One way or the other

[onlywinni]

I am quite shocked by the results of this Poll.

I have heard from the SL Supporters the numbers were overwhelming that speed limits were wanted on Winni

For example:

Quarterly Survey – June 2005

The following results are based on 600 completed telephone interviews among a statewide random sample of adults in New Hampshire. Of the 600 interviews, 534 interviews were among registered voters (162 Republicans, 138 Democrats, and 234 undeclared voters). The interviews were conducted June 27 through 29, 2005.


Question wording and responses:

Do you favor or oppose a law that would impose speed limits for boats on large lakes in New Hampshire?

Boat Speed Limits
Favor 64%
Oppose 22%
Undecided 14%


-----------------------------

Could be because they polled people who do not own or operate boats on Winni and really do not understand the conditions on Winni.

A poll taken of actual captains and their passengers at Marinas and Public Docks would be much more accurate, similar to this poll I believe.

-----------

[Kracken]

Onlywinni,

So what you are saying here is that; you only want the opinion of people who have personal knowledge of boating and or the lake. You, in essence want people to give an educated evaluation on the merits of a speed limit but you want to here only from people who have an understanding of lake and seamanship.

That does not seem to be the way things happen. Every person in the country is allowed to vote no matter how ignorant they are. People can vote for somebody or something for any reason incuding: left, right, donkey, elephant, hair color or just because they like the sound of someones voice. It doesn’t seem like a vote based on a trivial thing like looks should equal a vote based on logic and policy…but it does. People who never pay taxes are allowed an equal voice to a taxpayer’s on how their money…no my money…no the government’s money is spent.

So basically what you are saying is: People who don’t have a vested interest on certain topics should not have a say.

Ok I am alright with that.

A closing thought.

I bet if you did a telephone poll and asked the question: Should there be a speed limit for airplanes over New Hampshire? You might end up with similar numbers to the lake speed limit poll.

Other useful telephone poll questions to ask the general public:

Should motorcycles be required to have airbags?
Should boats have headlights?
Should planes have horns?
Should there be a speed limit for bicycles?
Should submarines have directionals?

[VtSteve]

I know people outside of boating that are bewildered that there isn't a speed limit on lakes. So if you ask them the question

"Given that many people are afraid to get near the water for fear of being run over by a four-ton boat going 140 miles per hour, and that there are Children in the water, would you support our quest to make the lake safe for Families???? "

or

"Given that hundreds of people drown every year during the early spring when the water is Deathly COLD, don't you agree that there should be a law prohibiting boating until the water reaches a SAFE 62.768 degrees? We've had a 400% increase in fatalities this year alone on the big lake, and we need this law NOW!"


By the way, why Don't submarines have directional signals?

[OCDACTIVE]

There hasn't been comments on here from the supporters because this is devistating to their case. The way this poll was listed is TOTALLY unbiased.

I don't know how the calls were made for the "state wide survey" or the exact questions phrasing, however I did watch the arguements on the House floor and with some of the rehtoric there you have to ask: How was that poll conducted?

If they said: as an example:

Would you support speed limits on lake winnipesaukee, which have proven to save hundreds of lives and remove dangerous speeders that keep many people away from the lakes region, hurting the economy?

The question obviously is biased and how could anyone say anything but: "yes I support speed limits" Again this is just and example...

Especially when they may or may not have any experience what so ever with boating on the lake.. All they have to compare it to (quoting from the Winnfabs website) a Walmart parking lot!!! Seriously.. How many Walmart parking lots can you fit into Paugus Bay alone? Let alone the Broads.

That is the difficulty with survey's conducted from one side or the other. Depending on how they are worded makes all the difference.

This particular survey was not asked in a biased way and proves that boaters of the lake, who actually have experience and understand the issues on the lake, overwhelmingly do not want the speed limit as it is currently in force.

Again by looking at the other "compromise" poll it appears that people are in favor of some type of compromise, but as stated over there by a supporter "if there were to be a one way or the other poll the results would be much different"

Apparently that wasn't the case....

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

There hasn't been comments on here from the supporters because this is devistating to their case.

How so? All this does is prove the obvious; that this forum is dominated by the GFBL crowd. All it does is put the imbalance in these threads into prespective. If you asked the same question on Offshoreonly.com, or Speedwake.com. or NHRBA.com, you'd see the exact same numbers (duh), but would that prove that a speed limit is not favored by the majority of NHers? Or that it is not working just great? OR that it should not be made permanent? Of course not. All it says is that wild horses do not want to be corralled. It doesn't take a poll to know that. Most people in NH have better things to do than weigh in on some GFBL self-poll.

Here's a real poll;
http://searchseacoast.com/news/02172006/news/88265.htm
"Poll: Most residents favor limits on boating speeds
The American Research Group telephone poll of 1,200 residents was commissioned by the New Hampshire Lakes Association. It was conducted Feb. 6 through Feb. 9 with an error margin of plus or minus 3 percentage points...When asked if the limits would make the waterways safer, 84 percent said yes, 9 percent no while 7 percent were undecided...Asked if the speed limits would make boating more enjoyable, 74 percent said yes, 5 percent no, and 21 percent were undecided...Eighty-one percent said they believe the limits will help the Marine Patrol enforce boating laws, while 11 percent said the limit would not help with enforcement and 8 percent were undecided. "

[pm203]

Originally Posted by elchase

How so? All this does is prove the obvious; [/I]"

That most people on this forum know the difference between right and wrong.

[OCDACTIVE]

Oh my!!! EL is back!!! did you get your 1200 hours on the lake this year?

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

did you get your 1200 hours on the lake this year?

Good one. And so we again see why supporters shy away from these threads. If you post something that disagrees with the GFBL agenda, you are a troll or you are ridiculed over some unrelated issue.
No, I don't think 1200 hours is likely even though I'll be on the lake right up till ice-over, in one boat or another. Perhaps that makes you jealous. I also have a '60 T-bird in showroom condition in my garage. Want to poke fun at that? Is that relevant? I typically log near to or just over 1000 boating hours on Winni each year, from the first day I put my jon boat in, which is usually well before ice-out, until well into December. I love the lake and spend as much time on it as I can...especially the past two years when the high speed threat and annoyance has been all but eliminated. And I can say with certainly that my boating has never once intimidated or offended anyone else. Can you say the same? Whether fishing, sailing, or cruising to town, my boating does not impact anyone else's, or make any other boaters wish they had stayed home. I can truly say that I share the lake with all. Can you?

By the way, just how loud must one's boat be to gain membership into this "Thunder Cult"? Do you get to wear "Thunder Cult" helmets? Do you have "Thunder Cult" capes like Evil Kneivel? Sounds pretty silly to me, but then, to each his own.

