Winnipesaukee Forum - View Single Post

Skip · 04-11-2005, 06:03 PM

Wow, interesting discussion (to say the least

).

My $.02

Is there room for intelligent debate on the possibility of speed limits on public bodies of water in New Hampshire? Of course, but should the debate be solely limited to Lake Winnipesaukee? Should any rational discussion include all public bodies of water and be based on the unique circumstances each presents?

Should the debate also bring all parties to the table, pro and con? Integral to an acceptable outcome also requires substantial input of the law enforcement community, in particular the Marine Patrol. What good is any legislation if not enforceable, whether by design or resistance?

And should we talking about adding more responsibilities to an agency that many agree is completely overwhelmed, or should the first course of action be to address funding and manpower issues within the Department of Safety? Should we first insist on modifying existing law so that it is enforceable before adding additional piecemeal legislation? For example, should the present modest fine schedule be enhanced dramatically, as in the case of motorcycle exhaust violations, to make it financially reckless to not be familiar with present boating requirements?

I am sure the intentions of the legislator that filed HB 162 are honorable. However, way too many questions remain on the table for serious consideration of the legislation as presently held in committee. Quite frankly, if passed in its present state, you will have yet another statute that will be nearly impossible to enforce on a fair and consistent basis given the extremely limited tools the State has to work with. And what good to anyone is yet another law on the books that remains ignored by the public at large?

Too bad this discussion denigrated into personal attacks, there are obviously experienced boaters perusing this site, both pro & con on the issue, that have the ability to come to a rational compromise on this emotional issue. And claims that legislators will vote based on emotions wrought from details of a recent death, or sarcastic allegations that they will follow a money trail, show complete ignorance of how things actually work in Concord.

Most legislators will follow the path of compromise, the solution that will probably make no one individual or group completely happy, but a piece of legislation that everyone can live with.

When reasonable discourse provides reasonable compromise, perhaps time will come for reasonable legislation.

04-11-2005, 06:03 PM	#35
Skip Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Dover, NH Posts: 1,615 Thanks: 256 Thanked 514 Times in 182 Posts	Time to take two steps back! Wow, interesting discussion (to say the least ). My $.02 Is there room for intelligent debate on the possibility of speed limits on public bodies of water in New Hampshire? Of course, but should the debate be solely limited to Lake Winnipesaukee? Should any rational discussion include all public bodies of water and be based on the unique circumstances each presents? Should the debate also bring all parties to the table, pro and con? Integral to an acceptable outcome also requires substantial input of the law enforcement community, in particular the Marine Patrol. What good is any legislation if not enforceable, whether by design or resistance? And should we talking about adding more responsibilities to an agency that many agree is completely overwhelmed, or should the first course of action be to address funding and manpower issues within the Department of Safety? Should we first insist on modifying existing law so that it is enforceable before adding additional piecemeal legislation? For example, should the present modest fine schedule be enhanced dramatically, as in the case of motorcycle exhaust violations, to make it financially reckless to not be familiar with present boating requirements? I am sure the intentions of the legislator that filed HB 162 are honorable. However, way too many questions remain on the table for serious consideration of the legislation as presently held in committee. Quite frankly, if passed in its present state, you will have yet another statute that will be nearly impossible to enforce on a fair and consistent basis given the extremely limited tools the State has to work with. And what good to anyone is yet another law on the books that remains ignored by the public at large? Too bad this discussion denigrated into personal attacks, there are obviously experienced boaters perusing this site, both pro & con on the issue, that have the ability to come to a rational compromise on this emotional issue. And claims that legislators will vote based on emotions wrought from details of a recent death, or sarcastic allegations that they will follow a money trail, show complete ignorance of how things actually work in Concord. Most legislators will follow the path of compromise, the solution that will probably make no one individual or group completely happy, but a piece of legislation that everyone can live with. When reasonable discourse provides reasonable compromise, perhaps time will come for reasonable legislation. Last edited by Skip; 04-11-2005 at 09:03 PM.