What Speed Limit ????????

brk-lnt · 10-28-2009, 07:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elchase

This is a great point. But when we have a defined limit, there is no need for interpretation. And when a violator flaunts the law, he can be convicted.

There is still need for interpretation if someone did not witness the event and capture some sort of data to prove how fast the boat was going.

In some cases, where there is structural damage and other things to reconstruct the data from, you may stand some chance of getting a conviction based on a speed factor.

In the case of this accident, you would be very hard pressed to ever prove speed conclusively enough to get a conviction.

10-28-2009, 07:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brk-lnt

There is still need for interpretation if someone did not witness the event and capture some sort of data to prove how fast the boat was going.

Of course. But this is true for any crime. If you can't prove how fast a car was going, you can't convict the driver of speeding. If you can't prove a murderer murdered someone, you can't convict him of murder. But at least when you have the law and you can prove the offense, you can convict. One thing for sure; if you don't have the law you can't convict even when you can prove the offense.
Besides, most Americans are law abiding and will respect a law simply because it tells them what behavior society has deemed appropriate.

A 17 year old girl was killed in this high speed crash into a jetty; http://www.tampabay.com/news/publics...rutiny/1042107

brk-lnt · 10-28-2009, 07:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elchase

Of course. But this is true for any crime. If you can't prove how fast a car was going, you can't convict the driver of speeding. If you can't prove a murderer murdered someone, you can't convict him of murder. But at least when you have the law and you can prove the offense, you can convict. One thing for sure; if you don't have the law you can't convict even when you can prove the offense.
Besides, most Americans are law abiding and will respect a law simply because it tells them what behavior society has deemed appropriate.

A 17 year old girl was killed in this high speed crash into a jetty; http://www.tampabay.com/news/publics...rutiny/1042107

Yet in most of these cases, laws already exist for operation under influence of alcohol (most common contributing factor by far), negligent operation, homicide/manslaughter, etc. How many laws do you think are necessary and practical?

The link you reference above also points out alcohol as a contributing factor. That and the fact that the jetty itself has been the centerpoint of many night time accidents (likely due to the fact that it is unlit).

Saying that a speed limit here would have made any difference is a tough sell. You might as well draw the conclusion that boats cause accidents, and so therefore boats should be outlawed.

DEJ · 10-28-2009, 08:03 PM

Perhaps we should require deer to have ezpass also!!!

10-28-2009, 08:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brk-lnt

Yet in most of these cases, laws already exist ....
The link you reference above also points out alcohol as a contributing factor.

And it points out that speed was also a contributing factor. Darkness, weather, and waves are often contributors too, but we can't control those. What we can try our best to control is the human factors; like speed and alcohol. By the logic you are apparently using, should we not have laws against DUI just because we still have a few who break them? If we did not have those laws, then those who are caught breaking them can't be convicted at all. If this guy was just below the limit, he might have walked. If he had fled the seen and waited two days until his blood cleared to turn himself in, he might have walked. A speed limit might not always prevent the accident or be enforceable in every case, but it is another deterrent and can often be another tool for the prosecutors.
If there were no offenders we would not need any laws at all...but unfortunately, and as this forum shows so often, there is always going to be a handful of scofflaws. We saw this summer and last on Winnipesaukee that when the MP is measuring speeds, almost all boaters keep their speeds reasonable...and that will always save lives.

hazelnut · 10-28-2009, 08:15 PM

el,

While I applaud your efforts to prove your point (borderline flooding aside)most of the articles do lack hard numbers. "High Rate of speed" "Too Fast" "High Speed" could mean 25, 45, 55, 105, who knows. Also, percentage wise this probably wouldn't even register on any scale. .00000004% or something in terms of an issue of safety. Also you are digging and I mean digging. Look at the dates on these articles. This data hardly supports a law. If you want I'll cull the data for you and make a graph but we're looking at tiny tiny numbers here. Never mind the fact that there is nothing even close to being local. So while you keep digging keep in mind that all you are doing is furthering the stereotypical SL supporters Modus operandi and that is fear mongering. All these flooded posts amount to is a smattering of events scattered throughout several years globally. I mean you're even citing Australia here. I understand what you are trying to prove here but it falls short of any "proof" that Lake Winnipesaukee itself needs a speed limit. Boating can be dangerous, period end of sentence. The only way to guarantee the prevention of death by water/boating is to stay on the shore. So please go ahead on your fear campaign while the rest of us actually figure out how to make our lake safer.

