One way or the other

Originally Posted by pm203

The crime today was that somebody( over the weekend) from Bear Island frauduently called in to the MP that a high performance boat was speeding through a no-wake zone...

Originally Posted by pm203

I hope it wasn't someone in your road association that called in a fraudulent report on a speed boat ...

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

One weekend, someone called the MP and claim some kid was going 100 mph by his/her house. Come to find out someone had a little hydroplane with a 25 HP motor. Such a waste of time for the MP...

This ever-changing and irrelevant story is getting old. Was it a performance boat or a little 25HP hydroplane? Was it called in from an island or a road association? How do you know? Was it in a no wake zone or in front of someone’s house? Are shorefront owners suddenly starting to call in these fictitious violations as part of some nefarious pro-speed limit conspiracy? How would this help their cause? It’s starting to sound like a big fabrication that just cannot be kept straight. It sounds more likely to me that the whole story is either made up or that some speed limit opponent is making these calls. Otherwise, its relevance eludes me. Is the point that shorefront owners cannot call the MP when they feel they are witnessing a violation or that boaters should be allowed to harass shorefront owners? The MP can take care of themselves. They know the source phone number of every call and would just cite the caller for filing a fraudulent report if that was the case. They require identification of every caller (I know). They will not respond to an anonymous complaint (I know). So clearly there is another motive to this repeated story about someone feeling that a boat was violating a law and reporting it to the MP. Why not just save us the suspense and come out with it?

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

Since the speed limit, people are over reacting................

You can say that again… and it’s not the shorefronters.

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by elchase

This ever-changing and irrelevant story is getting old. Was it a performance boat or a little 25HP hydroplane? Was it called in from an island or a road association? How do you know? Was it in a no wake zone or in front of someone’s house? Are shorefront owners suddenly starting to call in these fictitious violations as part of some nefarious pro-speed limit conspiracy? How would this help their cause? It’s starting to sound like a big fabrication that just cannot be kept straight. It sounds more likely to me that the whole story is either made up or that some speed limit opponent is making these calls. Otherwise, its relevance eludes me. Is the point that shorefront owners cannot call the MP when they feel they are witnessing a violation or that boaters should be allowed to harass shorefront owners? The MP can take care of themselves. They know the source phone number of every call and would just cite the caller for filing a fraudulent report if that was the case. They require identification of every caller (I know). They will not respond to an anonymous complaint (I know). So clearly there is another motive to this repeated story about someone feeling that a boat was violating a law and reporting it to the MP. Why not just save us the suspense and come out with it?
You can say that again… and it’s not the shorefronters.

el, get a clue the stories are two separate incidents. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out. Another chink in your armor I'm afraid. Everyone else seems to have their stories straight. You parse comments and jump all over people with little to no regard for facts. It's getting a tad embarrassing.

[pm203]

The Bear Island call-in was for a large speed boat and after a investigation was deemed a hoax by the MP. And, they had solid proof that it was a hoax. Looks like the Bear Islanders are now trying to control who idles by their island. Too bad it was a failure.

[KonaChick]

Originally Posted by pm203

The Bear Island call-in was for a large speed boat and after a investigation was deemed a hoax by the MP. And, they had solid proof that it was a hoax. Looks like the Bear Islanders are now trying to control who idles by their island. Too bad it was a failure.

I hope this has no truth to it. Who in their right mind would make up a story about a fictious GFBL boat speeding just for a hoax? If it's true it's deeply disappointing and saddens me. I hope it's not.

Originally Posted by hazelnut

el, get a clue...You parse comments...

Ok Sherlock, so assuming there are all these sudden false alarms being called in, why does this belong in a speed limit thread? Violating a no wake zone or shoreline are other laws having nothing to do with the SL. What would this con artist gain by calling in from different places about different boats? Why would a SL supporter want to drag the MP in over a boat that did not exist? Sounded a bit fishy to me. But then, I don't have a clue because I parse quotes .

Originally Posted by pm203

The Bear Island call-in was for a large speed boat and after a investigation was deemed a hoax by the MP. And, they had solid proof that it was a hoax. Looks like the Bear Islanders are now trying to control who idles by their island. Too bad it was a failure.

