Will NH lakes be safer?
 

A recent independent poll by the American Research Group shows that 84% of New Hampshire voters think a speed limit will make the lakes safer!


Do you believe that a 45 miles per hour daytime and 25 miles per hour
nighttime speed limit for boats will make New Hampshire lakes safer, or
not?

84% - Yes, believe will make lakes safer
9% - No, do not believe will make lakes safer
7% - Undecided

Based upon a 600 person telephonehttp://americanresearchgroup.com/nhpoll/boat/survey. The last time that I checked, NH had approximately 1.2 million people living within its borders. 600, statistically speaking, is a very small sampling. That's just 0.05% of the population if my ciphering is correct.

Yankee

In a poll they don't call everybody in the state. Polling is a science. They call a sampling.

That why its call a poll.

And this poll is not the one you linked to. This poll was just taken.

And it also shows only 5% of NH voters think it will not make the lakes more enjoyable.

Do you believe that a 45 miles per hour daytime and 25 miles per hour
nighttime speed limit for boats will make New Hampshire lakes more
enjoyable, or not?

74% - Yes, believe will make lakes more enjoyable
5% - No, do not believe will make lakes more enjoyable
21% - Undecided

There seems to be an echo in the forum...

We have read these words previously.

Have you depleted your bag of trick-words? :rolleye2: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

I don't think you have read these words before. This is a new poll, released TODAY!

The old poll from last June was 66%. That poll has been criticized here because it didn't mention 45/25. Now the poll taken a few days ago, specifying 45/25, is 84%.

NH voters want HB162.

How about this poll
 

This is interesting, it might be worth the money to conduct these polls?

Do you believe that preventing Tractor Trailer trucks from driving on our highways would make our roadways safer?

Or

Do you think not allowing people over the age of 70 to drive would make our roadways safer?

Or

Do you think that requiring everyone who boats should wear a PFD, would make our boaters safer?

Etc.

Can you guess what the percentages might be?

I agree with the poll results based on the question.

Poll of general public or boaters?
 

How many of the residents of the state use the lake or are boaters?
Non-boaters could well be influenced to believe that a 45/25 speed limit would make the lake a safer place. Faster than that in a boat can sound very scary to a non-boater.

A poll that targets those that use the effected lake would be much more significant than one which surveys the general public.

Its nice to see that we agree on something. Yes the lakes will be safer with a 45/25 speed limit.

America moves on a truck!
 

Hey WinniLaker, let's not be picking on tractor-trailer 18 wheel trucks. Everything in this country got there on a big truck and truck drivers are held to higher driving safety standards than cars. Just ask you local police dept if they hold the big trucks to higher standards.

One large reason why there is now a nation wide shortage of CDL-A truck drivers is because it is a very difficult state license test to pass. About seven out of eight flunk it.

A simple and straight-ahead question it is. "Do you think NH lakes will be safer with a 45-25 speed limit?"

In case you forget, 45mph is hardly a slow speed for a boat!

The lakes would be safer if the marinas would stop renting boats to people who don't have a CLUE.......never mind being certified.I've never had a close call with a go fast boat....but I've had several with uneducated tourists in rentals.Two years ago a rental pontoon boat at WOT tried to pass between me and a skier in the water.They have no idea what the 150' rule means.Several times I've had rentals throw a wake up on me while towing one of the kids on a water toy.........while traveling at headway speed near shore.

Poll question......Would the lakes be safer if rental customers had to be certified???

Safer than what
 

There is plenty of evidence that speeds above 45 is not a factor in any signficant number of accidents, so what's the point of the poll? Safer than what? Doesn't safer mean - less chance of an accident? Again, we have self-serving groups writing leading questions with a motive, asking questions to people who have been "educated" by previous advertising campaigns. Where is the independant pollsters writing the questions? Where is the segmentation by registered boaters (not voters). We continue going down the "feel good" route - let some people force others to change behavior so they can "feel safer" without actually being safer - and at the same time, reduce the civil liberties of safe boaters. The times, they are a'changing.

Rentals
 

Sam,
I agree with you. Rental boats are generally too small for the big lake on a busy weekend due to lake traffic, not speed. A small rental boat out in the broads is not going to be fun, especially if there is wind and there are wakes.They have not taken any real boater safety trailing and are pretty
clueless.
How many times have we all had rental boats come way too close, only to have the renters wave happily at us as though they don't know they are doing something wrong?

I wasn't picking on Tractor Trailers drivers, I was making a point, that the general public might not know the HIGH standards you speak, want me to point to a story where a tractor trailer KILLED 7 kids in a minivan that had stopped for bus to unload, ages 13 months to 15 years old. Never mind I just will (http://yahoo.usatoday.com/news/natio...sh_x.htm?csp=1) As for 45 being hardly a slow speed, maybe in your boat, but my boat does 55 mph, I'm perfectly comfortable going 55 mph in my boat with my kids in the boat.