I'll say it again as I've said it a thousand times. I don't own a GFBL boat I have no intentions of EVER EVER EVER buying one. I swear to god. I just want legislation that works. Not a feel good useless law that occupies time and resources that target a percentage of boaters on the lake that I feel are safe drivers already. I wish you could actually believe and understand that I gain or lose nothing personally from this law. I continued to boat as I normally boated every year as I have for 25+ years on this lake. Only I saw NO DIFFERENCE this year and it pissed me off. I was continually aggravated by discourteous inexperienced boaters putting themselves and my family in danger. None of these people were breaking any Speed Limit.

I just feel that "your side" is setting safety on the lake back decades all under the guise of ridding the lake of what your group considers undesirables. It's a dangerous gamble to take. You pretend that the lake got safer and ignore the real fact that it hasn't. So while I am happy for you that YOU are happy with your new law, I think it is unfortunate that the real issues of safety on the lake will go on ignored while you celebrate. If you actually cared about safety on the lake you would want to address the actual problems on the lake.

Thanks
H

OCDACTIVE · 10-28-2009, 08:19 PM

I don't know what he's been saying but if it's the same old rehtoric as usual, GREAT response Hazelnut.. See you next summer on the water!

BroadHopper · 10-28-2009, 08:23 PM

Ever since I put el on the ignore list, I often wonder what he's been up to.

OCDACTIVE · 10-28-2009, 08:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

Ever since I put el on the ignore list, I often wonder what he's been up to.

Tell me about it.... it just shows you one bad apple can ruin the bunch.. There used to be some good productive conversations on both sides of the isle... Bear Islander was one of the leading contributers... But I haven't heard from them in so long. Even sunset had some good comments. While I may not have agreed with their views they did it in a very productive manner.. Hopefully over time they will come back.

DEJ · 10-28-2009, 08:36 PM

Same here. At times I almost want to take him off my ignore list but I think it is better left this way.

OCDACTIVE · 10-28-2009, 08:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DEJ

Same here. At times I almost want to take him off my ignore list but I think it is better left this way.

It's too bad it doesn't eliminate all posts like the ones people quote.. but there haven't been too many of those either so no worries.

OCDACTIVE · 10-28-2009, 08:45 PM

just a matter of time before a new name appears.. LMAO!

ApS · 11-04-2009, 07:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hazelnut

"...So please go ahead on your fear campaign while the rest of us actually figure out how to make our lake safer..."

Opponents are "figuring out" Winnipesaukee safety?

Take a look at what has appeared on the Internet, and how "funny" a 100-MPH speed is to ONE OF YOUR OWN:

Quote:

"...I was anchored just east of Welch Isl. and I had a 40' cat run off my bow about 50' out at a solid 100! I thought my windshield was toast just from the noise...I think I was a bit too close to the course, but it was soooooo worth it.

A few of my buddies were getting ready to jump overboard out of fear...
too funny...!

hazelnut · 11-04-2009, 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

Opponents are "figuring out" Winnipesaukee safety?

Take a look at what has appeared on the Internet, and how "funny" a 100-MPH speed is to ONE OF YOUR OWN:

One of who's own? My own? Where do you draw the connection?

APS your only purpose in life is to rid one sector of the boating population you consider undesireable. Don't even pretend you give a rats behind about safety.

DoTheMath · 11-04-2009, 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

Opponents are "figuring out" Winnipesaukee safety?

Take a look at what has appeared on the Internet, and how "funny" a 100-MPH speed is to ONE OF YOUR OWN:

"...I was anchored just east of Welch Isl. and I had a 40' cat run off my bow about 50' out at a solid 100! I thought my windshield was toast just from the noise...I think I was a bit too close to the course, but it was soooooo worth it.