Hoax? Conspiracy? Sounds like someone needs to loosen his tin foil hat.

Originally Posted by KonaChick

I hope this has no truth to it. Who in their right mind would make up a story about a fictious GFBL boat speeding just for a hoax? If it's true it's deeply disappointing and saddens me. I hope it's not.

Don't worry Konachick. I called to Glendale and they had no idea what this was about. Never heard of even one such false alarm, never mind three. Said it never happened. As confused as me about the reason for such a tale. Confirming what I said before, they have a record of the source number of every call-in and if someone calls they will only send out a boat if they know who the caller is. If someone made a false report and they had "solid proof", they'd cite them. This is clearly a tale..or two...or three...for what purpose we will never know. Perhaps they are trying to gain sympathy for GFBL's, but then, why say it was a hydroplane? Perhaps they are trying to rally up dislike for the people on Bear Island, but then, why go after the road association?
Anyway, wasn't it a great day out there today? What a summer! Heading up the Bay for an ice cream after dinner...nice and slow.

[chipj29]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

Living 30 miles away, you've probably never had a boat awaken you in the middle of the night. But then we'll hear, "We get awakened by loud motorcycles"!

We get awakened by both loud motorcycles and loud boats.

You probably can't conceive that a boat anchor can strike your house at night; or, should your house be located within 120-feet of a lake's shoreline, be struck by the boat itself.

(Consider also, that the boat may have nobody in it!)

On the eve of a Labor Day Weekend—a weekend when editors will be printing the headlines—there was the expected increase in the number of boats on the lake.

Towards evening, it was reassuring to see that many were traveling at speeds much slower than the required 25-MPH.

Many appear to be discovering the safer and relaxed boating Winnipesaukee experience that decades of residents had enjoyed before excessive speeds became an issue.

I can conceive that a motorcycle or a car/truck/any vehicle could hit my house at any time. That was the risk I took when I bought my house. Same with you, whether it be your house in Florida or your house in NH.

There are laws on the books regarding loud cars/trucks/motorcycles etc. Do they make the drivers go slower? Probably not.

Again, Lake Winnipesaukee is owned by me, you and all the other residents of NH. One owns no more than another. Isn't that beautiful?

[Rinkerfam]

I for one do not feel the least bit "safer" since the speed limit has taken hold. Hazelnut hit it right on the head. The lake is overrun with captain b-heads. I have been boating on Winnipesaukee for some 25 years ( all of them piloting family runabouts that are far from GFBL's). I have never been in an uncomfortable situation that derived from a boat traveling at a high rate of speed. All of my safety concerns involve other vessels coming too close to me and or not understanding who has the right of way in a given situation. Every time out so far this season I have had to slow down or alter course all the while being the stand on vessel. This is so frustrating. I have even witnessed boats passing between myself and Marine Patrol at a distance far less than 150' from both myself and the MP boat (and yes I dropped to idle speed). As far as Sunset On The Dock's perception of the lake being a kinder gentler place this year, I think the weather and the economy have far more to do with it than any speed limit.

Originally Posted by Rinkerfam

I for one do not feel the least bit "safer" since the speed limit has taken hold....

As Howie Carr would say "Of course you don't". And of course the rest of your GFBL buddies on this forum don't. And smokers are united in the belief that the laws against smoking in restaurants have not done a thing to make dining more enjoyable. And junkies are united in the belief that drug laws have been useless. And illegal aliens are united in the belief that border security is a waste of time. If we let the offenders decide which laws to keep on the books, we'd have lawless bedlam. That's why we don't let prisoners vote.
But the bottom line is that the people who fought so hard for this law are very happy with it and want it kept and the cowboys it was aimed to slow down are very unhappy with it...and that says it all. The more you guys complain about the law, the more you show how effective it has been. If this law had done nothing, then you guys would be out buzzing around the lake instead of spending your days on this forum complaining about it.

[BroadHopper]

Originally Posted by elchase

That's why we don't let prisoners vote.

Wrong again buddy! Prisoners are allowed to vote by sending in an absentee ballot to their home town. Why do you make up all these lies....

[KonaChick]

I don't understand how complaining or trying to change a law makes it "effective". That does not compute....

