop trying to tell us what we think, what our agenda is, and what will satisfy us. You don't know, and that is not the purpose of these threads. Tell us what YOU think about the SL...why did it make the lake so much more civil last year or why didn't it...in YOUR opinion. That's what the readers (including several legislators) are coming here to read. And that is how you keep this debate from heading back into the gutter. Unless it is really your goal to drag it back into the gutter to get the threads shut down. I know what I think and what my agenda is, and it has nothing to do with any type of boat. I just want to keep all the gains we have made and see Winnipesaukee remain like it was last summer. There were plenty of "Fast Boats" out there last summer and I was happy to see them, because they just weren't going too fast. And that made boating on Winnipesaukee so much better for the rest of us.

I'm looking for information about the Eagle Island crash from earlier in the decade. Not the most recent one where the kid was seen traveling at a high rate of speed in his mom's boat before he crashed ashore and landed right next to a cottage, but the one that happened a few years before that where the Mount's captain saw the boat crash at very high speed and land right next to another cottage with people sleeping inside. Can anyone help me find a report on that one?

Yosemite Sam · 11-09-2009, 08:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chipj29

Wait a second...are you saying that there was indeed a speed limit in place at the time of that accident? And are you also saying that the speed limit failed to save the lives of those 6 innocent people? How can that be? The speed limit is about safety! It is supposed to protect us all!

Thanks chipj29 for finally making it clear that Cigarette style boats do not belong on Lake Winnibesaukee. The article that VtSteve posted makes it clear that even though a speed limit was in effect those cowboys could have cared less and proved it by killing six innocent people.
Lets not have a speed limit on Lake Winnibesaukee but instead lets ban all Cigarette style boats because it is clear now that the law doesn’t make a difference to these people.
Thanks again chipj29 for making me understand exactly what VtSteve was trying to tell us. Good job, now I can show this to the lawmakers in Concord to help them understand what is really wrong with our boating laws.

VitaBene · 11-09-2009, 08:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yosemite Sam

Thanks chipj29 for finally making it clear that Cigarette style boats do not belong on Lake Winnibesaukee. The article that VtSteve posted makes it clear that even though a speed limit was in effect those cowboys could have cared less and proved it by killing six innocent people.
Lets not have a speed limit on Lake Winnibesaukee but instead lets ban all Cigarette style boats because it is clear now that the law doesn’t make a difference to these people.
Thanks again chipj29 for making me understand exactly what VtSteve was trying to tell us. Good job, now I can show this to the lawmakers in Concord to help them understand what is really wrong with our boating laws.

Sam, The state can regulate speed limits, however, don't you think it a real slippery slope when they start regulating the types of boats that would be allowed on the lake?

sunset on the dock · 11-09-2009, 08:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VtSteve

Here's the real relevance Sunset, be sgure to wipe the smirk off your face after reading

"Six die in Broward Intracoastal boat collision

Ft Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel
25 November 1997
FORT LAUDERDALE - Six people were killed and two injured late Monday when a Cigarette-style boat slammed into a smaller boat from behind on the Intracoastal Waterway just south of the Sunrise Boulevard bridge.
A 45-foot Cigarette-type named "Merrymaker" was traveling north, "apparently at a high rate of speed," about 11:25 p.m. when it struck a 31-foot cabin cruiser named "Bill it" from behind, cutting it in half and killing all six people on board. Authorities have not determined the speed of the larger boat, but the speed limit is 25 mph in that area of the waterway.
"It was a gory scene," said Fort Lauderdale Fire Battalion Chief Tom Fredricks.

The speedboat continued north, striking a dock about a block north, then came to a stop in the water.
"

The next time you have a smart remark to make, better finish reading first. Same goes to El. Real boaters have no use for such rubbish.