And what ever happened to that "documentary" that you guys filmed a couple of weeks back? Is it still in editing?

[BroadHopper]

Originally Posted by elchase

I also have a '60 T-bird in showroom condition in my garage. Want to poke fun at that?

Sure. My '58 Satelite with a 426 wedge eats Chebbies and Phords for breakfast. Better not let it out of the garage!

[Kracken]

[QUOTE=elchase;105228]Good one. And so we again see why supporters shy away from these threads. If you post something that disagrees with the GFBL agenda, you are a troll or you are ridiculed over some unrelated issue.../QUOTE]


Ok let me make sure I have this right.

Speed limit supporters are afraid of performance boats.

Speed limit supporters are afraid to post on this because they will be ridiculed?

I must have missed those posts. Some people have been ridiculed for making unsubstantiated claims without backing them up with facts or at least a link. Some people (on both sides) had the hammer dropped on them for making outrageous claims but quite often their statements and claims had nothing to do with a speed limit.

I don’t think anyone here really wants to silence the opposition. Most just want to debate topics and at times it’s damn entertaining. If you read the speed limit topics from beginning to end one can’t help but laugh. There are some really funny posts from a lot of people on both sides of the debate. Somebody should copyright or patent these threads and sell them. It’s a good read and a great distraction.

[Turtle Boy]

Originally Posted by elchase

I love the lake and spend as much time on it as I can...especially the past two years when the high speed threat and annoyance has been all but eliminated. And I can say with certainly that my boating has never once intimidated or offended anyone else. Can you say the same? Whether fishing, sailing, or cruising to town, my boating does not impact anyone else's, or make any other boaters wish they had stayed home. I can truly say that I share the lake with all. Can you?

EL...getting people to change their perspective is not always easy, especially in NH. I felt that this short story by Tupelo from last year summarizes some of the difficulties:

A Brief and Irreverent History of Early Motoring and Speed Limits on NH Highways by tupelo

In the early days of motoring in NH, most cars were small, underpowered and unreliable. Speed limits existed nowhere on NH roads and highways. However by the early 1920's , bigger and better cars, like Duesenbergs, were finding their way onto these roads. Some were capable of doing 65 MPH right through downtown Laconia. They were fast and fun. Accidents occasionally happened but they were few and infrequent. One day a fast, new Duesy raced through Center Harbor, just hitting a small boy who fortunately only broke his arm as he rushed to cross the street. His mother however did not consider this to be such an insignificant injury. She spoke out, saying these GFBL cars need to slow down....my son might well have been killed. "Fear monger, fear monger" soon echoed through the ranks of the GFBL cars owners, directed at this vilified mother. Other townfolk soon began discussing speed limits as well. "But we've never had speed limits" cried some of GFBL car owners." We're turning into a nanny state" cried others. Some even called it feel good legislation. Soon more and more people though were clamoring for some limits. A man named Helvey Sanders became interested as well and a grassroots organization was born. He even traveled to N.Y. where speed limits had been established years ago. He came back after talking with law enforcement officials there about how these limits were instituted and enforced. He even sent letters to the editor detailing how they worked. "Foul play" cried many of the GFBL car owners. "You didn't spell out exactly who you spoke with, when you spoke with them, what their snail mail addresses are. You must provide annotated references with all letters to the editor. No wonder newspaper subscriptions are declining. Your newspaper is a rag. Yellow journalism." Some even threatened to drive their cars back and forth in front of Mr. Sanders' house(there were of course no stalking laws at this time). Soon some car dealerships also weighed in claiming their customers were not feeling welcome in the state and were going to move to Vermont. Besides they said, how are you going to measure and enforce speed limits...radar hasn't been invented yet so surely it will not work on land.
The controversy heated up. A poll was taken of NH residents asking if they felt the roads would be safer if there were speed limits. Mothers, fathers, horse and buggy owners, even common pedestrians weighed in. This statewide NH poll showed 85% of the people were in favor of speed limits on the roads. "Wait, foul play" cried the Duesy owners and other GFBL groups. "This poll is invalid because you only should poll car owners. How can a man who only rides a horse have any say". Soon the GFBL's organized a club, though a few people who owned horse and buggies, also Model T's were encouraged to join to give the sense of a fair and balanced club. They even took their own poll that showed 85% of their members thought "reasonable and prudent" would be a better standard. There was still the occasional accident, but forth came the rallying cry "this accident never would have happened if the car hadn't blown its tire while going through town at 70 mph".
There was even the occasional accident attributed to alcohol intoxication. One GFBL crashed into Ye Olde Tamarack Restaurant in broad daylight doing 55 mph but when it was later found that the driver was intoxicated and had misinterpreted the meaning of "Drive-In",the GFBL car owners cried "See, this proves speed limits would never work...drunks would never obey them!"
By now there was interest in the legislature for establishing speed limits. The house in fact passed this new bill, HB 7. "Vote the bums out" was heard from the "no limits" crowd. One person was heard to say "If the old man of the mountain were still standing, he'd be shedding a tear right now". Another man said " It is still standing you idiot". Soon the senate passed HB 7 and then the governor signed as well. While the GFBL car crowd vowed to fight on, after 2 years when it was seen that the whole NH economy did indeed not collapse as had been warned, and people still found great enjoyment using their cars, the "no limits" crowd slowly faded away.




THE END

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by tupelo; 06-29-2008 at 07:39 AM

[OCDACTIVE]

[QUOTE=elchase;105228]Good one. And so we again see why supporters shy away from these threads. If you post something that disagrees with the GFBL agenda, you are a troll or you are ridiculed over some unrelated issue.

By the way, just how loud must one's boat be to gain membership into this "Thunder Cult"? Do you get to wear "Thunder Cult" helmets? Do you have "Thunder Cult" capes like Evil Kneivel? Sounds pretty silly to me, but then, to each his own.

[QUOTE]

EL I was just razzing you a little.. Don't take it to heart...

Thunder Cult has nothing to due with noise. Would have been happy to explain if you were to have asked, but I appreciate the sarcasm.

The type of boat I own is an Active Thunder. Not a production boat. Only built to order.

When we go places: poker runs, gatherings etc. there are usually not too many of us and we all tend to get together. Over the years we have become good friends and another manufactorer jokingly one day said: Wow do those guys go everywhere together? they are like a cult... And thats how Active Thunder Cult Member was started.

Just ask if you would like to know.. No need to speculate.

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by elchase

And so we again see why supporters shy away from these threads. If you post something that disagrees with the GFBL agenda, you are a troll or you are ridiculed over some unrelated issue.

Really?

