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.

"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.

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?

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?

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.

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.

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.

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)

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...

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.

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? :rolleye2:

Where do I fit in?
 

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!

I was there as well. What a great day!

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

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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

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? :eek: 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.

OK. So Don Arronow have design boats for Magnum, Apache, Cigarette, Donzi, Formula and Eastern boats. The MP Enforcers are Eastern boats. So that means the MPs have GF boats. No wonder the Marine Patrol don't want the speed limits! They will have to buy new boats! :eek:

So I guess what OCDACTIVE was saying on another thread about how fast his GFB could go and showing the instruments on his boat going 86 MPH was just a game he is playing. He also said many more things that pertain to speed on Lake Winni.

Just tell me when you are serious and when you are kidding and then maybe we can have some worthwhile discussion.

How many times do I have to point out to you that THERE WAS NO SPEED LIMIT LAW IN EFFECT IN 2008?!?!? You keep telling us and telling us and telling us how civilized the lake was last year (2008) and I keep pointing out to you that there was no speed limit in effect in 2008!! HB-847 was introduced, voted on and signed by the governor in 2008, WITH AN EFFECTIVE DATE OF JAN. 1, 2009 to sunset on Jan. 1, 2011!! :mad: :mad:

So, if Lake Winnipesaukee was really so calm and civilized in 2008 AND there was no speed limit law in effect, we can only deduce that the current speed limit law really IS just a FEEL GOOD LAW because IT WAS NOT IN EFFECT IN 2008 and from everything I've read in your posts, you were still overjoyed with the so-called "results" in 2008!!!! :rolleye1: :laugh:


Apparently, you don't read all the posts in the speed limit section! Anybody who had read them all would know that OCD trailers his boat to other states to participate in poker runs!! I guess it didn't occur to you that the comments and photos he posted might be in reference to THOSE trips he took, NOT to his boating habits on Lake Winnipesaukee! And you think the SL opponents "don't get it"!! :mad:

Sorry OCD, I know you're capable of defending yourself but I was already posting and just had to point out the error of his ways!! :mad:

GFBL boats.
 

Told my old man who is 85 years young that the SL supporters wants to ban his 23' Eastern center console because it is considered a GF boat (Aronow designed). I have never seen him so smoking in decades! That's the price he will have to pay for sitting on the fence all these years. :rolleye2:

I can see it now. Babe Gagnon of Silver Sands is going to be very busy filling Fountain orders when everyone who owns Aronow designed boats trade in. Fountains are designed by Reggie and not considered GFBL. ;)

Thanks man.. Not to worry... I enjoy a good debate on this subject thats why I respond to sunset and bear islander etc... I don't engage troublemakers or trolls. Just won't get anywhere and not worth it.

I guess I fit into that catagory (according to you anyway) so I won't post anymore on Winnipesaukee Forum.


See Ya

I am very serious. Why is it that you assume:

#1 He was doing that speed on Winni and if he was

#2 Why am I and several others on this thread lumped into that category?

After that whole post this is what you take from it? Still obsessing over the fact that he may or may not have done 80 on the lake at one time or another this summer? I really don't want to get hung up on that point with you. If you want to have worthwhile discussion with me I think you need to get over it. Discuss it with OCD and find out the what when and where. I stand firmly behind my comments Sam. A guy who probably broke the Speed Limit once or twice this summer hardly makes him a cowboy. I guess every time I drive to the lake I am a Cowboy on the road because I don't exactly do 65MPH the whole time.

Don't you think you are getting a little carried away here? You guys are creating a chicken little "the sky is falling!!!" controversy where there isn't one.

Nobody wants to ban 23' center console boats. And I am unaware of any serious effort to ban GFBL's of any kind. We are only debating a SPEED LIMIT. A limit that the majority of power boats on the lake are capable of violating.

Originally posted by Wolfeboro_Baja
Elchase and his kind are not interested in facts, they appear to be disappointed that Lake Winnipesaukee was safe before speed limits and Lake Winnipesaukee continues to be safe today! I am going to reduce the amount of posts I write about this topic because it just feeds the beast, but I have changed my signature to quote a portion of an August 2009 Press Release issued by the NH Department of Safety to remind everyone that speed limits are not needed, the speed limits is a feel good law that costs the Marine Patrol time and money, and speed limits should be sunsetted!

