![]() |
![]() |
|
|||||||
| Home | Forums | Gallery | Webcams | Blogs | YouTube Channel | Classifieds | Register | FAQ | Members List | Donate | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
|
#1 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,177
Thanks: 664
Thanked 943 Times in 368 Posts
|
Here's my solution to this speed limit:
1) Get rid of the fixed speed limit on Winnipesaukee, NH's largest lake. Apply the USCG "reasonable and prudent" rule. 2) Make the fixed speed limit (45/25) applicable to all other lakes in NH. This way there is something for everyone. People who want peace and quiet (don't give me the "safety" BS) can go to the hundreds of other lakes in the state and enjoy themselves to the utmost. Meanwhile, Marine Patrol can enforce the dozens of laws already on the books to go after BWI, the safe passage law, equipment violations, etc., etc,....................................... |
|
|
|
|
#3 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
|
Quote:
![]() ![]()
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,764
Thanks: 32
Thanked 441 Times in 207 Posts
|
Quote:
It was posted about extensively in August of 2003 in the old forum so you need to search the archives. The threads are named "Boat enters cottage - upside down.." and "Baja gets air". This accident was also part of the testimony in the Moultonboro HB162 public hearing. It has been discussed in recent years on this forum but I have been informed by SL supporters that it happened to long ago to count. I guess that means it never happened and the people are not dead. |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Weirs Beach
Posts: 1,968
Thanks: 80
Thanked 980 Times in 440 Posts
|
I think there should be.... get this.... a COMPROMISE!
IMHO, all of the FATAL accidents have occured at NIGHT and ALCOHOL was involved! In EVERY SINGLE ACCIDENT there was a violation of the COLREGS! EVERY SINGLE ONE! It can be argued that all accidents are violations of the COLREGS. But in the last 2 accidents, both accidents occured at NIGHT, several of the COLREGS were violated, quite possibly some BWI laws as well. Niether of the last 2 accidents occured over the current night time speed limit of 30 MPH.... however they were both grossly in violation of Rule 6, namely too fast for the conditions at the time of the accident and failure to keep a proper lookout. Add in booze and you have recipe for disaster. No speed limit would have prevented these accidents from occuring! I personally think a COMPROMISE is in order! I get that there are extremeists on either side, but I think there can be middle ground! I propose the adoption of the COLREGS, an unlimited DAYTIME limit (when visibility can be measured in MILES) and keep the current night time limit of 30 MPH. My logic is this, we have had NO hi-speed collisions during the daytime. The reason being visibilty is measured in miles, and we have the 150' rule! That rule does more to prevent accidents than many people realize! Most of the major accidents occur at night, and usually alcohol is involved. Given the inherent lack of depth perception at night, lower visibilty, and increased possibility of intoxicated skippers... I think the current night time limit of 30 MPH is appropriate! Woodsy
__________________
The only way to eliminate ignorant behavior is through education. You can't fix stupid. |
|
|
| Sponsored Links |
|
|
|
|
#6 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,985
Thanks: 246
Thanked 744 Times in 444 Posts
|
I can offer no help in the search, but I recall the accident. Happened in the mid 1970s. A boat was traveling at a very high speed and hit the shore. The boat flipped in mid-air and crashed into a camp that was quite a distance from the shore. IIRC, all aboard were at least double the legal alcohol limit and all died. I'm pretty sure there was a major crackdown on BUI, as a result.
|
|
|
|
|
#8 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,764
Thanks: 32
Thanked 441 Times in 207 Posts
|
Quote:
But it doesn't alter the fact that it did happen and when someone posts that it didn't they are in error. And I think you are way off base with your idea that lakefront owners are all in favor of speed limits. Several of the top people fighting speed limits are waterfront owners. The old forum is at http://www.winnipesaukeeforum.com/ you can search August 2003 but you will find the old forum is not as user friendly as the current forum. |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
|
Quote:
And if you need to bring up something from the 70s to maintain relevance to today's current problems then I will call you out on it. The article does not say how fast they were going but it would appear the chain of events that led to the crash is too much to drink. So what data exists showing 45 MPH will make any difference for daytime boating? The SL proponents desire to link some of these accidents is a prime example of how correlation does not imply causation. Suggested reading for the pro-SL crowd: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correla...mply_causation We could spend hours just discussing the lack of correlation. I frequently post things as a tongue-and-cheek way for people to see the fallacies of their logic but it often goes over people's heads. |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 39
Thanks: 31
Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
|
I just want some hard facts and I get nothing but do my own research comments .... I have and can find no official data to support the claims of all these high speed accidents .... I have educated myself and there are no facts
|
|
|
|
|
#12 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,764
Thanks: 32
Thanked 441 Times in 207 Posts
|
Quote:
Over the past 10 years, Barrett said, there have been three boating deaths attributed to speed. |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
|
Quote:
Correlation does not mean causation Psst, the insurance companies rely on this fact when setting car insurance rates.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 39
Thanks: 31
Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
|
[QUOTE=Bear Islander;150506]Below is a quote from David Barrett the head of the New Hampshire Marine Patrol and a long time opponent of speed limits. He is an "official" and he is quoting "data". Therefore there IS official data. I guess you did not educate yourself well enough.