And your indignant remarks conveniently ignore the irony of the specious and convoluted arguments that any accident occuring anywhere else has no relevance to our speed limit. This is what my post is highlighting.Trying to paint the picture that SL supporters have no compassion for those injured or killed by speeding boats meshes well with your arguments that if SL supporters really cared about safety then we would be working to solve the problem of Capt. Bonehead. Nice try.

chipj29 · 11-09-2009, 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yosemite Sam

Thanks chipj29 for finally making it clear that Cigarette style boats do not belong on Lake Winnibesaukee. The article that VtSteve posted makes it clear that even though a speed limit was in effect those cowboys could have cared less and proved it by killing six innocent people.
Lets not have a speed limit on Lake Winnibesaukee but instead lets ban all Cigarette style boats because it is clear now that the law doesn’t make a difference to these people.
Thanks again chipj29 for making me understand exactly what VtSteve was trying to tell us. Good job, now I can show this to the lawmakers in Concord to help them understand what is really wrong with our boating laws.

If the goal was to ban cigarette style boats from Lake Winni, then why wasn't that proposed? Why was that hidden under a veil of a speed limit?

Class warfare at its finest.

I will state it once again. Lake Winni (as with all publicly owned bodies of water in NH) is owned by each and every one of us. Each of us has the right to use the water however we please, as long as it is within the law.

Kracken · 11-09-2009, 01:07 PM

APS

Isn’t reckless boating a felony?

I believe speeding is not a felony unless it is classified as “reckless”.

Please correct me if I am mistaken.

sunset on the dock · 11-09-2009, 01:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chipj29

Class warfare at its finest.

OK,quick question, and I'm serious. What class is it that has $200K plus GFBL boats and what class is it that wants a speed limit? (My boat is 14' with a 15 HP outboard)

OCDACTIVE · 11-09-2009, 01:43 PM

hey sunset.. Good to see you...... (seriously)...you are one of the SL supporters that are actually here to debate without attacking everyone.

I have a question for you... Where did people get the alusion that GFB's all cost $200K and every owner has to have tons of $$$ or a trust fund?

I have been to the boat shows and seen Sailboats that cost way more then GFB. Mine cost nothing close to that. Given it was a lot closer when it was new but I wouldn't have been able to afford it....

What I am driving at is I believe there is an untrue stereo type that all GFBs and owners cost a huge amount of money or the person has huge amounts.... This just simply is not the case.

It would be like me saying that all party boaters don't have much $ because they cost less then fiberglass boats..

Just a point I was wondering if you could clairify for me.

Thanks...

PS. hope all is well.. Been off the forum for sometime.. busy weekend.. was at the Patriots game yesterday.. Great great time.. Beautiful weather as well. If I wasn't there it would have been a terrific day to go bombing down the broads.. J/K.... little razzing...

chipj29 · 11-09-2009, 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

OK,quick question, and I'm serious. What class is it that has $200K plus GFBL boats and what class is it that wants a speed limit? (My boat is 14' with a 15 HP outboard)

I truly believe that it is not only the upper class that owns GFBL's. I believe that it is a mix of many different classes. Personally I could afford one (on the lower end), but choose not to for my own reasons. And trust me when I am say that I am far far far away from the upper class.

DEJ · 11-09-2009, 02:06 PM

Ever notice how most speed limit supporters always refer to GFBL boats as 5 ton $200K boats? There are many if not more Bass boats on the lake on any weekend from ice out till the end of November than there are so called GFBL's that can do 70+ and cost about the same as the average bow rider style boat which is about 20 to 30K. Could it be that a particular type of boat is the real target here?

BroadHopper · 11-09-2009, 02:11 PM

So the SL supporters consider my little 22' 1988 Formula as a GFBL boat. Then they turn around and say the 200K+ Cigarette boats are the GFBL boats. I'm really confused???? Just what is exactly a GFBL boat?????

I think I am in 'No man's land'. Between the pontoon and bowriders that do no wrong? And the big 'ocean liners' that does everything wrong?