I love the lake and spend as much time on it as I can...especially the past two years when the high speed threat and annoyance has been all but eliminated. And I can say with certainly that my boating has never once intimidated or offended anyone else. Can you say the same? Whether fishing, sailing, or cruising to town, my boating does not impact anyone else's, or make any other boaters wish they had stayed home. I can truly say that I share the lake with all. Can you?

Absolutely. Yes I can.

By the way, just how loud must one's boat be to gain membership into this "Thunder Cult"? Do you get to wear "Thunder Cult" helmets? Do you have "Thunder Cult" capes like Evil Kneivel? Sounds pretty silly to me, but then, to each his own.

Ridicule El?

You've simply reduced your arguments down to a single denominator. You have no facts, restate the same notions that many disagree with regarding safety this year, then you label anyone disagreeing with you a GFBL supporter. And routinely denigrate them and others on the lake.

All this time you are on the lake countless hours, and never witness the boneheads that others do. You seem to have the time on the lake, why not go to the NWZ at Bear Island and see what's going on over there. Today would be good since it's still a holiday weekend officially.

If you are right El, then absolutely nothing needs to be done again on the lake, it's all just fine now.

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by VtSteve

You've simply reduced your arguments down to a single denominator. You have no facts, restate the same notions that many disagree with regarding safety this year, then you label anyone disagreeing with you a GFBL supporter. And routinely denigrate them and others on the lake.

Unfortunately this is very common with the other sides argument. If you look at Sunsets Posts at no point are they focused at anyone in particular but are based on opinon and he rationalizes his thoughts to make his points. He does a very good job at staying on topic and isn't here just to cause trouble. I applaud him for his methods. I may not agree with what he says but he is here to discuss in an objective and healthy manner. Cheers!

There are others that have an agenda and this poll does not help them in anyway. They only appear or troll when things are not going their way in hopes to hijack the thread or better yet get it shut down by getting people off track and bickering.

I implore people to stay on topic and discuss the poll as it was set up for.

If noise and exhaust is your issue I know there is a thread set up for that.

If the merits of the speed limit are what you would like to discuss there is a thread for that as well, as is a compromise thread, how fast your boat goes, Safety issues, etc.

Don't let trolls drag down particular threads and make them become un-useful, best to ignore and stay on track.

Carry on..

[VitaBene]

It really has been a fabulous weekend for slow cruising so we will be back at it in Moultonborough Bay over to Lee's Mills this afternoon, so if you see us come by and say hi!

OCD, if you want to go slow, you can always hook up with us!

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by VitaBene

It really has been a fabulous weekend for slow cruising so we will be back at it in Moultonborough Bay over to Lee's Mills this afternoon, so if you see us come by and say hi!

OCD, if you want to go slow, you can always hook up with us!

VERY NICE PIC!!! I may take you up on that someday.. I am actually working all day today.. Saving up for the engine, paint job and some really cool upgrades... (Stay tuned for details)

Really appreciate the offer though..

You will be going right by my house. Will tell my parents to wave.

Just for the record. I LOVE going slow. I have a pontoon boat and a fishing boat (both of which can not go over 45 mph)

I just don't like being told that by exceeding that will put people in danger etc etc... I don't need to go down the list of reasons for they have been beaten to death.

Happy boating.. Enjoy!

[sunset on the dock]

Originally Posted by elchase

How so? All this does is prove the obvious; that this forum is dominated by the GFBL crowd. All it does is put the imbalance in these threads into prespective. If you asked the same question on Offshoreonly.com, or Speedwake.com. or NHRBA.com, you'd see the exact same numbers (duh), but would that prove that a speed limit is not favored by the majority of NHers? Or that it is not working just great? OR that it should not be made permanent? Of course not. All it says is that wild horses do not want to be corralled. It doesn't take a poll to know that. Most people in NH have better things to do than weigh in on some GFBL self-poll.

[/I]"

Exactly...and as noted earlier, 100% of the residents on our road associaion(approx. 25 people) are in favor of SL/and donation to WinnFabs. Our state reps/senate are not dumb enough to swallow a poll conducted on this forum!

[pm203]

Obviously the state representatives were dumb enough to swallow the Winnfabbs propoganda.They really do not have a clue. Just like the random survey that was done. Why don't we survey someone who really knows, like the entire Marine Patrol? What do you think they would say? By the way, I hope it wasn't someone in your road association that called in a fraudulent report on a speed boat over the weekend. The MP's investigated and found it to be a hoax. They weren't too happy.

[OCDACTIVE]

Again we woudn't be hearing this from the supporters if this poll went the other way.

First a compromise poll is set up where the majority is not happy with the current law.

It is then suggested that it would be a different story if people had to choose one way or the other.

Then this poll is set up.

The results are what they are.....

[sunset on the dock]

Poll whom you want, talk to whomever agrees with you...it won't change the fact that swimmers, sailors, lake front residents, kayakers, and many power boaters will be quite reluctant to give up the gains achieved over the last year. The speed limit has made Winnipesaukee a better, more tranquil lake to visit. The anti SL spin machine's propaganda about how the lake's region economy would go down the toilet never happened. Speed limits are here to stay and the real owners of the lake won't ever again let it be hijacked by a very loud minority of powerboaters.

[BroadHopper]

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

Poll whom you want, talk to whomever agrees with you...it won't change the fact that swimmers, sailors, lake front residents, kayakers, and many power boaters will be quite reluctant to give up the gains achieved over the last year. The speed limit has made Winnipesaukee a better, more tranquil lake to visit. The anti SL spin machine's propaganda about how the lake's region economy would go down the toilet never happened. Speed limits are here to stay and the real owners of the lake won't ever again let it be hijacked by a very loud minority of powerboaters.

Or angry lakefront property owners for that matter. The 25 at night is already showing its effect on our shores.

[pm203]

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

Speed limits are here to stay and the real owners of the lake won't ever again let it be hijacked by a very loud minority of powerboaters.

Are the "real owners "of the lake your neighborhood of 25? I didn't realize what a pompous group of individuals you are. And for the record, the speed boats have not gone away, still frequent the lake and still exceed the speed limits on a regular basis. So feel safer if that makes you feel better, but nothing has changed. Everything has remained the same for the "real owners" of the lake.

[Kracken]

You are absolutely right elchase and Sunset. Most people in this state and most people on Winnipesaukee.com don’t care a lick about speed limits on the lake. This poll PROVES that fact. Of the 4000+ members of winnipesaukee.com only 164 voted in this poll, that is 3.8%. That is a very low number considering this forum has members who are passionate about the lake. I believe these polls due give an accurate view of how people feel about the subject.

The catalyst to the speed limit bills passage was the incident involving Erica Blizzard. If that did not happen and the public interest in this legislation would not have been there. It was a devastating blow to speed limit oposition. It was purely a knee-jerk reaction to a tragedyand exploited by the Winnfabs. If there was even one instance of a GFBL traveling at a high speed causing serious injury or death than an valid argument could be made about limits being imposed.