Ironically, this sounds like an attack on someone (I wonder who?). Stop attacking if you don't like to be attacked. What purpose did that statement have on a forum for people to post their opinions on a speed limit? What did it tell us about the SL? Stop getting personal.
[QUOTE=OCDACTIVE;111386]...little razzing...
And stop always trolling then trying to cover it by saying "I'm just razzing". It fools nobody. You are one of the biggest trolls here and everyone outside your little cult knows it.
Yes you do, you do it with comments just like that one that you think have been disguised. But nobody is fooled. So stop being a trouble maker and a troll with these very transparent pokes. What did you gain for your cause with that statement? How it it add materially to this debate? Nobody else has been trolling or trying to make trouble. Try to take the high road. Your game of playing the nice guy while taking shots has gotten very old. But of course you will not see this because you have me on ignore (ya right).

Who said? How would we even know? Have you told us how fast it goes or how loud it is? Tell us more about your boat if you want us to help you decide whether it is a GFBL. And stop telling us what "the SL supporters think" and tell us what you think. You had that one good civil post then went right back into the gutter.

You guys really don't know? Come on...Sure you do. Its a boat that can Go Fast and Be Loud. You guys tell us that less than 2% of the boats on the lake can do over 45, so let's say those 2% are Go Fast boats. How fast can your boats go? How loud are they?

Don't get so mad, it was just a slip. I'm surprised you couldn't see that. When I said "last year", I obviously was referring to last summer...of '09. Sorry I got you so upset. Now please calm down and think about last summer and what a wonderful one it was on Winnipesaukee without all the speeding about and associated dangers. That will soothe you.

Sam, Don't let them do this to you. They almost did it to me. Stay the course. You are doing great. They chase supporter after supporter off these threads. Don't become another victim. We are enjoying your logical points of view. Please keep them coming.

Haven't your parents put a block on your computer yet? Go back to the illegal fishing thread where you belong. Every time you post all anyone thinks about is the fool you made of yourself there. The adults are trying to have a civilized discussion here. Please go trolling somewhere else.

I was in Concord today. Met up with a buddy who is chairman of one of the House Committees. You guys would be amazed to know how many of our legislators are eavesdropping on this forum...and how badly you guys are coming off. You are blowing a great opportunity to make your case. While some of us are posting informatively about the dangers of high-speed boating...giving graphic examples of what happens when a boat going too fast plows into another, showing how often such accidents occur and how often they are fatal, you guys waste your posts doing nothing except complaining about those who disagree with you. Then I come home and read this stuff. You insult the grammar mistakes, the religious beliefs, the age, and everything else you can find out about a SL supporter, but you provide nary a single bit of evidence that multi-ton boats going at breakneck speeds on a crowded lake is not dangerous. It would really do you guys a lot of good to get back on topic and stop all the garbage.

I'm sure the smart legislators would have followed the posted links, just like I did. Upon reading the links, and any followups linked from there, they must be scratching their heads, wondering how in heck they got conned into such a legislation.

If they truly do read these threads, they must know by now that many of us that actually bring up actual events that seem to require enforcement, are so pillared by those that support the speed limit. I don't know if anyone else noticed, but some of the recent vindictiveness started after I posted a followup to a link posted by a SL supporter. I'm not even sure if they read the stories before they posted it. If an in depth discussion of all the posted articles on boat accidents was allowed, somewhere, my guess is that many of the SL supporters would not be interested in such a discussion.

We all want to be safe on the water and have a good time. We all know there are problems on the water, and there always will be. So some of us try to look at what's really happening, see the truth, and decide from there.

Originally posted by elchase:
To quote your comrade in arms, Sunset on the Dock:

Oh NO! :eek:

Sam, you have contributed so much knowledge to this forum, you can't just up-and-leave. Everyone makes spelling errors, and such criticism has no place at a forum of ideas!

I hope my PM to you—and to a handful of other Supporters—didn't enter into this extreme outcome. It was meant only for us Supporters to quit the SL forum! :(

In the meantime, I think a full-dozen Opponents need to express their apologies—in full! :mad:
|
|
|

Bear Islander it is good to have you back.

I'm not sure I agree with the statement that the "Majority" of the boats are capable of violating the Speed Limit. If we want to split hairs here, I guess you could say that. My boat is "capable" of breaking the law but it takes many factors to attain that feat. I outlined it in a prior post. Half tank of gas empty of passengers with a tailwind. I would argue that many of the boats that can "violate the limit" can only do so under perfect conditions as outlined above. I would hardly think that these are the people we are talking about anyway. The subject of this debate is and has always been targeted at the so named GFBL boats. Not my bowrider that is technically "capable" of breaking the limit.

FYI - I do not believe we will be banning any 23 foot center consoles... Yet. ha ha ha. As I said in another post we really don't know what could be next. Swim Caps? No Kayaking in the Broads? No Sailing at Night? Headlight Use on Boats? Give em an inch and.... Well you know the rest.