My beef is boneheads are in all type of boats. Outlawing a specific style boat does not get rid of the problem!

hazelnut · 11-09-2009, 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

PS. hope all is well.. Been off the forum for sometime.. busy weekend.. was at the Patriots game yesterday.. Great great time.. Beautiful weather as well.

I was there as well. What a great day!

sunset on the dock · 11-09-2009, 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

hey sunset.. Good to see you...... (seriously)...you are one of the SL supporters that are actually here to debate without attacking everyone.

I have a question for you... Where did people get the alusion that GFB's all cost $200K and every owner has to have tons of $$$ or a trust fund?

I have been to the boat shows and seen Sailboats that cost way more then GFB. Mine cost nothing close to that. Given it was a lot closer when it was new but I wouldn't have been able to afford it....

What I am driving at is I believe there is an untrue stereo type that all GFBs and owners cost a huge amount of money or the person has huge amounts.... This just simply is not the case.

It would be like me saying that all party boaters don't have much $ because they cost less then fiberglass boats..

Just a point I was wondering if you could clairify for me.

Thanks...

PS. hope all is well.. Been off the forum for sometime.. busy weekend.. was at the Patriots game yesterday.. Great great time.. Beautiful weather as well. If I wasn't there it would have been a terrific day to go bombing down the broads.. J/K.... little razzing...

Hello...no you're right and I agree with your point. I just wanted to encourage people to be aware that the incomes of both SL supporters and opposers seem to vary considerably from the highs to the lows. I just hate to see the discussions turn into a class warfare issue because I don't believe it is such.
Glad you had good weather for the Pat's win. Looks like this week will be pretty good too...sunset

Kracken · 11-09-2009, 03:12 PM

Most of the “cowboys” are agreeable to a compromise. It has become clear that unlimited speeds on Lake Winnipesaukee are a thing of the past. The problem most boaters have with the 45/25 limit is it appears to be an arbitrary figure without supporting data. The limits were never debated, there wasn’t a compromise it was simply stated in a bill and adopted.

What we don’t want or need is a myriad of laws that sterilize every part of our lives. We don’t need warning signs on every product. We don’t need to tax sugary snacks and drinks to deter consumption. We don’t need every corner to be rounded and padded. We are heading down a path where everybody will be wearing helmets and water wings 24/7.

Years ago a national highway speed limit was adopted because it was determined that fuel consumption when up drastically when automobiles exceeded 55mph. during the first energy crisis it was understandable why they chose that speed as a national limit.

45/25 does not have clear reasoning behind it. Yes it is true, if no boat exceeded 5 mph there would be a lot fewer fatalities but why would one want to live their life in bubble wrap?

Prior to the speed limit, NH had laws in place that effectively promoted safe practices on the state's waterways. New Hampshire has one of the best water safety records in the country. We don’t need redundant laws. We all want the lake to be safe; however before enacting a law like 45/25 we need to do our due diligence to determine what is an acceptable safety limit. The voices of the Coast Guard and New Hampshire Marine Patrol should be the loudest in this endeavor.

Yosemite Sam · 11-09-2009, 03:21 PM

This is a question for all you go fast (GFB) or cigarette boat owner's who use their boat on Lake Winni:

IF the 45/25 speed limit law gets extended past the original two year time period, will you still use your GFB on Lake Winni anyway?

OCDACTIVE · 11-09-2009, 03:23 PM

Very well put Kracken.!!!

I also would be willing to talk over a compromise but most peolpe are unwilling to do so.

Also, do not be so quick to dismiss unlimited. The law sunsets in one year, one month and 20 days...

You have to look at the history. Winnfabs wanted a two year test period on the "enitire" lake because the test zones yielded no data that speeding was an issue. This is what our state legislators said to us in support of the 2 year test. They said:

that the reason there was very limited data they claimed was "the fast boats just avoided the test zones" This was why they pushed for a 2 year test to prove that there are a lot more "speeders" on the lake and this test will prove that.

Well that didn't happen. Not 1 ticket has been written and paid on. Not One!!!