[sunset on the dock]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

Wrong again buddy! Prisoners are allowed to vote by sending in an absentee ballot to their home town. Why do you make up all these lies....

I didn't think prisoners could vote either. Maybe there are some states with some exceptions but here is some info from Michigan. I would hardly describe el's comment as "making up lies". How do you know so much about prisoners voting rights?

Here's the story from Michigan:


Can someone convicted of a felony register and vote? Can a person confined in jail or prison register and vote?
MCL 168.492a reads: "A person confined in a jail, who is otherwise a qualified elector, prior to trial or sentence may, upon request, register under section 504. The person shall be deemed a resident of the city, township, and address at which he resided before confinement. A person while confined in a jail after being convicted and sentenced shall not be eligible to register."

MCL 168.758b reads: "A person who, in a court of this or another state or in a federal court, has been legally convicted and sentenced for a crime for which the penalty imposed is confinement in jail or prison shall not vote, offer to vote, attempt to vote, or be permitted to vote at an election while confined."

Given the above restrictions, a Michigan resident confined in jail or prison that is awaiting arraignment or trial is eligible to register and vote. A Michigan resident who is serving a sentence in jail or prison after conviction cannot register or vote during his or her period of confinement. After a Michigan resident who is serving a sentence in jail or prison is released, he or she is free to participate in elections without restriction.



SHAME ON YOU EL...YOU SHOULD HAVE QUALIFIED YOUR COMMENT. PRISONERS NOT YET CONVICTED CAN VOTE ABSENTEE. Oh brother. Hey el, didn't one of your posts say something to the effect that if you said August occurred in summer then people on this forum would find a way to disagree with you?

[Resident 2B]

Originally Posted by sunset on the dock

I didn't think prisoners could vote either. Maybe there are some states with some exceptions but here is some info from Michigan. I would hardly describe el's comment as "making up lies". How do you know so much about prisoners voting rights?

Here's the story from Michigan:


Can someone convicted of a felony register and vote? Can a person confined in jail or prison register and vote?
MCL 168.492a reads: "A person confined in a jail, who is otherwise a qualified elector, prior to trial or sentence may, upon request, register under section 504. The person shall be deemed a resident of the city, township, and address at which he resided before confinement. A person while confined in a jail after being convicted and sentenced shall not be eligible to register."

MCL 168.758b reads: "A person who, in a court of this or another state or in a federal court, has been legally convicted and sentenced for a crime for which the penalty imposed is confinement in jail or prison shall not vote, offer to vote, attempt to vote, or be permitted to vote at an election while confined."

Given the above restrictions, a Michigan resident confined in jail or prison that is awaiting arraignment or trial is eligible to register and vote. A Michigan resident who is serving a sentence in jail or prison after conviction cannot register or vote during his or her period of confinement. After a Michigan resident who is serving a sentence in jail or prison is released, he or she is free to participate in elections without restriction.



SHAME ON YOU EL...YOU SHOULD HAVE QUALIFIED YOUR COMMENT. PRISONERS NOT YET CONVICTED CAN VOTE ABSENTEE. Oh brother. Hey el, didn't one of your posts say something to the effect that if you said August occurred in summer then people on this forum would find a way to disagree with you?

What do Michigan laws have to do with New Hampshire or Lake Winnipesaukee and why is this post posted on the Lake Winnipesaukee web site?

I thought this site was for things that pertain to Lake Winnipesaukee and the New Hampshire lakes region. If there is a site for Lake Michigan, LakeMichigan.com, perhaps you can post this stuff there. It does not belong here. Please read the rules.

R2B

[sunset on the dock]

Originally Posted by Resident 2B

What do Michigan laws have to do with New Hampshire or Lake Winnipesaukee and why is this post posted on the Lake Winnipesaukee web site?

I thought this site was for things that pertain to Lake Winnipesaukee and the New Hampshire lakes region. If there is a site for Lake Michigan, LakeMichigan.com, perhaps you can post this stuff there. It does not belong here. Please read the rules.

R2B

How foolish of me...how could anything happening beyond our great state's borders have any relevance to the Granite State. My bad. I promise never again to bring up anything having to do with any state other than NH, especially New York (Lake George) and Maine (Long Lake, I have "NO PATIENCE" for that lake)!