If you really listen to the objections from some of the very vocal speed limit supporters it is easy to identify what their objectives are. They want to take “their” lake back. They want to limit the speed, size and noise generated by boats on the lake. I believe taking out the GFBL is step number one. The next step may be cruisers, then boats with 300+ and so on. Divide up and pick off the minorities one by one. The truth is they want to limit access to the lake. They supported the closing of Ames Farm and would also back anything that would keep the weekend warriors off their lake.

I am not saying all the people who support the speed limit have a hidden agenda. I am not about to accuse any supporters in this forum of such treachery, However they are alligning themselves with people do.

[sunset on the dock]

Originally Posted by pm203

Are the "real owners "of the lake your neighborhood of 25? I didn't realize what a pompous group of individuals you are. And for the record, the speed boats have not gone away, still frequent the lake and still exceed the speed limits on a regular basis. So feel safer if that makes you feel better, but nothing has changed. Everything has remained the same for the "real owners" of the lake.

Nothing has changed? All I have to do is look out my window (and even more important, LISTEN). The SL works and that message is reaching Concord.

[pm203]

Yes, I am certain that Concord is excited about something they have no idea about, nor care about.

[hazelnut]

The spin is ridiculous. My head is dizzy. The numbers have proven it time and time again that this site is NOT DOMINATED BY GFBL owners. You can kick scream and throw sand all you want but it does not make it true. You have deluded yourself into thinking this and you say it so many times that you actually believe yourself. It is hysterical. Stop though because you look more and more silly.

I still get a kick out of the other spin tactic that this law has somehow transformed the lake into some paradise? You are putting yourselves your family members and readers of this forum in jeopardy by suggesting that people should let their guard down. The lake is as crazy as ever and overrun with boneheads in bowriders. Sorry to burst your bubble but the SL law has had absolutely ZERO affect on the safety of the lake. The more you say it the more people are laughing at you. It is fun to read though so no need to stop I guess.

Originally Posted by Kracken

You are absolutely right elchase and Sunset.

Thanks. When a majority is so overwhelming, it usually is absolutely right.

Originally Posted by Kracken

Of the 4000+ members of winnipesaukee.com only 164 voted in this poll, that is 3.8%.

Based on the interest in this topic among the GFBL crowd, I'm sure that all 100% of the GFBL members voted and a negligible percentage of the non-GFBL members voted. Had all 4000+ voted, I'm sure you'd see numbers much closer to those ARG found in their legit poll. In fact, the numbers would have to agree within +/- 3%, according to the laws of statistics. Was the poll limited to logged-in members? To pre-existing members? It would be interesting to know how many voters were recruited from the other GFBL sites to vote in this "poll".

Originally Posted by Kracken

The catalyst to the speed limit bills passage was the incident involving Erica Blizzard.

Check your history. The bill had already passed the House and Senate by wide margins and was just awaiting the Governor's already-promised signature.

Originally Posted by Kracken

If there was even one instance of a GFBL traveling at a high speed causing serious injury or death than an valid argument could be made about limits being imposed.

Check your history. There have been numerous high-speed boating accidents on the lake. And please don't give the usual "prove it" response. The research has been done many times and posted on this forum. At least three GFBL boats have flipped on Winnipesaukee in the past ten years at speeds over 70MPH. Boats have been driven up onto islands numerous times at night at high speeds. Do some Googling. But don't rely on MP citation records...there was no speeding law to cite the drivers with.

Originally Posted by Kracken

If you really listen to the objections from some of the very vocal speed limit supporters it is easy to identify what their objectives are.

It sure is...because they say it over and over and over again. They want a lake that they feel safe boating on...like the one we saw this summer. It's telling that those who fought for the law are so happy with it, and those who opposed it are so unhappy with it. Doesn't that say it all? Who is more believable, the person who was a victim and now says "This law is working great, I don't feel victimized anymore, please keep it", or the person who was an offender and now says "This law is not working. I'm still offending as much as ever and nobody is doing anything about it...but please eliminate it." It defies logic to see so many former victims working so hard to keep a law and so many former offenders working so hard to remove the law if it is doing nothing. Of course it is effective. Otherwise, why all the fuss?

Originally Posted by The Big Kahuna

I have been out and about all summer in my GFBL

Is it just me, or does anyone else see the irony here? For those who don't know, "GFBL" stands for "Go Fast Be Loud". It was meant to be a derogatory term to show the obnoxiousness of the high-speed boating enthusiasts. But to show the mentality of the people it is directed at, they actually see it as a compliment and have adopted it to describe themselves and their boats... "We go fast and are loud"... "I have been out and about all summer in my fast and loud boat". And this is supposed to gain support for your cause in a reasonably conservative state? Why not just refer to yourselves as obnoxious? It is a direct synonym. "We are obnoxious"... "I have been out and about all summer in my obnoxious boat". It says so much about the problem that the people who oppose this law have no problem referring to themselves and their boats as "Go Fast and Be Loud". It's a real sympathy grabber.

[Kracken]

Elchase- Thanks. When a majority is so overwhelming, it usually is absolutely right.

Nice spin, I was referring to your assessment that this poll does not include the opinions of a significant number of winnipesaukee.com members. My point was that most people consider the speed limit debate insignificant.

Elchase- Based on the interest in this topic among the GFBL crowd, I'm sure that all 100% of the GFBL members voted and a negligible percentage of the non-GFBL members voted. Had all 4000+ voted, I'm sure you'd see numbers much closer to those ARG found in their legit poll. In fact, the numbers would have to agree within +/- 3%, according to the laws of statistics. Was the poll limited to logged-in members? To pre-existing members? It would be interesting to know how many voters were recruited from the other GFBL sites to vote in this "poll".

You are not suggesting “the other side” stuffed the ballot box are you? What evidence do you have of that? (See post about outrageous unsubstantiated claims)

Elchase - Check your history. The bill had already passed the House and Senate by wide margins and was just awaiting the Governor's already-promised signature.

The House passed the previous speed limit bills only to be defeated in the senate. On HB 847 the senate approved the bill by 14-10 one month prior to the accident. 14-10 is hardly an overwhelming number. However HB 847 is a 2 year law and is now being considered to override the sunset law conveniently around the same time as the trial of Erica Blizzard. Is it merely coincidence they want to make a temp law permanent right in the shadows of Erica Blizzards trial?

Elchase- Check your history. There have been numerous high-speed boating accidents on the lake. And please don't give the usual "prove it" response. The research has been done many times and posted on this forum. At least three GFBL boats have flipped on Winnipesaukee in the past ten years at speeds over 70MPH. Boats have been driven up onto islands numerous times at night at high speeds. Do some Googling. But don't rely on MP citation records...there was no speeding law to cite the drivers with.