Now of course they twist their own reason why they requested it in the first place and say "see how well it is working" Totally going against why it was requested in the first place.

We can only hope that the state reps. see this as clearly as we do. That speed is not an issue on Lake Winni and that the law will simply sunset and we will be done with this.

OCDACTIVE · 11-09-2009, 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yosemite Sam

This is a question for all you go fast (GFB) or cigarette boat owner's who use their boat on Lake Winni:

IF the 45/25 speed limit law gets extended past the original two year time period, will you still use your GFB on Lake Winni anyway?

Absolutely. I love lake winni! I have been there for 30 years and I am not letting this turn me away.

Again this is not just about cigarette boats. There are many different types of watercraft that this effects. PWC, Bass Boats, GFB.... etc.

Kracken · 11-09-2009, 03:43 PM

Yosemite Sam,

Define GFB

Yosemite Sam · 11-09-2009, 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kracken

Yosemite Sam,

Define GFB

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go-fast_boat

"The dance or go-fast boat or van witsen is a high performance boat of a characteristic design. Originally designed for offshore powerboat racing team by Donald Aronow, the fast, powerful boats became notorious as the drug smuggling boat of choice in many parts of the world starting in the 1980s. These boats were used at first to smuggle cigarettes into Canada and therefore derived their nickname as the "cigarette boat". A company was formed later and trademarked the actual name "cigarette" as the preferred sea vehicle among the elite."

OCDACTIVE has a typical low end GFB.

hazelnut · 11-09-2009, 04:34 PM

Posts 294 and 296 in this thread are by far the absolute best posts I have ever seen to date on this subject. I urge every single supporter and those who oppose the law to read them and then re-read them again. Kracken and OCDACTIVE have summed up in few words, without embellishment, many people's feelings.

I can't tell the readers of the forum this next point enough, because most here try to paint us all the same. I am not a Fast Boat owner nor will I ever own one. I am a bowrider guy. I have to say this and I will continue to say this. My boat barely does 49 MPH.

I am truly an individual that opposes legislation to protect us from ourselves. I oppose lawmakers who arbitrarily use their power to push an agenda with no merit. Laws created out of thin air that are not warranted are dangerous to our freedoms. It becomes way too easy for your government to nickle and dime your freedoms away. Wake up, this is one more law created by lawmakers with little to no facts to support it. They tried to "show us all" with the test sites, FAIL. Now the law is enacted and once again they have FAILED to show good reason why it should remain.

Keep this in mind the few supporters on this site that use statements like "seems quieter" and "less scary" "it was less chaotic" are using circumstantial, subjective reasoning in support of this law. This should scare the heck out of everyone in this debate. If we can legislate on feelings then we should all be very afraid. This is not what this country was founded on.

Kracken and OCD well stated and I hope a few people on this site realize now that this is not a case of a bunch of Cowboys looking to drive as fast as they want whenever they want. I can't stress this enough. They want to paint us all as reckless cowboys but it just isn't the truth. My boating has not changed at all. I still drive 30-35MPH and my boat only goes 45MPH on average with a half tank and a few passengers. To get my boat to go 50MPH I have to be alone with a quarter tank and a tailwind.

Lemmings we are not. Question the reasoning behind every single piece of legislation. This is a classic example. We are all united by one simple fact. We enjoy recreation on the lake that we all love so much. Your activity could very well be next. Why would it be so crazy to think that Kayakers could be targeted next, or sail-boaters, fishermen, I could think of any number of laws that could be targeted against you. I'll give you an example. Wasn't there a piece of legislation that was proposed to make swimmers wear silly orange caps?

Imagine that? A LAW requiring you to wear a swim cap. Don't you think a law could just as easily be proposed prohibiting kayakers from using the broads? I mean it "seems scary" to be kayaking in the broads. What with all that wind and deep water? You could easily drown out there in a windstorm. It would "seem safer" if you kayaked closer to shore.

Of course personally I do not think there should be a law prohibiting kayakers from using any part of the lake. But I'm not the one proposing silly laws though.