[Rinkerfam]

elchase, did you pay attention to the content of my post? I do not operate a GFBL. My boat barely exceeds the 45mph daytime limit. I have three young children(9,6 &2). I have no hidden agenda here regarding GFBL's. My stand on the speed limit debate from day one has been that stronger (any actually) enforcement of the 150' rule and the right of way rules would make for a safer lake. Adding another law to the books when perfectly serviceable laws are left largely unenforced makes no sense to me. Unnecessary legislation is as wasteful as unnecessary litigation as far as I'm concerned.

[trfour]

Originally Posted by Rinkerfam

elchase, did you pay attention to the content of my post? I do not operate a GFBL. My boat barely exceeds the 45mph daytime limit. I have three young children(9,6 &2). I have no hidden agenda here regarding GFBL's. My stand on the speed limit debate from day one has been that stronger (any actually) enforcement of the 150' rule and the right of way rules would make for a safer lake. Adding another law to the books when perfectly serviceable laws are left largely unenforced makes no sense to me. Unnecessary legislation is as wasteful as unnecessary litigation as far as I'm concerned.

Absolutely correct, Rinkerfam! Unfortunately getting everyone on the same page is the difficult part.... I guess common sense is allocated instead of nourished, and some just don't have a clue.

[VitaBene]

Originally Posted by Rinkerfam

elchase, did you pay attention to the content of my post? I do not operate a GFBL. My boat barely exceeds the 45mph daytime limit. I have three young children(9,6 &2). I have no hidden agenda here regarding GFBL's. My stand on the speed limit debate from day one has been that stronger (any actually) enforcement of the 150' rule and the right of way rules would make for a safer lake. Adding another law to the books when perfectly serviceable laws are left largely unenforced makes no sense to me. Unnecessary legislation is as wasteful as unnecessary litigation as far as I'm concerned.

Rinker,

That is what most of us have been saying to El all along but for some reason it is much easier for argument's sake to assume everyone who opposes a SL does so because we want to go faster than 45 (or 50 because the MP would have to give you that for wiggle room) instead of better enforcing the current laws you note.

[BroadHopper]

Originally Posted by VitaBene

Rinker,

That is what most of us have been saying to El all along but for some reason it is much easier for argument's sake to assume everyone who opposes a SL does so because we want to go faster than 45 (or 50 because the MP would have to give you that for wiggle room) instead of better enforcing the current laws you note.

I agree with the majority of you. Just because I have a Formula, the SL proponents think it is a GFBL. The silent thunder exhaust is one of the quietest in the industry. I only have a small block in a big heavy boat. I can just baely go fast enough to enjoy my sport of bare foot skiing.

It is well known that the next target is large cruisers. The proponents have been talking about that during the public hearings.

The biggest problem is the boneheads. Instead of addressing the problem they are compounding it with more laws. The SL law is expensive. Laser guns had to be bought and MPO's have to be extensively trained. Along with the budget cut, I can see why there is less patrolling on our waters. It is Bonehead territory! I don't feel safe at all this year. Labor day weekend is a disaster waiting to happen. I'm surprised that it was safe.

The SL law has merit. The reasonable and prudent clause as well as attaching the offense to the driver's license are reasonable additions.

[OCDACTIVE]

Hey Vita,

Totally off topic, but just wondering what is the:

GSBQ Bowrider Club ?

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

Hey Vita,

Totally off topic, but just wondering what is the:

GSBQ Bowrider Club ?

Let me guess.


GO SLOW BE QUIET

[VitaBene]

Originally Posted by VtSteve

Let me guess.


GO SLOW BE QUIET

Steve nailed it! There is no real club but I thought it would help show that while there are some fast boats on the forum, the majority are not so fast family bowriders. Though I guess in the interest of full disclosure, I will have to admit that I hit my all time high of 47 Saturday.

[Lakegeezer]

Originally Posted by elchase

But the bottom line is that the people who fought so hard for this law are very happy with it and want it kept and the cowboys it was aimed to slow down are very unhappy with it...and that says it all.

That does not say it all. Boaters with slower boats are also unhappy at the class warfare strike in the false name of safety.