I hate to chime in again on this as I don't own a boat, but I do view a speed limit as a limit on personal freedoms (like helmet and seatbelt laws).

Having said that, I think if we want a poll that really means something, why not a poll of users on this site who know someone who was involved in an boating accident that was caused by either:
a. excessive speed by a sober operator
b. lack of skills/training in boat operation by a sober operator
c. alcohol

And compare the results of these 3 issues.

This poll result was reported on Channel 9 News at 5 o'clock last night....interesting.

That WAS interesting,KC.......they published the poll results and three people spoke for the bill.....they didn't have a single voice from the other side.

Thats because the opposition has pretty much given up. A majority of Senators are on-board with HB162.

What?
 

I am sorry, but if you think the opposition has pretty much given up, then you are going to be sorely disappointed next Friday.

And can you give your source for your statement that a majority of Senators are on board with HB162?

I'd really like to hear your response to that as well.

This boat would have some Lake (BI) residents shaking in their shoes, even with HB162 protecting them. ;) :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Read the specs for the Panther 80 (as in 80 feet with a cruising speed of 42 knots - just right for HB162):
http://www.baiayacht.it/

http://www.europenet.it/clienti/baia...er-640x480.jpg

Here's my take on the poll results. There are roughly 100,000 boats registered in NH. Let's be generous and say that 80% of those boats are owned by NH residents. I think there are around 800,000 registered voters so, to make the math easier (for me), I'll assume that 1 in 10 voters own a boat.

If I didn't boat, and knew nothing about boating laws, boater education, enforecement, etc., I'd probably say why not to speed limits, we have them on the roads (not realizing that there are great differences bewteen cars and boats - line of sight, operating 5 feet away from another vehicle, etc.).

Basically, I'd bet that the majority of people being polled have not educated themselves on the issue, and if they don't boat, I can understand that.

That being said, I'm not surprised by the results. I think our senate will apply more stringent standards and a more deeper understanding of the issue when they review HB162. That's why we elected them.

I bet 84% of voter in NH once believed in Santa Claus too. Almost half of the residents of NH have below average intelligence; why does anyone really care what voters believe? Don't we (poorly) pay lawmakers to make decisions like this based on logic rather than emotions? I gotta go talk to my Senator, Jack Barnes and see what he thinks about all this. He's a pretty smart guy.

That poll is just hype. Both sides are guilty of hype though...

I think peoiple will continue to kill and die with some regularity while doing dumb things on the lake regardless of the outcome of the law.

As a NH resident and native, I'm very offended by your entire post.

New Hampshire lakes are public waters - owned by the people (residents) of NH. They aren't only for power boaters, or even just for boaters.

1,200 owners of NH public waters (NH residents) were polled. The results of the poll clearly show that NH residents are in favor of a speed limit.

From RSA 270:1 "... in light of the fact that competing uses for the enjoyment of these waters, if not regulated for the benefit of all users, may diminish the value to be derived from them, it is hereby declared that the public waters of New Hampshire shall be maintained and regulated in such way as to provide for the safe and mutual enjoyment of a variety of uses, both from the shore and from water-borne conveyances."

Part of the bill is all we need
 

HB162 should be limited to only the first paragraph:

X.(a) No person shall operate a vessel at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the existing conditions and without regard for the actual and potential hazards then existing. In all cases, speed shall be controlled so that the operator will be able to avoid endangering or colliding with any person, vessel, object, or shore.

Island Lover, when you say "Yes the lakes will be safer with a 45/25 speed limit.", I suggest you really be saying "Yes the lakes will FEEL safer with a 45/25 speed limit." Nice feelings is all you are going to get out of the law - feelings at the cost of civil liberty. It is a very steep price!

Lakegeezer

Why don't you go back up about 15 posts and read where winnilaker admits the lake will be safer with a 45/25 speed limit. Then you can argue with him!

He was only agreeing with the results, do not spin it. The results would be considerably different if the poll was conducted with only boaters or registered boat ownwers.

Boat Safe, Boat Smart- no HB162

There was no spin at all in my comment. Here is the poll question...

"Do you believe that a 45 miles per hour daytime and 25 miles per hour
nighttime speed limit for boats will make New Hampshire lakes safer, or
not?

84% - Yes, believe will make lakes safer
9% - No, do not believe will make lakes safer
7% - Undecided"

And this is winnilakers responce...

"I agree with the poll results based on the question."


I find his answer refreshingly honest.

Wrong again, you took one sentence of his response, used it out of context to portray him in a way that is false. More proof of what you have been doing.

I wish I could say you have been "refreshingly honest" but I can't because doing things like this is not honest.

Pay attention sentators.

Was it the killing and dying, the Santa Claus part of the intelligence thing that really set you off? The first time someone dies on the lake after the speed limit passes, you'll see what I meant, the people will still die in dumb and/or awful ways. Santa Claus is not real. By definition, just under half the people in any state have below average intelligence.

I like to canoe, a lot.