11-04-2009, 01:38 PM	#207
DEJ Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 553 Thanks: 526 Thanked 314 Times in 155 Posts	Well said I rest my case, thank you.

11-04-2009, 02:02 PM	#210
DoTheMath Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: MA / Moultonborough Posts: 146 Thanks: 46 Thanked 43 Times in 18 Posts	Btw... Why is everyone getting so nasty over in this thread - it is / was very civil in the other threads... Everyone take a step back, take a series of deep breaths and relax. We were making good progress toward a middle-ground of sorts, let's not blow it with name calling and insults. Just stick to the facts, stand your ground and make your point(s) and work toward a solution that will appease (most) everyone. Picking on spelling or grammatical errors, professions, etc... isn't doing anyone any good - and it is causing a loss of focus on the points-at-hand. I tell my wife all the time, life is short - we only go this way once - when we are gone, we're gone for a loooooong time! So make the most of your time here, live life to the fullest and if you don't like onions on your burger, order it without! Last edited by DoTheMath; 11-04-2009 at 02:44 PM. Reason: I misspelled "your" as "you" forgot the "r" - lol. :o)

11-04-2009, 02:08 PM	#211
DoTheMath Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: MA / Moultonborough Posts: 146 Thanks: 46 Thanked 43 Times in 18 Posts	Another idea... How about we try this as a little exercise? Let's all post our ages - seriously - as a reminder of just how old we are and how old we "should" act. I'll start - I just turned 41.

11-04-2009, 02:11 PM	#212
Kracken Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Alton Posts: 223 Thanks: 46 Thanked 130 Times in 50 Posts	A question for Mr. Chase. You have been scouring the web to give the members of Winnipesaukee.com the most accurate and relevant articles related to dangers of high speed boating. I couldn’t help but notice that on post #177 your article is from MSNBC. You have made it clear what side of the aisle you are on. My question is: What would you be doing even reading an article from MSNBC, and why would you believe it was not fictional?

11-05-2009, 07:37 AM	#230
Yosemite Sam Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Lakes Region Posts: 395 Thanks: 81 Thanked 95 Times in 56 Posts	Job for elchase? In todays GSN there is a want ad for a Marine Patrol officier Traninee. I think they have the date a little screwed up...it states "effect January 2, 2009. Maybe it should say 2010. This would be a good job for elchase...Yes or No?? Attached Images

11-04-2009, 12:30 PM	#202
sunset on the dock Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 347 Thanks: 153 Thanked 106 Times in 69 Posts	whoa...things are getting a little out of control here. No one(pro or con SL) on this SL forum is a girl scout from what I can see. El has often been on the receiving end of the personal insults...so what if he's able to give it back? We're all big boys and girls here and if we can dish it out we need to be able take it.

11-04-2009, 12:35 PM	#203
DEJ Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 553 Thanks: 526 Thanked 314 Times in 155 Posts	Some here on both sides of this issue "toe" the line, some step over it which I believe has happened here.

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to hazelnut For This Useful Post:
BroadHopper (11-04-2009), eillac@dow (11-04-2009), OCDACTIVE (11-04-2009)

The Following User Says Thank You to gtagrip For This Useful Post:

11-04-2009, 01:33 PM	#206
sunset on the dock Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 347 Thanks: 153 Thanked 106 Times in 69 Posts	Like I said, I've seen plenty of trashing coming from the Sl opposition as well. And I've seen supporters called stupid, pond scum, idiots,liar, and the list goes on and on. What strikes me is that a couple of those prime offenders who taunt and insult some of their fellow forum members are the first to run crying to Don when they get a dose of their own medicine.

11-04-2009, 02:00 PM	#209
DEJ Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 553 Thanks: 526 Thanked 314 Times in 155 Posts	He is a great story teller, deserves an Emmy IMO.