Just the facts sir.

How many non-GFBL had accidents on the lake at speeds under 45 MPH in the past 10 years? Has there EVER been a boat to boat accident when a performance boat traveling at a high rate of speed on Lake Winnipesaukee?

Elchase- It sure is...because they say it over and over and over again. They want a lake that they feel safe boating on...like the one we saw this summer. It's telling that those who fought for the law are so happy with it, and those who opposed it are so unhappy with it. Doesn't that say it all? Who is more believable, the person who was a victim and now says "This law is working great, I don't feel victimized anymore, please keep it", or the person who was an offender and now says "This law is not working. I'm still offending as much as ever and nobody is doing anything about it...but please eliminate it." It defies logic to see so many former victims working so hard to keep a law and so many former offenders working so hard to remove the law if it is doing nothing. Of course it is effective. Otherwise, why all the fuss?

Yes some people (like you) want to feel safe while boating. Others would prefer to keep redundant and unenforceable laws off the books so the Marine Patrol can concentrate on the laws that actually make people safer.

[pm203]

Bottom line is that all of the speed boats that I know of have not left and have no intention of leaving. And since that is what you really want, you still lose. There have been loud boats on the lake well before you got here and will be long after you are gone. But, if the law makes you feel better........

[gtagrip]

It sure is...because they say it over and over and over again. They want a lake that they feel safe boating on...like the one we saw this summer. It's telling that those who fought for the law are so happy with it, and those who opposed it are so unhappy with it. Doesn't that say it all? Who is more believable, the person who was a victim and now says "This law is working great, I don't feel victimized anymore, please keep it", or the person who was an offender and now says "This law is not working. I'm still offending as much as ever and nobody is doing anything about it...but please eliminate it." It defies logic to see so many former victims working so hard to keep a law and so many former offenders working so hard to remove the law if it is doing nothing. Of course it is effective. Otherwise, why all the fuss?


Is this the same "safe" lake that you were on when the boat with the 25hp motor passed you within feet and you and your son just laughed, because if youhad been struck by it, there was no possible way that you could have been killed by it! Dude, give it a rest.

[VitaBene]

Originally Posted by gtagrip

It sure is...because they say it over and over and over again. They want a lake that they feel safe boating on...like the one we saw this summer. It's telling that those who fought for the law are so happy with it, and those who opposed it are so unhappy with it. Doesn't that say it all? Who is more believable, the person who was a victim and now says "This law is working great, I don't feel victimized anymore, please keep it", or the person who was an offender and now says "This law is not working. I'm still offending as much as ever and nobody is doing anything about it...but please eliminate it." It defies logic to see so many former victims working so hard to keep a law and so many former offenders working so hard to remove the law if it is doing nothing. Of course it is effective. Otherwise, why all the fuss?


Is this the same "safe" lake that you were on when the boat with the 25hp motor passed you within feet and you and your son just laughed, because if youhad been struck by it, there was no possible way that you could have been killed by it! Dude, give it a rest.

No problem, it was a small boat and only 25 HP or thereabouts and you know the props stop on those little motors when they hit a body part (kind of like my son's toy bathtub boat with the electric motor). It would hardly make a mark. Merely a flesh wound! You could probably laugh it off.

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by VitaBene

No problem, it was a small boat and only 25 HP or thereabouts and you know the props stop on those little motors when they hit a body part (kind of like my son's toy bathtub boat with the electric motor). It would hardly make a mark. Merely a flesh wound! You could probably laugh it off.

Vita, I have always appreciated what you have said. You have always had some very good points but seriously I hope you are joking on this one.

The torque on a 25 horse motor can easily chew anyone up really really badly. I don't know if it could cut through bone but it sure would get there...

[VitaBene]

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

Vita, I have always appreciated what you have said. You have always had some very good points but seriously I hope you are joking on this one.

The torque on a 25 horse motor can easily chew anyone up really really badly. I don't know if it could cut through bone but it sure would get there...

Sorry, I was being facetious based on this from this previous post by Elchase:

"Thanks Steve, I had a great day on the lake. It was hot and sunny here and Winnipesaukee was very busy, but very civilized again. Hope you enjoyed the day up on your lake.
I just can't get over the difference a simple little law has made. You might not be able to see that from your vantage in VT, but having been out on Lake Winnipesaukee for well over 600 hours so far this spring/summer, I have witnessed the improvement first hand.
I did see one of those Capt Boneheads in a non-GFBL that you guys keep talking about. My son and I were drifting about 25 feet south of the lit buoy off Welch, casting worms at the buoy for bass. A larger boat was coming along south of us, heading east to west with a little hydroplane running next to him on his north side. The bigger boat was going to pass south of us about maybe 100 to 200 feet (who can tell the difference?), and the little boat was heading straight at us. It looked like a little 14-foot or so homemade thing with a 20HP Johnson on it. We could see the smiling driver looking right as us as he approached, so we never got scared, just confused and annoyed. I figured he had to change course a bit and expected that was going to cut just north of the buoy, which would still put him only 30 or 40 feet from us, but to our astonishment, he passes right between us and the buoy. Right over our lines, not more than 10 feet from us at no less than 25 miles an hour. We're holding out our arms in a "what the heck?" gesture, and he gives us a big smile and holds up his beer. I looked at my son and we both broke out laughing. This was stupid enough to be comical. I know people say "10 feet" when it was really 50, but this was 10 feet. I was close enough to the buoy to cast beyond it and this guy split the difference.
But then I realized that never once did I get scared. If the guy had hit us dead-on there certainly would have been some damage but that little thing would not have killed us. I compared this to how heart-stopping-scared I've felt in past situations where I've had big heavy cigarettes coming at me at 60 or 70 miles an hour, even when much further away. Usually you can only see the big hull and wonder whether the driver can see you or is even looking. While this guy was driving as bad, he simply was not putting us at the same risk. His boat was small, and it was only going 25 or so.
There are certainly Captain Boneheads driving craft of all sizes; little fishing boats, sailboats, cruisers, and GFBLs. And the SL certainly will not get them all off the lake or turn them into good boaters in all regards. But it is amazing how much less dangerous these Captain Boneheads in the smaller slower boats are than the Captain Boneheads driving 70 in big heavy boats. Its amazing how much less terrorizing boats are when they are heading at you at 25 mph than at 70.
You guys need to understand that laws like the SL are not caused by responsible drivers like you protest to be, but are caused by the idiots who have been terrorizing us because they drive like idiots, drive huge heavy boats, and drive them very fast in places where it is not "prudent" to do so. You guys had a good thing, and they ruined it for you...we didn't. Your anger should be directed at them, and not at those who simply want to recreate on the lake without undue fear or risk.
Focus your energies on saving the other lakes where you can still drive as fast as you want from SLs before you lose them too. Do this by going after the people who really cost you your freedom here...the Captain Boneheads who drive GFBLs. If you don't get them off Sunapee, Newfound, Champlain, and all the other still-unlimited lakes, then SLs are inevitable there too, and you will only have yourselves to blame for failing to recognize your true enemy while you still had time."