A few of my buddies were getting ready to jump overboard out of fear...
too funny...!

Funny thing here APS - do you know what this quote was referring to!? I DO! It was back when we had the offshore races up here for a short stretch - once again, pulling quotes out of context to drive your agenda. That was MY boat, AND we were just inside the outer edge of the buoy-line of the course, where technically we shouldn't have been AND it was one of the race boats that was approaching AND that comment was made in-jest. But hey, you keep manipulating quotes and deliver your propaganda to the masses in hopes someone will care and listen.

Nice try - keep digging!

DEJ · 11-04-2009, 03:00 PM

He is a great story teller, deserves an Emmy IMO.

DoTheMath · 11-04-2009, 03:02 PM

Why is everyone getting so nasty over in this thread - it is / was very civil in the other threads... Everyone take a step back, take a series of deep breaths and relax. We were making good progress toward a middle-ground of sorts, let's not blow it with name calling and insults. Just stick to the facts, stand your ground and make your point(s) and work toward a solution that will appease (most) everyone. Picking on spelling or grammatical errors, professions, etc... isn't doing anyone any good - and it is causing a loss of focus on the points-at-hand.

I tell my wife all the time, life is short - we only go this way once - when we are gone, we're gone for a loooooong time!

So make the most of your time here, live life to the fullest and if you don't like onions on your burger, order it without!

DoTheMath · 11-04-2009, 03:08 PM

How about we try this as a little exercise?

Let's all post our ages - seriously - as a reminder of just how old we are and how old we "should" act.

I'll start - I just turned 41.

Kracken · 11-04-2009, 03:11 PM

You have been scouring the web to give the members of Winnipesaukee.com the most accurate and relevant articles related to dangers of high speed boating. I couldn’t help but notice that on post #177 your article is from MSNBC.

You have made it clear what side of the aisle you are on.

My question is:

What would you be doing even reading an article from MSNBC, and why would you believe it was not fictional?

gtagrip · 11-04-2009, 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DoTheMath

How about we try this as a little exercise?

Let's all post our ages - seriously - as a reminder of just how old we are and how old we "should" act.

I'll start - I just turned 41.

Just turned 43.

10-28-2009, 08:19 PM	#7
OCDACTIVE Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Fort Myers FL / Moultonboro Posts: 1,045 Thanks: 444 Thanked 574 Times in 178 Posts	I don't know what he's been saying but if it's the same old rehtoric as usual, GREAT response Hazelnut.. See you next summer on the water! __________________ Have you had your Vessel Inspected Yet?

10-28-2009, 08:23 PM	#8
BroadHopper Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Laconia NH Posts: 5,587 Thanks: 3,228 Thanked 1,107 Times in 797 Posts	Ditto. Ever since I put el on the ignore list, I often wonder what he's been up to. __________________ Someday may never be an actual day.

10-28-2009, 08:45 PM	#12
OCDACTIVE Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Fort Myers FL / Moultonboro Posts: 1,045 Thanks: 444 Thanked 574 Times in 178 Posts	just a matter of time before a new name appears.. LMAO! __________________ Have you had your Vessel Inspected Yet?

11-04-2009, 03:08 PM	#18
DoTheMath Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: MA / Moultonborough Posts: 146 Thanks: 46 Thanked 43 Times in 18 Posts	Another idea... How about we try this as a little exercise? Let's all post our ages - seriously - as a reminder of just how old we are and how old we "should" act. I'll start - I just turned 41.

11-04-2009, 03:11 PM	#19
Kracken Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Alton Posts: 223 Thanks: 46 Thanked 130 Times in 50 Posts	A question for Mr. Chase. You have been scouring the web to give the members of Winnipesaukee.com the most accurate and relevant articles related to dangers of high speed boating. I couldn’t help but notice that on post #177 your article is from MSNBC. You have made it clear what side of the aisle you are on. My question is: What would you be doing even reading an article from MSNBC, and why would you believe it was not fictional?