I think each law or proposed law should be evaluated at face value. To say that the SL is the first in a long line of laws is misdirection. Any future laws would need to go through the full legislative process. The legislature is not going to rubber stamp a swim cap law or GFBL ban just because they already passed the SL. It doesn't work that way and we all know it.

Why don't we argue the SL as it is written and not pretent it is more than it actually is. Telling an 85 year old man that his center console is about to be banned is hype, not reality.

The nighttime speed limit is 25mph. Most power boats on the lake can go faster than that. Therefore most power boats CAN violate the SL.

The vast majority of accidents do not occur at very high speeds. Collisions between boats occur because of inattention, breaking safe passage rules relating to distance, lookout, etc.. Many of the worst accidents and collisions involve alcohol, like it or not.

I found it very ironic that many of the accidents pointed out not only here, but in discussions around the country, involved boats speeding in NWZ's, or other speed-limited waterways.

One thing that stands out virtually everywhere in the country, is that more enforcement presence is needed. I've never advocated MP's canvassing and harassing the waterways, that leads to no good. At night, the two primary problems are alcohol and boats without lights. Both of these problems can be addressed by proper enforcement.

On a brief weekend on Winni, I noted MP's presence in key areas, but violations going on all around them. Perhaps they were just coming up with a game plan for next year, and everyone was taking notes on what the most common problems are. We sure did that on this board.

But your hints are well taken. Aside from the MP's and most of us regular boaters, there are some that took this opportunity to gain as much control over their pet peeves as possible. I think they've pretty much achieved all they possibly can, and a saner approach will prevail in the future. I also hope that by the actual passage of the SL law, it gave a solid reality check to those that did ignore the warnings that they should police their own, report problems, and deal with it before other dealt with it first. Nobody will stick up for a reckless cowboy (usually), but now people have to do more than just remain silent.

Rights and privileges have to be earned, and they can be taken away because of the actions of a few. This is why I suggested a strong group of boaters should form a liaison with the MP, an alliance if you will. This didn't happen on another lake, which has deteriorated into total animosity towards trigger happy (just a term), badge wearers that make life miserable for most. Most boaters are pretty reasonable folks, and I think they understand that there is a better outcome than being punished for the actions of others.

I'm surprised that not many have delved into the aspects of even a few of the accidents posted here by some. Contained within many of the articles is a microcosm of what the problems are on today's waterways.

Hey B.I. good to have your logic back on the boards... While I disagree with you from an ideological standpoint you are always very clear on your posts.

I think he was originally just trying to prove a point that we maybe on the virge of a slippery slope. Once the SL goes into effect whats next? It has been stated that the SL is just the beginning by more then a few supporters. That this is just a start on an overall agenda of banning particular types of boats.

While I agree that the 23 ft center consol will not be on the chopping block anytime soon, I see what his point was.

Once we begin to infringe on our freedoms by enacting laws to restrict personal liberties where does it end?

If the legislature has members that read this forum and are eating what is being fed to them by the extremist supporters, then they should have realized by now that the next election will not fair well for them.

In my opinion, these are the last people that I want making laws in my state, and my campaign has been underway to remove people like this from office for awhile now.

Tell your buddy at the state house the voters are coming and this law is only one of the foolish things that they have done to bring this upon themselves.

I personnally believe that the citizens should be the ones voting on the bills being created in the state house, not the creators of the bills. But what do I know, I am just a tax paying, resident native of this state that has many friends of a similar feather.

Many of the politicians who voted against HB-162 were in fact voted out of office. As far as HB-462 goes, maybe you should be thankful that the citizens of NH aren't the ones voting if you keep in mind their overwhelming support for a SL in the ARG poll (unless you feel we should exclude voters from Salem). We hear about our so called loss of freedoms and liberty in regards to HB-847 but in fact many of the lake's residents who support limits have felt a loss of some of their freedoms and liberties (i.e. freedom to enjoy peaceful recreation) and that's what was behind the push for these bills.

Majority are GFBL's
 

it's funny how in many of El's posts that he claims the majority of the boats on the lake or the boater's on this forum are GFBL owners. I think this is his way of pulling over the wool of the legislatures eyes in his many posts to which he is pandering to. One would hope that they are smarter than that!

As we all know, this is how legislature(for which most probably do not or may not have ever boated on the lake)were dooped into this SL law in the first place.

Is the legislature going to take a "field trip" to the lake to see exactly what type of boats make up the majority of boating on the lake? Probably not. So the propaganda is going to continue.