I'm just needling him a bit. Any prop that can move a boat is not going to give when hitting a person.

[hazelnut]

Vita,

I am sure elchase regrets posting this story as it absolutely 100% confirms what we have been saying. He posted this trying to prove a point and all he did was prove ours. I LOVE IT!!!!

I pray that the good elected representatives read his story and understand that is what we have been trying to say all along. The lake is overrun with Capt. Boneheads and that is the problem. Thanks elchase for posting this story it has helped immensely.

[sunset on the dock]

Originally Posted by elchase

Thanks. When a majority is so overwhelming, it usually is absolutely right.


Based on the interest in this topic among the GFBL crowd, I'm sure that all 100% of the GFBL members voted and a negligible percentage of the non-GFBL members voted. Had all 4000+ voted, I'm sure you'd see numbers much closer to those ARG found in their legit poll. In fact, the numbers would have to agree within +/- 3%, according to the laws of statistics. Was the poll limited to logged-in members? To pre-existing members? It would be interesting to know how many voters were recruited from the other GFBL sites to vote in this "poll".

Check your history. The bill had already passed the House and Senate by wide margins and was just awaiting the Governor's already-promised signature.

Check your history. There have been numerous high-speed boating accidents on the lake. And please don't give the usual "prove it" response. The research has been done many times and posted on this forum. At least three GFBL boats have flipped on Winnipesaukee in the past ten years at speeds over 70MPH. Boats have been driven up onto islands numerous times at night at high speeds. Do some Googling. But don't rely on MP citation records...there was no speeding law to cite the drivers with.

It sure is...because they say it over and over and over again. They want a lake that they feel safe boating on...like the one we saw this summer. It's telling that those who fought for the law are so happy with it, and those who opposed it are so unhappy with it. Doesn't that say it all? Who is more believable, the person who was a victim and now says "This law is working great, I don't feel victimized anymore, please keep it", or the person who was an offender and now says "This law is not working. I'm still offending as much as ever and nobody is doing anything about it...but please eliminate it." It defies logic to see so many former victims working so hard to keep a law and so many former offenders working so hard to remove the law if it is doing nothing. Of course it is effective. Otherwise, why all the fuss?


Is it just me, or does anyone else see the irony here? For those who don't know, "GFBL" stands for "Go Fast Be Loud". It was meant to be a derogatory term to show the obnoxiousness of the high-speed boating enthusiasts. But to show the mentality of the people it is directed at, they actually see it as a compliment and have adopted it to describe themselves and their boats... "We go fast and are loud"... "I have been out and about all summer in my fast and loud boat". And this is supposed to gain support for your cause in a reasonably conservative state? Why not just refer to yourselves as obnoxious? It is a direct synonym. "We are obnoxious"... "I have been out and about all summer in my obnoxious boat". It says so much about the problem that the people who oppose this law have no problem referring to themselves and their boats as "Go Fast and Be Loud". It's a real sympathy grabber.

And I think sympathy for the GFBL crowd will fall to a new nadir when Erica Blizzard's trial gets underway in a few weeks and more of the details surrounding the accident come to light. She, by virtue of her association with the NHRBA, became the GFBL's poster girl and many view her agenda to have been "party hearty, live free or die, and get outa my way so I can be fun, fast, and free".

[BroadHopper]

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

Nothing has changed? All I have to do is look out my window (and even more important, LISTEN). The SL works and that message is reaching Concord.

Looking out my window I see erosion from all the boats that are limited to 25 at night. SL is not working in my neighborhood. It's WORST!

Maybe we should put a clause in the Shoreline Protection Act to eliminate the 25 at night.........................

[XCR-700]

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

Speed limits are here to stay and the real owners of the lake won't ever again let it be hijacked by a very loud minority of powerboaters.

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

and the owners of the lake, including non waterfront owners, swimmers, kayakers, sailors, people who live near the lake who don't don't enjoy all the benefits of lakeside living

WOW, that has to be the single most obnoxious statement I have ever read on this forum! I guess I should say statement(s), as you had the gall to say it TWICE!!!

The concept that lake Winnipesaukee is “OWNED” by some elite group is just appalling and flies in the face of everything AMERICAN.

What is wrong with “you people” that you can even envision something like that,,,

Is this the “New World” mentality???

Its no wonder we have so many idiotic laws passed, it’s the omniscient group mentality that someone knows whats better for EVERYONE, everyone else that is,,,

And either way they don’t really care, as they just want to change the rules to suit their preferences and too bad for anyone else,,,

As for the SL being “here to stay”, god help us all, because all I can think of is whats next,,,

[BroadHopper]

The state owns the lake. They are the real lake owners.

As far as waterfront owners. Who are the 'real owners', the ones with the biggest properties? They are the ones with the 'big toys'. Or the ones that have been on the lake longer. If that's the case, my family has been on the lake since 1892. We don't want stupid laws to tell us what to do. We just want people to use COMMON SENSE when they use our waters. I'm beginning to think this is too much to ask?????

[jmen24]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

When I visit your neighborhood, I'm a visitor.

When you visit my neighborhood, you're a visitor.

If you go to the ocean (which is only one hour away), you're not "visiting".

If you say that is what you meant, I have no option but to take your word for it, but a day later to respond leaves a lot of time to think of a good explanation and your post did not come off at all as you explain above.

[BroadHopper]

I notice the 'flaming' by proponents got a lot of people voting against the speed limit. Which is good, but I wish emotions will not encourage people to make their decision. I am hoping I am wrong and everyone voted with what they feel makes sense.

I am waiting for Rep. Pilliod to file the amendment. As of now, he has not. The next step is to take this poll, the maximum speed poll, the minimum speed poll and the compromise poll and analyse the data to come up with the best compromise.

Having no speed limit is, I believe, is dead. This proposal was defeated in the last voting. So it makes sense that we make a compromise. That will send a message to the opponents the opponents are concerned about safety. I think we will have a better chance to raise the speed limit.

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

Having no speed limit is, I believe, is dead. This proposal was defeated in the last voting. So it makes sense that we make a compromise. That will send a message to the opponents the opponents are concerned about safety. I think we will have a better chance to raise the speed limit.

Don't be so sure that it is dead.... Keep in mind the history here.