10-28-2009, 08:03 PM	#4
DEJ Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 554 Thanks: 528 Thanked 316 Times in 156 Posts	Perhaps we should require deer to have ezpass also!!!

10-28-2009, 08:15 PM	#6
hazelnut Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 1,348 Blog Entries: 3 Thanks: 508 Thanked 462 Times in 162 Posts	el, While I applaud your efforts to prove your point (borderline flooding aside)most of the articles do lack hard numbers. "High Rate of speed" "Too Fast" "High Speed" could mean 25, 45, 55, 105, who knows. Also, percentage wise this probably wouldn't even register on any scale. .00000004% or something in terms of an issue of safety. Also you are digging and I mean digging. Look at the dates on these articles. This data hardly supports a law. If you want I'll cull the data for you and make a graph but we're looking at tiny tiny numbers here. Never mind the fact that there is nothing even close to being local. So while you keep digging keep in mind that all you are doing is furthering the stereotypical SL supporters Modus operandi and that is fear mongering. All these flooded posts amount to is a smattering of events scattered throughout several years globally. I mean you're even citing Australia here. I understand what you are trying to prove here but it falls short of any "proof" that Lake Winnipesaukee itself needs a speed limit. Boating can be dangerous, period end of sentence. The only way to guarantee the prevention of death by water/boating is to stay on the shore. So please go ahead on your fear campaign while the rest of us actually figure out how to make our lake safer. I'll say it again as I've said it a thousand times. I don't own a GFBL boat I have no intentions of EVER EVER EVER buying one. I swear to god. I just want legislation that works. Not a feel good useless law that occupies time and resources that target a percentage of boaters on the lake that I feel are safe drivers already. I wish you could actually believe and understand that I gain or lose nothing personally from this law. I continued to boat as I normally boated every year as I have for 25+ years on this lake. Only I saw NO DIFFERENCE this year and it pissed me off. I was continually aggravated by discourteous inexperienced boaters putting themselves and my family in danger. None of these people were breaking any Speed Limit. I just feel that "your side" is setting safety on the lake back decades all under the guise of ridding the lake of what your group considers undesirables. It's a dangerous gamble to take. You pretend that the lake got safer and ignore the real fact that it hasn't. So while I am happy for you that YOU are happy with your new law, I think it is unfortunate that the real issues of safety on the lake will go on ignored while you celebrate. If you actually cared about safety on the lake you would want to address the actual problems on the lake. Thanks H

The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to hazelnut For This Useful Post:
BroadHopper (10-28-2009), OCDACTIVE (10-28-2009), Resident 2B (10-28-2009), VtSteve (10-28-2009)

10-28-2009, 08:36 PM	#10
DEJ Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 554 Thanks: 528 Thanked 316 Times in 156 Posts	Same here. At times I almost want to take him off my ignore list but I think it is better left this way.

11-04-2009, 03:00 PM	#16
DEJ Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 554 Thanks: 528 Thanked 316 Times in 156 Posts	He is a great story teller, deserves an Emmy IMO.

11-04-2009, 03:02 PM	#17
DoTheMath Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: MA / Moultonborough Posts: 146 Thanks: 46 Thanked 43 Times in 18 Posts	Btw... Why is everyone getting so nasty over in this thread - it is / was very civil in the other threads... Everyone take a step back, take a series of deep breaths and relax. We were making good progress toward a middle-ground of sorts, let's not blow it with name calling and insults. Just stick to the facts, stand your ground and make your point(s) and work toward a solution that will appease (most) everyone. Picking on spelling or grammatical errors, professions, etc... isn't doing anyone any good - and it is causing a loss of focus on the points-at-hand. I tell my wife all the time, life is short - we only go this way once - when we are gone, we're gone for a loooooong time! So make the most of your time here, live life to the fullest and if you don't like onions on your burger, order it without! Last edited by DoTheMath; 11-04-2009 at 03:44 PM. Reason: I misspelled "your" as "you" forgot the "r" - lol. :o)

The Following User Says Thank You to DoTheMath For This Useful Post:
hazelnut (11-04-2009)