The Following User Says Thank You to DoTheMath For This Useful Post:
hazelnut (11-04-2009)

11-04-2009, 02:25 PM	#215
sunset on the dock Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 347 Thanks: 153 Thanked 106 Times in 69 Posts	Part of my point Hazelnut, not directed entirely at you, is why for example, wasn't there this much indignation when EL was falsely accused of illegal fishing. It's a 2 way street. That accusation was not uncharacteristic of the barbs being slung El's way.

11-04-2009, 02:36 PM	#216
hazelnut Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 1,348 Blog Entries: 3 Thanks: 508 Thanked 462 Times in 162 Posts	Let me further add that this entire tangent of the argument was and is my fault. I stuck my nose in and I shouldn't have. Many forum members prior to elchase have, in the heat of the argument, called people's intellect into question regarding a slip of the keyboard with regard to both grammar and spelling. It was a tactic I saw a couple of forum members using time and time again. When I read and react to a post I usually base my response on the content of the post. Some people, whether they had no real rebuttal or not, chose to resort to trying to paint the responders as stupid because they misspelled or misused a word. This tactic wore thin with me and I finally snapped when I saw what I perceived as another attempt by a forum member discrediting a post from someone else based on a spelling mistake. It wasn’t even my post! So I stuck my nose in and have regretted it since I hit the post button. I apologize to all that have been subjected to reading the thread. I also want to apologize to YosemiteSam. I generally do enjoy your posts. While I disagree with your stance on the SL I think you are a good sport and I enjoy trading barbs with you. I think people misunderstand your humor sometimes and take it personally or take it as an attack. So I’m sorry I was rude to you in my follow up post after you so aptly caught my major mistake as I was pointing out a mistake in the other post. I’m taking DTM’s advice and stepping back and taking a breath here. I really think that there are great people on both sides of the issue. SOTD, while we have traded jabs I think you do a good job making your case for the most part. I really think that one person on this forum who makes so much noise has driven a spike between both sides of the argument. Whether or not that was his mission he has succeeded. I really think honest to goodness debate on the matter could take place between many of us. If you go back and research the forums you’ll see that one member has made it his mission to ensure that this does not happen. I was told that was the case by many and I never believed it until now, shame on me.

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to hazelnut For This Useful Post:
DoTheMath (11-04-2009), VtSteve (11-04-2009)

11-04-2009, 02:37 PM	#217
DEJ Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 553 Thanks: 526 Thanked 314 Times in 155 Posts	Good move Hnut.

11-04-2009, 04:33 PM	#220
elchase Guest Posts: n/a	You'll all note that my attacks are always responses to attacks that had been directed at me. I am like Israel...I only strike in retaliation. And I'm not going to shy from defending myself just because some of you can't take it. Meanwhile, there are a few of the cult (you know who you are) who follow me around and attack every time I post. If I post on another thread about fishing, they suddenly appear to disagree with and insult me. If I post on another thread about sailing, they suddenly appear to disagree with and insult me. Hazelnut's attack at me was unprovoked, personal, rude, hate-filled, based on her error about the source of the original misspelling, and childish...who has the time to be spell-checking and grammar checking each others' posts? Get a life. My original post was not directed at her, was not insulting, and was no cause for her attack. I got no apology for that and still no apology when I pointed out her error. "Don, please protect me, Ed fights back and I don't like when people do that. Please kick him off the board." Sexist? "Smarmy" was your own word, not mine, and I never knew it was sexist. "Don, a man called me "smarmy" back after I called him "smarmy". Please sanction him." (Hazel, note my placement of the period inside the quotation mark in this instance? http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/2932 ). And saying I am insulting your sexuality is outrageous. How could I even know of your sexuality? When did you even disclose it? Where did I insult it? I have several gay friends and am very tolerant about alternative lifestyles. Don't call me a racist and don't call me a homophobe unless you can back it up lady. I've never seen such a glass-house crybaby. Keep your personal opinions about me to yourself and I'll keep mine to myself. But if you want to throw gasoline, I'm throwing it back until I am kicked off the forum...and don't cry when you get burned. I'd never strike a woman, but I'd certainly fight back verbally. You started this one. My response was in kind. You sound like a whiny little girl to everyone except your own gang, who will side with you and against me no matter what you do anyway. Now, so as to not waste this opportunity to further educate; Laconia Citizen Laconia, NH Monday, July 5, 2004 Two thrown from boat in Alton not injured By KRISTA MARRS Staff Writer ALTON — Two boaters thrown from a vessel in The Broads Saturday evening were not injured. Andrew Rocco, 36, of Exeter was operating his 30-foot cigarette power boat on Lake Winnipesaukee in the area between Parker and Rattlesnake Island just before 5:30 p.m. when Marine Patrol officials said Rocco went into a tight turn and rolled the boat. Rocco and his passenger, Kimberly Dailey of Portsmouth, were ejected but were not injured. A boat passing by stopped to help Rocco and Dailey get out of the water. The boat was later recovered from the water. Marine Patrol was assisted by the Wolfeboro Fire Rescue Department. The incident is being investigated by Marine Patrol Officer Michael Vito, Supervisor Dave Gunter and Sgt. Eric Robertson. The investigation found nothing they could charge Rocco with. He was sober, was luckily not within 150 ft of shore or another boat, and there was no speed limit then. Of course if it had happened this summer, they could have charged him with speeding and tagged his driving record too. Why is this stuff so easy for me to find yet you guys keep saying "We can't find where there has ever been a high speed accident on Winnipesaukee."? (Hazel, see http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/2932 before you insult my question mark placement).