1st the supporters wanted test zones. These zones data proved that speeding was not an issue. Their argument was that GFB just avoided these test zones.

2nd the supporters ask for the law to be enacted on the enitire lake for a period of 2 years so that it can be proven that there is a speeding issue. Also they pushed to have it linked to your MVR so that it had "consequence".

again to date no data shows there is a "speeding issue" only 1 ticket so far from what I have heard.

Now there is talk that they want to repeal the 2 year sunset provision because there isn't time to review the data....

How transparent can this be... They took small steps and used data as a ploy. Well I am hoping our Legislature sees through this as we have.

If the MP states it is not and issue and here is the data to prove it, then I can't see how or why the provision would be removed or the need for a compromise.

I had stated that I would entertain a compromise if needed however it may not be needed at all.

[NoRegrets]

I have and still maintain my belief that there is no value to laws that have no impact. Thanks OCDACTIVE for such a logical progression of facts on the issue. Now if only the ill informed Pollyanna politicians were capable of rational thinking would I believe we can make some real progress after the 2 year project is completed.

[Kracken]

Pollyanna politicians???

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by NoRegrets

I have and still maintain my belief that there is no value to laws that have no impact. Thanks OCDACTIVE for such a logical progression of facts on the issue. Now if only the ill informed Pollyanna politicians were capable of rational thinking would I believe we can make some real progress after the 2 year project is completed.

More importantly a law that has a "Perceived Effect." This is my biggest problem with the law and the supporters of the law. They use terms like the lake is quieter, and less busy, and safer in their arguments for a Speed Limit. I am sorry but Laws are enacted to curb a specific problem. This law has supporters because of the PERCEIVED side effects. That is ridiculous in my opinion. 1 ticket? No statistics? Just hearsay. If this were a courtroom it would be thrown out before the jury had a chance to hear the case.

Just my humble opinion

[pm203]

Originally Posted by hazelnut

, . If this were a courtroom it would be thrown out before the jury had a chance to hear the case.

Just my humble opinion

So, why can't the house and senate figure it out? Are they that foolish, or just a bunch of gullible ameteurs? It's a shame they have the powers they do.

[NoRegrets]

Hi Kracken,

I liked the way the 2 words rhymed together. Here are the common literary definitions:

Pollyanna n. A person regarded as being foolishly or blindly optimistic.

Politicians n. Persons involved in politics

Politicians n. My personal definition has become a group of big spending, self serving, tax evading, lying bassturds that bend the laws for their personal gain or benefits.

I believe the Pollyanna Politicians (the many that had no knowledge of the issue but still voted) optimistically passed this ineffective speed law and thought they were going to help. Now the pro SL supporters want to change the rules and declare victory after half of the test term complete. This is where I apply my definition of a politician.

[Turtle Boy]

Originally Posted by hazelnut

More importantly a law that has a "Perceived Effect." This is my biggest problem with the law and the supporters of the law. They use terms like the lake is quieter, and less busy, and safer in their arguments for a Speed Limit. I am sorry but Laws are enacted to curb a specific problem. This law has supporters because of the PERCEIVED side effects. That is ridiculous in my opinion. 1 ticket? No statistics? Just hearsay. If this were a courtroom it would be thrown out before the jury had a chance to hear the case.

Just my humble opinion

Just go out to the end of your dock in August and listen if you don't think the lake isn't quieter(even with gas $2.00/gal cheaper). And thank God you can go out fishing at the buoys without some GFBL screaming past you at 70 MPH just 150' from your anchored boat...that's not "perceived side effects"? And as far as 1 ticket, that's even more evidence that speed limits are working. No statistics? That from someone(a teacher) who has repeatedly shown no working knowledge of even the most rudimentary fundamentals of polling and it's statistical implications. People who use Winnipesaukee will not give up this quantum leap in the lake's quality of life.

[pm203]

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy

People who use Winnipesaukee will not give up this quantum leap in the lake's quality of life.

Quantum leap? Why don't you lie down on the couch and tell the doctor all about it.

[XCR-700]

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy

Just go out to the end of your dock in August and listen if you don't think the lake isn't quieter(even with gas $2.00/gal cheaper).

Hummm, unemployment at record high levels, gasoline at $3.00 gal on the water, worst summer weather in years, ya I would guess is a bit quieter,,,

Personally the only time I ever see any significant amount of high speed traffic (over 45 MPH) on the lake is Saturdays at the peak of the season and when the weather is very good. And if I'm not in the mood to deal with it, "I" stay home. I dont run out to rally a group of knuckleheads to support my cause to pass a law to outlaw whatever annoys me on any particular day.

I guess the other part of my problem with the whole speed limit issue is that I don’t automatically associate speed (over 45 MPH) with reckless operation.

There are days when the water is flat I can cruise the Merrimack River at 65 MPH and I have no issues with safety. There are other days when the wind is blowing that I have a tough ride on Winnipesaukee at 35 MPH.

Reckless operation has always been a problem everywhere there are boats and we already have regulations that deal with it. And though it is a bit of a subjective call if someone is operating unsafely, in my mind so is the concept of universal safe speed limits.

Some boats and operators can cruise at 70 MPH without incident, others are unsafe at ANY speed.

I think anyone can make the call that passing an anchored boat at "close distance" (say 50 feet) at 70 MPH is reckless operation, but what is a safe speed for all boats and operators under all conditions, well thats not so easy to define without illegitimately curtailing our freedoms.

Who among us is a legitimate expert in small powerboat marine safety??? I’m guessing no one,,,

[NoRegrets]

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy

Just go out to the end of your dock in August and listen if you don't think the lake isn't quieter(even with gas $2.00/gal cheaper). And thank God you can go out fishing at the buoys without some GFBL screaming past you at 70 MPH just 150' from your anchored boat...that's not "perceived side effects"? And as far as 1 ticket, that's even more evidence that speed limits are working. No statistics? That from someone(a teacher) who has repeatedly shown no working knowledge of even the most rudimentary fundamentals of polling and it's statistical implications. People who use Winnipesaukee will not give up this quantum leap in the lake's quality of life.

I think you missed typed and either meant to shorten the 150' legal distance or maybe you are trying to suggest that you prefer to get back to nature with nothing but peace and quiet. Either way the lake is not a reserved haven for exclusive use of the few. It is one of the states greatest assets that attracts many from diverse cultural, economic, and view point differences. We are not trying not to judge how ones personal preference is better than anothers.

The lake being so large is unique since it can support such a vast array of sporting activities. Divers get a chance to test deep water, Sailers can let loose for long blows(can you tell I am not a sailer?), fishing for those that choose can be thrilling, and the surrounding towns have embraced all and encourage tourism. I don't see how we can allow a restrictive law exist that intends to eliminate a certain class of sportsman. I do not believe it is appropriate for our state to do this for this huge public resource. Safety is an issue, noise is already governed, and fear is controllable.