I live in NH, and have for 37 of my 40 years.

I was offended by all your comments.

As far as average intelligence goes, that's just not true. IQ scores are calibrated against the norms of actual population. So 50% are average and the other 50% is split between above average and below. That's called a bell curve. The mean (the average) is the sum of everyone’s IQ scores, divided by the number of scores. So below and above average are usually within 10 percentage points of 25% each.

Franklin Said......
 

I Think Ben Franklin's Quote goes something like this.....
Those who would give up any measure of liberty for a small amount of safety deserve neither! I like lake geezer's attitude!

Regards, The breeze
make sure to wave because I'll wave back

ITD

I went back up to the post in question and checked. She did not take "one sentence" she took a whole paragraph. More importantly I took winnilakers comment to mean exactly what it said. It was not taken out of context in my opinion.

I think you are getting a little carried away here. I know you want this speed limit to fail, but this is not the way to go about it.

Why don't you pm winnilaker and ask him what he meant? Not that its all that important either way.

Bear Lover,

I don't see a whole paragraph, I see one line of winnilaker's and a repeat of the poll question. I suggest you look at IL's post again, you're mistaken, or was it a mistake?

There is one sentence used out of a post containing nine lines. The line used without the benefit of the other 8 lines can be interpreted differently then when used with Winnilaker's complete post.

What's important is accuracy and honesty, keep things in context.

Finally, I don't need to PM Winnilaker, it's very clear from his post what he meant.

Essentially wrong
 

What Franklin said was, "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

Five tons of boat operating at unreasonable speeds among lesser boaters doesn't strike me as an essential liberty.

(But that's just me). :confused:

What about the liberty of others?
 

So why then do we have laws?

We have and need laws because everyone's right to liberty ends where it intrudes on someone else's liberty.

From RSA 270:1 "... in light of the fact that competing uses for the enjoyment of these waters, if not regulated for the benefit of all users, may diminish the value to be derived from them, it is hereby declared that the public waters of New Hampshire shall be maintained and regulated in such way as to provide for the safe and mutual enjoyment of a variety of uses, both from the shore and from water-borne conveyances."

I understand EXACTLY what winnilaker is saying. His meaning is obvious, you are misinterpreting. Winnilaker asks...

Do you believe that preventing Tractor Trailer trucks from driving on our highways would make our roadways safer?

The obvious answer is YES

Do you think not allowing people over the age of 70 to drive would make our roadways safer?

The obvious answer is YES

Do you think that requiring everyone who boats should wear a PFD, would make our boaters safer?

Again this is a YES

I agree with the poll results based on the question.

This is another YES

He is pointing out that there is more to the enactment of a law than just a statistical improvement in safety. Otherwise we would all be driving around in Volvos at 5 mph.

OK:D Now I understand. It's ok for kayakers to intrude on powerboaters.
That makes it all so clear:rolleye2:

I think you need to lighten up a bit. Look at your bell shaped curve for a moment, it has a center point and does not have a flat top. I was referring to everyone that falls left of center on the curve. That would be 50% of the area under the curve.

Showing the results of popular polls on subjects sach as this tends to push the assumption that voters should decide the laws. Problem is, what's popular isn't always right. Britney Spears is popular... :rolleye2: I think I'd rather have wizened folks making laws based on logic. If the wize people do a poor job, they can be fired easily enough.

The House of Reps is the junior varsity of lawmakers. They are there to represent the wishes of the populace and the fact that they voted for the bill makes perfect sense, as most of them will never be Senators. The Senators are the varsity team, a wizer group in general, and they will hope vote with more logic that emotion.

Who's Intruding on Whom?
 

Who's intruding? Check out the definition of intrude (your word of choice):
1.) thrust oneself in as if by force
2.) enter uninvited
3.) enter unlawfully on someone's property

Since human power boats were on the lake first, who actually intruded?

In recent years canoes and kayaks have been virtually forced off Winni. So, again, who's intruding?

We're not trying to force the powerboats off the lake - just get a law passed to slow the fastest powerboats down - so that we can have an equal right to use NH lakes - that's all.

Your comments were insulting to NH residents - I was offended. Don't make insulting comments and then tell one of the persons you insulted to "lignten up".

The senators should represent the public opinion, especially in areas of public safety. And they have a responsibility to follow the intent of existing laws, in passing new laws.

HB 162 is necessary because of some of us have lost some of the rights stated in RSA 270:1 "... in light of the fact that competing uses for the enjoyment of these waters, if not regulated for the benefit of all users, may diminish the value to be derived from them, it is hereby declared that the public waters of New Hampshire shall be maintained and regulated in such way as to provide for the safe and mutual enjoyment of a variety of uses, both from the shore and from water-borne conveyances."

According to NH law, the reason for regulations is to provide for the safe and mutual enjoyment of a variety of uses. That should be the main arguement for passing this bill. This bill will pass if the Senators make their decisions based on logic. I'm more worried that logic won't even be a factor for some of them.