11-04-2009, 04:38 PM	#221
DEJ Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 553 Thanks: 526 Thanked 314 Times in 155 Posts	You were wise to do that Hnut.

The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to gtagrip For This Useful Post:
chipj29 (11-05-2009), DEJ (11-04-2009), DoTheMath (11-04-2009), hazelnut (11-04-2009)

11-04-2009, 05:04 PM	#224
VtSteve Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 1,320 Blog Entries: 1 Thanks: 230 Thanked 361 Times in 169 Posts	The only thing I've gotten out of this latest series of attempts to rile everyone up is this. El missed the point in this horrific accident he listed. http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/b...7RlLGo2mH3wSmO "Two fishermen told cops they saw the boat speeding under the Goose Creek Bridge a minute or so before the crash. The speed limit under the bridge is 5 mph." Huh, imagine that.

11-04-2009, 05:09 PM	#226
DoTheMath Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: MA / Moultonborough Posts: 146 Thanks: 46 Thanked 43 Times in 18 Posts	Wow - elChase, what gives!? (Although I have you blocked as you just bring this place down, I got to read your post as quoted by gtagrip). Hazelnut apologized for what went down earlier, was the bigger MAN (HE is not a woman) and offered the "olive branch" if-you-will. "Sam" accepted and let it go, why are you so bent on carrying on? Let it go and move on - we get you are all about standing up for yourself, and have a strong opinion on the SL, but you need to chill out. Really, is it beyond you to just say "gee thanks, that was much appreciated and I know things can get heated here, I too am sorry for getting so wound up, etc...". It's like you are trying to be this literary (forum) martyr or something just to hold your ground - is that your goal? I love a good debate as much as the next guy (or gal), but everyone has their limits - and we are all adults here, aren't we!? Do everyone - most importantly yourself - a favor and just step away from the computer, take a few deep breaths, grab a nice glass of McCallan 25 and chill. The thing we seem to lose sight of about the lake is this - we all love the lake, in our own way. Be it in a kayak, canoe, bowrider, old woody, or a big fast performance boat. And at the end of the day, safety seems to be the primary concern for all - I know it is for my friends and family. Go out, have fun and enjoy the lake and BE SAFE! Peace!

