Woodsy,
I have been quietly enjoying this debate and it seems that the GFBL crowd just digs itself into a deeper and deeper hole with each post. Hope you will not be offended if I weigh in.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Woodsy
In order for speed be a "Safety Issue", as the Winnfabs claim it is, one would need statistics and facts to bolster that claim. The problem is, there aren't any statistics or facts that bolster your claim. I ask again, if you have those facts or statistics, please post them.
|
How do you get a chicken without and egg? How can we get statistics that a speed limit reduces accidents if we have no speed limit to use for generating statistics? Perhaps the answer lies in your own message...by looking at how speed limits have worked elsewhere.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Woodsy
We have speed limits on our roads, because they have been statistically proven to reduce accidents and fatalities.
|
Of course, before there were speed limits on our roads, there was no way to get statistics to prove they would reduce accidents, right? I'm sure many excitement loving car drivers fought our highway speed limits with your same argument...no statistics. Glad they did not win.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Woodsy
We in NH have speed limits on our snowmobile trails because they have been statistically proven to reduce accidents.
|
And, of course, before there were speed limits on our trails, there were no such statistics, right? I'm sure many excitement loving snowmobilers fought our trail speed limits with your same argument...no statistics. Glad they did not win.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Woodsy
We in NH do not have a helmet law for motorcyclists, even though it has been statistically proven to reduce motorcycle fatalities.
|
I don't think any innocent bystanders are worried about getting killed because a biker was not helmetted. Bad comparison. None of the HB162 crowd has been fighting for this bill, as far as I can find, because they are worried about the GFBL boaters safety. If they were, then this comparison would have some merit. Alternately, I guess this might be the place where you all can use that "live free" argument that makes no sense against HB162.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Woodsy
We in NH do not have a seatbelt law for automobiles, even though they have been proven to reduce injuries and fatalities in automobile accidents.
|
I don't think any innocent bystanders are worried about getting killed because a driver in another car was was not belted in. Another poor comparison for Hb162, but another place the "live free" argument might be useful.
I guess I just don't agree with the whole "statistics" defense. If the residents of NH want speed limits on their lakes, why do they have to prove the need to anyone? I don't see that they have any burden to prove anything, except that they are a majority, which they have obviously proven. Its not like they are trying to do something unconstitutional like ban a "protected group" from the lakes. There is no constitutional right to drive boats fast. Is it your position that GFBL's are a "protected group"?