[Airwaves]

Originally posted by APS

At exactly 10:20, on this eve of Labor Day Weekend, I was awakened by a loud, fast boat obviously exceeding the speed limit. A minute later, somehow unhappy with the existing "free expression of his ideas", he switched on his selective exhaust!

At 11:47, a deep rumble indicates that the offender is now departing, heading in the direction of Cow Island at about 25-MPH.

So the boat's exhaust woke you up and you could tell from the sound that he was "obviously exceeding the speed limit"?

He switched his exhaust to quiet and you're complaining? I don't have a boat with this kind of exhaust but I was under the impression that a switchable exhaust is not lawful in NH, so by making his boat quiet, possibly so he wouldn't disturb you, he broke the law.

At 11:47 your superhuman hearing once again came into play and you determined he was heading toward Cow Island, with his loud exhaust, at 25 miles an hour?

We don't need radar...we have APS!!!!

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

Wrong again buddy! Prisoners are allowed to vote by sending in an absentee ballot to their home town. Why do you make up all these lies....

Wrong again buddy! http://www.idebate.org/debatabase/to...hp?topicID=515 "Only two US states (Maine and Vermont) permit prisoners to vote, although Utah and Massachusetts also did so until 1998 and 2000 respectively." While you guys are so quick to call everyone else a liar, you have no trouble just throwing anything out as fact and have been able to get away with it because you had chased all those who disagreed with you away. Start doing your homework, like I do, before you make things up.

Originally Posted by hazelnut

...little to no regard for facts. It's getting a tad embarrassing.

I agree.

Originally Posted by Kracken

Just the facts sir.

Exactly. Could not have said it better. Thanks.

Originally Posted by KonaChick

I don't understand how complaining or trying to change a law makes it "effective". That does not compute....

It's sad that you can't understand this. If a drunk approached you and complained that he thought the DUI laws weren't doing anything and should be repealed to purge the statutes of a meaningless law, would you believe him? Would you be more appreciative of our DUI laws or less? If a guy in a big speedboat approached you and said "we don't need a speed limit...trust me, I'll behave. All I really care about is purging our statutes of meaningless laws" would you believe him? Want to by some magic beans?

Originally Posted by Lakegeezer

Boaters with slower boats are also unhappy at the class warfare strike in the false name of safety.

You mean the kayakers and camp directors look down on the people in the Thundercult with their $200000 boats? This one went way over my head. Are people with minivans that believe in highway speed limits just practicing class warfare? This one is a real stretch. This is better than the "discrimination against a certain class of boater" theory.

Had a wonderful afternoon out there. There is nothing better to a sailor than a late summer westerly breeze across the Broads. I probably approached the speed limit myself a few times. Saw numerous patrol boats. Saw hundreds of boaters enjoying the lake. But never saw a single boat that looked to be breaking the SL law. What a great way to close out the best summer in years.

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by elchase

You mean the kayakers and camp directors look down on the people in the Thundercult with their $200000 boats?

are you really trying to make this personal? I may not agree with your posts but I have not made any personal attacks. I will gather that this was just a razzing and let it pass. Otherwise I would suggest that you read the forum rules on keeping on topic.

[Rattlesnake Guy]

Originally Posted by elchase

As Howie Carr would say "Of course you don't". And of course the rest of your GFBL buddies on this forum don't. And smokers are united in the belief that the laws against smoking in restaurants have not done a thing to make dining more enjoyable. And junkies are united in the belief that drug laws have been useless. And illegal aliens are united in the belief that border security is a waste of time. If we let the offenders decide which laws to keep on the books, we'd have lawless bedlam. That's why we don't let prisoners vote.
But the bottom line is that the people who fought so hard for this law are very happy with it and want it kept and the cowboys it was aimed to slow down are very unhappy with it...and that says it all. The more you guys complain about the law, the more you show how effective it has been. If this law had done nothing, then you guys would be out buzzing around the lake instead of spending your days on this forum complaining about it.

Beneath words and logic are emotional connections that largely direct how we use our words and logic.
Jane Roberts

[chipj29]

Since there are people saying that there are fewer GFBLs on the lake, people are saying the lake is safer. It is pretty obvious what the goal of the speed limit was.