The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to DoTheMath For This Useful Post:
OCDACTIVE (11-04-2009), Rattlesnake Guy (11-04-2009), Resident 2B (11-04-2009), Yosemite Sam (11-04-2009)

The Following User Says Thank You to For This Useful Post:
sunset on the dock (11-04-2009)

11-05-2009, 12:02 PM	#233
Kracken Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Alton Posts: 223 Thanks: 46 Thanked 130 Times in 50 Posts	ED, The operator was breaking at least 4 laws before the crash. Why would a 5th law change the outcome?

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Kracken For This Useful Post:
OCDACTIVE (11-05-2009), Rattlesnake Guy (11-05-2009)

The Following User Says Thank You to sunset on the dock For This Useful Post:

11-05-2009, 07:51 PM	#241
hazelnut Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 1,348 Blog Entries: 3 Thanks: 508 Thanked 462 Times in 162 Posts	Has any one of the SL supporters ever answered the question as to why Marine Patrol (ya know the guys on the front line) have generally not supported the measure. I bring this up because my Brother-In-Law took the class this past summer and he told me that his instructor, a veteran of the force, said the Speed Limit Law was a joke. So what is the spin? Why would the guys and gals who enforce it also "roll their eyes" at the law? Wouldn't you consider their opinion higher than any one of us? Just curious?

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to hazelnut For This Useful Post:
BroadHopper (11-05-2009), OCDACTIVE (11-05-2009)

11-06-2009, 09:32 AM	#243
Kracken Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Alton Posts: 223 Thanks: 46 Thanked 130 Times in 50 Posts	Hazelnut, I don’t know why this is so difficult to understand. The Winnfabs and supporters are far more knowledgeable of water safety, boating, accident reconstruction and statistical analysis than the New Hampshire Marine Patrol and the Coast Guard. It’s just like politicians knowing more about healthcare than doctors and community organizers understanding warfare better than generals. Come on Hazelnut, quit thinking like a scofflaw cowboy and get with the program.

The Following User Says Thank You to DEJ For This Useful Post:
hazelnut (11-06-2009)

11-06-2009, 12:25 PM	#249
elchase Guest Posts: n/a	Can someone tell me how to post a screen shot of that post on OffshoreOnly from a while back where a longtime member and avid high-speeder had an epiphany and gave over 60 links to other OSO threads about then-recent high-speed accidents and eulogized about all of the members who had been killed? The post used to be at http://www.offshoreonly.com/forums/g...awakening.html, but it and all of the linked reports were deleted soon after it was posted and the poster was soundly reprimanded by his buddies for "admitting the dangers of high-speed boating to our enemies" and "giving ammunition to the gray hairs". I have a jpg but don't know how to post it. The message says; "In light of the few tragic accidents in the past few days and weeks, I started thinking back to how many unfortunate incidents I've been saddened by in my 4 years on OSO. I started digging through old threads and I was amazed how many hispahs have happened in a few short years to many of our family and friends. I found more than I could have imagined...It's far too heartbreaking reading all these stories, it would be prudent of all of us to take every possible precaution, so that we don't have to read any more accident reports. Let this be a reminder of how fragile we all are, and how quickly the one thing we all love and enjoy can come back and harm us in no more than a heartbeat." He then goes on with a huge list of links to threads about high-speed boating accidents that other OSO members had had, MOST of them involving fatalities. Of course, the only relevance this all has to the benefits of keeping the speed limit on Lake Winnipesaukee is that all those othe accidents "happened on water."

The Following User Says Thank You to For This Useful Post:
Turtle Boy (11-06-2009)

11-06-2009, 02:38 PM	#253
ishoot308 Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Gilford, NH / Welch Island Posts: 6,247 Thanks: 2,390 Thanked 5,283 Times in 2,055 Posts	"PS: safety isn't something that comes into play at a certain boat length or horsepower." VTSTEVE; I think that is one of the smartest comments I have heard regarding the S/L debate! Dan

The Following User Says Thank You to Bear Islander For This Useful Post:
OCDACTIVE (11-06-2009)

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to OCDACTIVE For This Useful Post:
BroadHopper (11-06-2009), DEJ (11-06-2009)