I believe this thread was an attempt to eliminate the statistical twisting that some of the previous surveys encountered. Should the speed limit stay or go? I do not believe it does any good so get rid of it. My opinion only.

[chipj29]

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy

Just go out to the end of your dock in August and listen if you don't think the lake isn't quieter(even with gas $2.00/gal cheaper). And thank God you can go out fishing at the buoys without some GFBL screaming past you at 70 MPH just 150' from your anchored boat...that's not "perceived side effects"? And as far as 1 ticket, that's even more evidence that speed limits are working. No statistics? That from someone(a teacher) who has repeatedly shown no working knowledge of even the most rudimentary fundamentals of polling and it's statistical implications. People who use Winnipesaukee will not give up this quantum leap in the lake's quality of life.

I think you have "statistics" confused with poll results in this context. The statistics that others are referring to is the fact that there is no evidence of a speed problem on the lake, it is a perceived problem. How can I say this? Well, one statistic in particular shows that there has not been a single death on the lake that was directly caused by a high speed. Another statistic based on data gathered by the MP during the test period also led MP to conclude that speed was not a problem on the lake.

And to the bolded above, it may not be a "perceived" side effect, but it certainly could be a side effect of a speed limit. But you don't know that. One could argue that that particular side effect isn't even a side effect at all...it was one of the primary goals of implementing the speed limit.

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy

Just go out to the end of your dock in August and listen if you don't think the lake isn't quieter(even with gas $2.00/gal cheaper). And thank God you can go out fishing at the buoys without some GFBL screaming past you at 70 MPH just 150' from your anchored boat...that's not "perceived side effects"? And as far as 1 ticket, that's even more evidence that speed limits are working. No statistics? That from someone(a teacher) who has repeatedly shown no working knowledge of even the most rudimentary fundamentals of polling and it's statistical implications. People who use Winnipesaukee will not give up this quantum leap in the lake's quality of life.

While I see your premise to your arguement, however this is where your position goes off the rails.

1. the lake is quieter due to the economy nothing more. There have been story after story on WMUR that people have not see vacancy's like this in years and tourism is at one if its all time lows. Marinas have had terrible sales figures and resturants are also feeling the pinch. Showing that it is quieter not due to limits but lack of people of all boating types.

2. The winnfabs pushed for the speed limit test zones and were disappointed in the results. The MP stated on the floor of the House that the test zone data proved (as they had said all along) there is not a speeding problem on our big lake. It is lack of education and adherence to existing rules.

The winnfabs again argued that the reason there was little to no speeding was because the GFB just avoided the test zones. Now whether that was a ploy or not is irrelevant.

They then argued that if the "entire lake" had limits then we would see an entirely different set of statistial results (because GFB would have no where to hide).

Well now that still hasn't happened. And if you read back on threads even before the test zones it was said that what supporters would do, as soon as the data showed speeding was not a problem, is they would jump on their soap box and state: "Hey look how well they are working"

That may be your opinion and that is perfectly fine. However it was not the intention or the arguement made for the 2 year test period by the people that pushed for them.

The arguement was: Put them into effect and see how many we catch to make the lake safer. NOT, put them in effect and no one will speed.

So although you may "feel" safer, the reasoning of the supporters (winnfabs) has been proven wrong.

My personal opinion is that they had no intention of trying to prove anything with any data and either way they were going to push for 'permanent' limits.

Lets just hope that the Legislature can take of their blind folds and see this progression for themselves.

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy

Just go out to the end of your dock in August and listen if you don't think the lake isn't quieter(even with gas $2.00/gal cheaper). And thank God you can go out fishing at the buoys without some GFBL screaming past you at 70 MPH just 150' from your anchored boat...that's not "perceived side effects"? And as far as 1 ticket, that's even more evidence that speed limits are working. No statistics? That from someone(a teacher) who has repeatedly shown no working knowledge of even the most rudimentary fundamentals of polling and it's statistical implications. People who use Winnipesaukee will not give up this quantum leap in the lake's quality of life.

Am I mistaken or does Turtle Boy consistently drag my personal life, my job into the debate.

Because my grasp on the polling data or the statistics differs from your opinion does not make you the least bit correct. Nor does my profession have any validity in this discussion. What is it that you do for a living and how does it affect this debate?

I'm trying Don... Really I am....

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by Turtle Boy

No statistics? That from someone(a teacher) who has repeatedly shown no working knowledge of even the most rudimentary fundamentals of polling and it's statistical implications.

I am curious:
What Stats? The ones that showed nobody was speeding on the lake? Or the Stats that show little to no accidents associated with High Speed?

[ApS]

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

"...I agree with you.. But I don't understand the ocean comment..."

I had written:

"If you go to the ocean (which is only one hour away), you're not "visiting".

That was paraphrased from another site where the moderator (with no dog in this debate) stated:

"...As most of you know, I'm very much opposed to additional marine regulation. However, just because of the sheer numbers and varieties of boats on inland waters, sometimes a quantifiable limit is a good idea.

"In my opinion, it would be far better to impose a reasonable speed limit now than wait until a couple of kids in a kayak are killed by someone doing 80 on the lake. Then you'll have the public screaming for a much reduced limit.

""There's an ocean not an hour's drive from the lake. That's a great place to run a boat at 75."

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...22&postcount=5

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by elchase

How so? All this does is prove the obvious; that this forum is dominated by the GFBL crowd.

Again this is quite an exaggeration. If you look at the poll of "how fast does your boat go" less the 20% have a boat that can exceed 60.. Some of those could easily be PWC as well.

When you have overwhelming results you can't say this forum is dominated by GFBL crowd. It is what it is.. I am sure if it went the other way the comments would be very different.

[Mee-n-Mac]

Originally Posted by onlywinni

I am quite shocked by the results of this Poll.
{snip-a-roo}
A poll taken of actual captains and their passengers at Marinas and Public Docks would be much more accurate, similar to this poll I believe.

Why so shocked ? The poll in this thread is a different question than the poll in your 2005 survey. That poll is more similar to the "compromise" poll. What I take from it is few like the present limits but most would like some limits. Buy alas "we" substitute someone's opinion as to what's good instead of using reason to determine any limits (and if they'd do any practical good). Naturally opinions will vary and so you end up with the kind of results we've seen to date in both the informal Winni polls and the more formal ones that we're paid for.

As to whom should be polled ... that's a good question. There's no requirement that voters be informed about the politicians they elect or on the referendums that come up so it's kinda hard to ask for it on lake speed limits (though it would be a good idea). These days it seems as if people feel their opinion should be heard even when they can't articulate how they formed it or why it has any validity.