Next will be the cruisers.

After that will be PWCs.

What can they ban next?

[Resident 2B]

Originally Posted by chipj29

Since there are people saying that there are fewer GFBLs on the lake, people are saying the lake is safer. It is pretty obvious what the goal of the speed limit was.

Next will be the cruisers.

After that will be PWCs.

What can they ban next?

Chip and all others,

It has been very clear to me for two years now that the pro speed limit minority have no real interest in safe boating. Their only objective is to restrict certain boats from the lake. They are all over GFBL boats now. If they win this battle, the PWC or cruisers will definately be next.

For the record, I have a bow rider that tops out at 47 MPH, but I have never gone over 40 MPH on Winnipesaukee. So, although I am completely opposed to the speed limit, I am not a GFBL boater. I respect the rights of all safe boaters and I respect freedom. Freedom is what this country was built on!

The Speed Limit push was not at all about safe boating. The Speed Limit proponents have a hidden agenda to remove certain type water craft from the lake. I used to go the the WinnFabs meetings when I was trying to decide were I was on this issue. It became very clear to me that their real objective was not at all about boating education and boating safety, but it was all about removing certain boats from the lake. Reading their posts on this forum, that becomes very clear.

To me, the proponent's actions are extremely un-American and their agenda has fooled the law makers of a great state with the motto "Live Free or Die". This is so hard to believe, but that is what has happened.

We, as one family, have decide to sell our water-front place on the lake and move on if this law becomes permanent. We want to live where freedom rings! We choose not to live with people who's only purpose is to restrict the rights of those they do not like.

That is clearly what is happening here and this has to be stopped.

R2B

[sunset on the dock]

Originally Posted by Resident 2B

Freedom is what this country was built on!

I agree (though some who were forced to come to this country in chains in the holds of wooden sailing ships might not).

Originally Posted by Resident 2B

To me, the proponent's actions are extremely un-American and their agenda has fooled the law makers of a great state with the motto "Live Free or Die". This is so hard to believe, but that is what has happened.

I don't think I follow what is so "un-American" about people who get together to use the state's legislative process to stop a small group of people who have hijacked and otherwise monopolized the lake. Doesn't seem all that different from the process people would use to stop any other behavior where the public benefit is at stake, say like legislating against dogs doing their business in the town park.

Originally Posted by Resident 2B

We, as one family, have decide to sell our water-front place on the lake and move on if this law becomes permanent. We want to live where freedom rings! We choose not to live with people who's only purpose is to restrict the rights of those they do not like.

"Where freedom rings"? Sounds like your definition of freedom means being able to do whatever you want, whenever you want, regardless of other's rights. When you sell your water-front place, have you considered Somalia as a place that might meet your criteria?

Originally Posted by Resident 2B

We, as one family, have decide to sell our water-front place on the lake and move on if this law becomes permanent.

This news elicits SEVEN Thank You's from your "friends"? Rather than try to enlighten you to the unreasonable extremity of your decision and try to convince you to reconsider, they are willing to let you jump on a grenade and are happy to sacrifice you for this noble cause with nothing but a "thank you for this useful post"? Good friends.
It's too bad though, if you really are one of those who boat safely, respect other boaters, and obey our boating laws (all of them), I wish you would reconsider. I would miss sharing the lake with you.

[NoRegrets]

Originally Posted by elchase

This news elicits six Thank You's from your "friends"? Rather than try to enlighten you to the unreasonable extremity of your decision and try to convince you to reconsider, they are willing to let you jump on a grenade and are happy to sacrifice you for this noble cause with nothing but a "thank you for this useful post"? Good friends.
It's too bad though, if you really are one of those who boat safely, respect other boaters, and obey our boating laws (all of them), I wish you would reconsider. I would miss sharing the lake with you.

I do not think the thanks were for the last statement alone! They were for the total note that was painted by the posting. I do not like the idea that it takes laws to run and govern the lives of everyone. This is not a right vs left political issue in my mind. This is about control and ownership. This thread was to get a count of people for or against the current law. I am against it. Not a personal swipe at others opinions.

You are reading way to much between the lines of a simple "Thanks" for this posting! It does show how easy it is to jump to conclusions though.

