Quote:
|
Originally Posted by codeman671
Scare tactics, lack of facts and hidden agendas.
|
Cman,
By "scare tactics", are you referring to the assertion that the local economy is going to collapse if we slow the very small group of excitement seeking go-fasters down? Or are you referring to the assertion that slow boats are more dangerous because they can't plane and the drivers therefore can't see where they are going when driving "only" 45? Or are you referring to the accusation that this is "discriminatory" against performance boats because they will somehow be the only ones who would have to obey the new limits? Or that this is just a veiled attempt to convert our lakes into "Golden Pond"? Or that the supporters are going to go after all other types of boats next? Or that our shores will be eroded and our environment destroyed by a speed limit? Or that the state will have to impose user fees to enforce a speed limit? Or that even the law abiders will be getting erroneous speeding tickets because of radar that doesn't work on boats? Or that speed limits will actually attract law-breakers to come here for the thrill of the chase? Or that the supporters will all be harrassed by having protest rallies staged in front of their houses? Need I go on?
By "lack of facts", are you referring to the facts that were deleted in all of the go-fast sites? Or to the facts from other lakes where speed limits have been proven so effective? Or to all the high-speed accidents on Winnipesaukee alone over the past few yeras that were mysteriously not classified as "speed-related"? Or to the fact that thousands of lake users (on both sides) testified about the plethora of safety problems on our lakes that our current laws are not preventing? Or, most importantly, to the fact that the overwhelming majority of the lakes' owners want a speed limit, as proven by the legitimate polls done by ARG and NHRBA?
By "hidden agendas", are you referring to the NHRBA pretention that it is a boating safety group? Or to its original "we just care about preserving all boaters' rights" agenda before they finally admitted that this is all just about "excitement"? Or to the supporters' "we just want to be safe on the lakes we own" agenda. when (according to you), what they really want is to rid the lake of boats having a certain shape?
Seems that you've got it all backwards.