Speed Limit test zones dead in the water!

[Phantom]

Aren't we now considered WAY OFF topic as the thread was "Speed Limit Test Zones now Dead in the Water" -- and finally end this thread till there is more news on the topic.

Another Great boating action shot !!!

Perhaps you can start a thread for Action Shot pic's (just an off the wall thought) as I truely like to follow the "News" through this forum yet unfortunately find important topical threads like this get bogged down with "off Topic" material.

Great Photo's ----- means nothing with regards to speed, spacing, or more importantly -->> "Speed Limit Test Zones now Dead in the Water"

[ApS]

Originally Posted by Phantom

"...Aren't we now considered WAY OFF topic as the thread was 'Speed Limit Test Zones now Dead in the Water'..."

OK, as a followup to my post #3, the Broads-side of Rattlesnake Island (which bore the brunt of the Test Zone avoiders) now has more houses for sale than I've ever seen before. The air is rich in hydrocarbon emissions there.

It's nice that the speeders stayed 150' offshore from Rattlesnake, but at least two huge sentinel boulders 100' off its northern shore act as submarine enforcement.

Originally Posted by WeirsBeachBoater

"...The only history those photos have is the one you made up yourself..."

New Hampshire Legislators received the photos directly from me—via USPS. A few weren't impressed enough, I guess.

Originally Posted by KonaChick

"...my suggestion is to take up a hobby, preferably NOT photography...!"

Too late: here's one looking back towards the other marker.

[Winnipesaukee]

I was sailing today (although not on Winni, but have had similar experiences on the Big Lake) and thought I'd go back to the dock to grab my camera to shoot something that had happened several times already, but was afraid I'd get it wet from the wake of a boat passing very few feet off my bow. I also felt the need to have my hands free to prevent the boat from capsizing from said wake and dropping the mast on said boat.

In my opinion, I think the problem is a combination of speed and boat wakes.

If a boater wants to be able to do 90 in the middle of the Broads on a weekday, that should be allowed to, but one doing 40 in the Weirs area on the 4th of July weekend should not be; therefore, I feel that passing legislature for a blanket 45/25 is not a good idea. Like most issues in our great country, the end legislature usually falls into a "happy medium." Oh, the beauty of checks and balences.

Somthing like a law stating that a boater may not operate "recklessly" would work for me. But how can we define "recklessly?"

This might be a good point of reference. RSA 636:2.

(c) ""Recklessly.'' A person acts recklessly with respect to a material element of an offense when he is aware of and consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the material element exists or will result from his conduct. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that, considering the circumstances known to him, its disregard constitutes a gross deviation from the conduct that a law-abiding person would observe in the situation. A person who creates such a risk but is unaware thereof solely by reason of having voluntarily engaged in intoxication or hypnosis also acts recklessly with respect thereto.
(d) ""Negligently.'' A person acts negligently with respect to a material element of an offense when he fails to become aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the material element exists or will result from his conduct. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that his failure to become aware of it constitutes a gross deviation from the conduct that a reasonable person would observe in the situation.

I think something has to be done, but not as extreme as a blanket 45/25 law or nothing at all. In addition, I think the "150-foot rule" needs to be more heavily enforced.