Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Islander
ITD - So there is no data! You made the whole thing up!!!
You said the data proves speed limits are not needed, now you have nothing but a weak quote from Barrett?
"The data that we're collecting is not giving us a sense that there's a lot of high-speed boat traffic,"
Spoken like a true political hack. He leaves himself a couple of back doors to get out when things go against him. What constitutes a "sense" how much is "a lot".
Barrett is not just a public figure, he is a political figure, makes a libel almost impossible. And I have a reasonable belief my statements are true, hence no libel. Plus he would have to prove my statement are false, he could only do that by never taking a job in the boating industry. As long as he is alive it is possible he may take a job in the boating industry, if he is dead libel no longer applies. There are more but what is the point.
|
I feel like I am in bizarro world when I read your posts. So let's use your logic on your statements. According to you, since there is no published data on speed then there is absolutely no need for a speed limit because there is no proof that boats are speeding. If we need proof that boats aren't speeding, then we should have proof that boats are speeding before we legislate a major change in the law and how the lake is patrolled. There have been no deaths on Winnipesaukee attributed to speed in years, if ever, so there is no need for a speed limit. Your case is beyond weak, it is non-existant. Just applying your train of thought.
"And I have a reasonable belief my statements are true", just the fact that you try to destroy someone's character based on this line shows that anything you write is suspect, how about just sticking to the truth instead of your twisted "beliefs", honestly, I'm not sure you can tell the difference.