[chipj29]

Originally Posted by elchase

This news elicits six Thank You's from your "friends"? Rather than try to enlighten you to the unreasonable extremity of your decision and try to convince you to reconsider, they are willing to let you jump on a grenade and are happy to sacrifice you for this noble cause with nothing but a "thank you for this useful post"? Good friends.
It's too bad though, if you really are one of those who boat safely, respect other boaters, and obey our boating laws (all of them), I wish you would reconsider. I would miss sharing the lake with you.

Perhaps you are misconstruing what the "thank yous" were for. I doubt any of his "friends" are glad to see him leave Winni. Maybe you should read the rest of his post.

[Kracken]

Glad to see everyone had a peaceful Labor Day weekend. I was appalled by what I witnessed this weekend on the water.

No less than seven near misses (two hits), and when I say near misses I mean misses by less than 10 feet.

The highlights:

Boats going 40+ with passengers sitting on the swim platform drinking beer.

Children on boats without PFD.

PWC operators without PFD.

3 women sunbathing on a motor hatch while the boat was on plain. (Sorry no picture).

A cruiser swamped a fishing boat exiting a no-wake zone at less than 15 feet.

A bowrider pulling two tubes with 3 kids in each tube and only the operator in the boat.

Jon Boat fishing in a channel hit by Cigarette boat (impact at no wake, no injury)

2 boats in a NWZ channel less than 10 feet apart doing 35+ with a Marine patrol officer 25 feet away. The officer was checking for milfoil stickers on docked boats and completely ignored the channel race going on behind him. This is what happens when Marine Patrol are instructed to enforce trivial laws that merely increase revenue for the state instead of laws that actually save lives.

These events all happened in Maine. People have referred to Winnipesakee as the “wild wild west”. This is simply not true, check the facts NH is one of the safest states for boating. Better than checking the facts, simply go to another state and watch. Not only is the Marine Patrol far superior to Maine, the boaters are as well. If the events listed above happened on Winni, they would have certainly been stopped by the MP but also I believe many Winni boaters would voice their concerns and explain to these Capt Bonehead Extremes what they were doing wrong. Yes some of the explanations would just be a half peace sign.

I think we should all chip in and send Elchase, APS, Turtleboy and Sunset to Maine for a weekend. Maybe when they came back their fears and concerns would be put into perspective.

[NoBozo]

Originally Posted by Kracken

These events all happenedI think we should all chip in and send Elchase, APS, Turtleboy and Sunset to Maine for a weekend. Maybe when they came back their fears and concerns would be put into perspective.

I'm waiting for Those Guys ...to weigh in on the WolfeBoro Vintage Raceboat Regatta coming up. OMG. Gotta be Total Mortification. NB

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...&day=2009-9-16

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by elchase

This news elicits six Thank You's from your "friends"? Rather than try to enlighten you to the unreasonable extremity of your decision and try to convince you to reconsider, they are willing to let you jump on a grenade and are happy to sacrifice you for this noble cause with nothing but a "thank you for this useful post"? Good friends.
It's too bad though, if you really are one of those who boat safely, respect other boaters, and obey our boating laws (all of them), I wish you would reconsider. I would miss sharing the lake with you.

Make that SEVEN including me. Smart individuals can read the post and thank him for his candor and honesty with regard to the real agendas of the opposition. We don't need you to twist the reason for their Thank You's. Once again elchase strike again, bend, twist, spin. I'm surprised you didn't snip a small section to completely misrepresent the message. I guess there is still time though. You do more for "our side" with every post. Keep up the good work. As it is most of your fellow supporters have distanced themselves from you quite a bit. Hear that? Those are crickets.....

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by hazelnut

As it is most of your fellow supporters have distanced themselves from you quite a bit. Hear that? Those are crickets.....

well, could always get more screen names

Originally Posted by NoRegrets

You are reading way to much between the lines of a simple "Thanks" for this posting! It does show how easy it is to jump to conclusions though.

Originally Posted by chipj29

Perhaps you are misconstruing what the "thank yous" were for.