Over the past 10 years, Barrett said, there have been three boating deaths attributed to speed.[/QUOte speed doesn't mean high speed that's what your missing......why do I bother you win I can't take anymore |
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
|
I'm curious if even ONE person out there has changed their mind on the need or lack thereof based on the years of back-and-forth by posting not only here but the newspapers and other forums.
I'm grounded in hard science and don't see the SL having any effect on the lake other than a a dozen or so tickets being handed out each year. I can see where the SL-proponents perceptions would lead them to believe a speed limit will be effective and possibly improve safety. However, after having admitted that the speed limits won't fix many of the problems people thought, they still fight for it. Do you really think someone doing 50 MPH in a bowrider is worthy of a ticket and points on their license? The SL supporters all or nothing attitude is what I think will cause them to lose the battle with SB-27...... |
|
|
|
|
#16 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bow
Posts: 1,874
Thanks: 521
Thanked 308 Times in 162 Posts
|
Quote:
__________________
Getting ready for winter! |
|
|
|
| The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to chipj29 For This Useful Post: | ||
jarhead0341 (02-15-2011), ronc4424 (02-15-2011) | ||
|
|
#17 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,764
Thanks: 32
Thanked 441 Times in 207 Posts
|
Quote:
Yes... I know... The accident I describe is made up, not very likely and doesn't really pertain to SB27. Just like yours. |
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
|
I don't know what's worse. The M/S Mount Washington crashing into something or a 100 MPH bowrider. Which one has happened and which is the one the SL proponents want to portray has happened?
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,177
Thanks: 664
Thanked 943 Times in 368 Posts
|
A big jet could have a malfunction during takeoff, crash into the sandbar at Silver Sands during a NASCAR race week, and kill 101 people sitting on their boats. Shall we now ban all jet traffic from Laconia airport?
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,764
Thanks: 32
Thanked 441 Times in 207 Posts
|
An interstellar dark body could pass through the Solar System's Oort Cloud causing a comet to fall through the Kuiper Belt on its way to impact the Sun. The disruption in the Sun's plasma could cause solar radiation to effect communications satellites. Thus a satellite could fall out of orbit and hit the pilot house of the M/S Mount Washinton as it passes the Witches causing it to loose control and hit two bow riders sending them out of control towards the Silver Sands sandbar resulting in SB27 failing to get out of committee.
|
|
|
|
|
#21 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
| The Following User Says Thank You to lawn psycho For This Useful Post: | ||
Pineedles (02-15-2011) | ||
|
|
#22 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Moultonborough & CT
Posts: 2,549
Thanks: 1,074
Thanked 672 Times in 369 Posts
|
I want to testify about SB-27 next week, but I will be on a boat with engines 50 times larger than any boat on Winnipesaukee.
In place of testimony, let me say the following: There are some folks that have insinuated that they represent the majority of opinion about what should be the law on Lake Winnipesaukee. IMO there was fraudulent correspondence to legislators that influenced their initial vote. I think the people of New Hampshire are more concerned with freedom, than trying to tweak themselves into a false nirvana of safety. There are some rich shorefront property owners, (Island and Mainland) that want to control how the lake is used. Little by little these rich people will try to control how they think the lake should be used. Does anyone want this lake controlled by rich shorefront owners? It's the people of New Hampshire who must decide. Live Free or Die! Never has this motto meant as much as it does now! |
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bow
Posts: 1,874
Thanks: 521
Thanked 308 Times in 162 Posts
|
SB27 is about speed being reasonable and prudent. Both situations described here would apply.
__________________
Getting ready for winter! |
|
|
|
|
#24 | ||
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Florida (Sebring & Keys), Wolfeboro
Posts: 6,031
Thanks: 2,279
Thanked 787 Times in 563 Posts
|
Quote:
(Sorry for the "all-caps", but that's how the article was posted.)Quote:
|
||
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
|
|
|
|
|
|
#26 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,764
Thanks: 32
Thanked 441 Times in 207 Posts
|
Quote:
I leave it to the reader to determine their own OPINION as to how relevant these accidents are to a speed limit. If you want to look things up on wikipedia, try looking up the difference between fact and opinion. |
|
|
|
|
|
#27 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
|
Quote:
Didn't the M/S Mount Washington have a drunk passenger go overboard and die several years ago? The boat was *gasp*, moving. The captain must be a cowboy. Yeeeehaaaaaa! |
|
|
|
|
|
#28 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 39
Thanks: 31
Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
#29 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,764
Thanks: 32
Thanked 441 Times in 207 Posts
|
Quote:
Jarhead posted that there were "no high speed accident statistics on the lake" That was his claim and he put no time limits on this claim. I refuted his post by mentioning several accidents including this one. The accident in question was high speed, fatal, and happened on Winnipesaukee. That is all I ever claimed. |
|
|
|
|
|
#30 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 39
Thanks: 31
Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
#31 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,764
Thanks: 32
Thanked 441 Times in 207 Posts
|
Quote:
For a third time I will point out that it is not by duty to educate the anti-SL side about accident data. You want me to do all the leg work and post it here so you can pick it apart and come up with reasons why it is not relevant. My point is that you need to educate yourself about the facts BEFORE you start making blanket statements about the history of boat accidents on Winnipesaukee. |
|
|
|
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|