Originally Posted by hazelnut

Smart individuals can read the post and thank him for his candor and honesty

If my "friend" announced he was moving away because of a law that he said does not apply to him anyway and is not doing anything, I'd give it more that a one-touch "Thank you". Your good buddy announced he is selling his home and moving away, and you guys never even made an attempt to discourage him or told him you'd miss him. Good friends.

Originally Posted by Kracken

These events all happened in Maine.

No non-Winnipesaukee stuff. Read the rules.

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

well, could always get more screen names

No razzing. Read the rules.

Originally Posted by NoBozo

Originally Posted by hazelnut

... ...

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

No excessive use of Smilies. Read the rules.

Originally Posted by OCDACTIVE

well, could always get more screen names

How's that bomb shelter coming?

[BroadHopper]

On Winnipesaukee.com. I'm assuming maybe a quarter are active.

182 voted 'No speed limit'

67 voted '45 and 25'

My quess is the rest want some kind of speed limit but not 45/25.

This really make sense as there is no evidence that speed have to be limited to 45 or speed have to be limited to 25. I google for any backup to these numbers and fail to see any. Just because they use these numbers in other states does not mean it should apply in this state. Same to motorcycle helmets law and seat belt law.

[NoRegrets]

I have been reading the forum for a long time and have never seen anyone so capable in the art of goading people to get off topic. You are an expert at it elchase.

As I pointed out before I am against the speed limit. I am not sure where you let your perspectives come from but it not even close to talking about the speed law issue.

Please stop the carving of everyones posts and placing judgement on single words like "Thanks"!

Notice the lack of a smile.

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by elchase

If my "friend" announced he was moving away because of a law that he said does not apply to him anyway and is not doing anything, I'd give it more that a one-touch "Thank you". Your good buddy announced he is selling his home and moving away, and you guys never even made an attempt to discourage him or told him you'd miss him. Good friends.




How's that bomb shelter coming?

Sorry I don't know how to do multi post like EL.. Wow for someone who just started here you are very very good at it. It's amazing how much one can pick up from the sidelines....

but:

How do you know we aren't talking to him outside of the forum. Private messages are available. no need to speculate.


Bomb Shelter??? HUH???

[Kracken]

Please accept my sincere apologies for talking about another lake. I was completely unaware that the rules of this forum forbid references to waterways outside the New Hampshire boarder. I understand ignorance of the rules is not an excuse for breaking them and accept full responsibility for my actions. I should never use facts to try to compare and contrast when attempting to make a point. From this time forward I will just state my point of view without providing facts or examples. I guess this way of thinking may qualify me for a Czar position in the current administration.

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by Kracken

Please accept my sincere apologies for talking about another lake. I was completely unaware that the rules of this forum forbid references to waterways outside the New Hampshire boarder. I understand ignorance of the rules is not an excuse for breaking them and accept full responsibility for my actions. I should never use facts to try to compare and contrast when attempting to make a point. From this time forward I will just state my point of view without providing facts or examples. I guess this way of thinking may qualify me for a Czar position in the current administration.

you know what is ironic. when Sunset posted about michigan laws and someone asked that same question, sunset posted a similar response. back around post #90. I thought sunset was correct but I didn't see EL getting all upset when he did it... Guess the door only swings one way....

[BroadHopper]

Originally Posted by elchase

How's that bomb shelter coming?

Thought this forum is Winnipesaukee related?

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

Thought this forum is Winnipesaukee related?

Agreed... Again we should focus on the poll itself.

The numbers don't lie. I have counted up the people posting on this thread and you are really looking at a dozen people. That is a far cry from the overwhelming go fast crowd then the number of people who have voted..

#'s don't lie.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by pm203

The Bear Island call-in was for a large speed boat and after a investigation was deemed a hoax by the MP. And, they had solid proof that it was a hoax. Looks like the Bear Islanders are now trying to control who idles by their island. Too bad it was a failure.

Why would someone need to make up a story about high speed boats going past Bear Island????

Boats go through the Bear Island NWZ at high speed EVERY DAY and EVERY NIGHT. If I called the Marine Patrol every time this happened I would be on the phone several times a day.

OK, this is only about 1% of the boats that go through the NWZ. But if you think this is not happening then you do not have a clue!

Funny thing, while I was typing this I just watched two PWCs go though full speed.