Remember to vote November 2

[ApS]

Article at the Concord Monitor:

"The thousands of people who signed petitions, testified at legislative hearings and worked in support of the permanent speed limits for Lake Winnipesaukee - including more than 300 businesses and an overwhelming number of politicians from both parties - are appalled at the candidates who have aligned themselves with a flash-in-the-pan group whose ultimate goal is to repeal or drastically corrupt the 45/30 mph speed limits for boats on the big lake.

These candidates include John Stephen for governor, Jim Forsythe for state Senate, John Hikel for the state House and many others who haven't figured out that on the big lake with over 10,000 boats, swimmers, sailboarders, water-skiers, campers and photographers, controlling speed for safety purposes is as important on the water as it is on our roads and highways.

After two years of relative civility, common sense, courtesy and safety the large majority of folks really enjoyed their time on Winnipesaukee due to the speed limits being in place.

Please vote Tuesday for the candidates who understand the need for safety and peace of mind for the great number of people who enjoy Lake Winnipesaukee. Remember some simple math: At 60 mph you are traveling 88 feet per second; at 100 mph you are traveling almost 147 feet per second. Who needs to go that fast to have fun while endangering everyone in near proximity?"

http://www.concordmonitor.com/articl...-into-election

SBONH-NHRBA has picked up that same cause—a flash-in-the-pan group—in case nobody was paying attention.

No Governor could ignore NHRBA when it showed its true colors to the New Hampshire people.

If I'm typing too fast for Opponents, the SL bill would have been signed by any Governor.

How could that be made more clear?

[chipj29]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

Article at the Concord Monitor:



http://www.concordmonitor.com/articl...-into-election

SBONH-NHRBA has picked up that same cause—a flash-in-the-pan group—in case nobody was paying attention.

No Governor could ignore NHRBA when it showed its true colors to the New Hampshire people.

If I'm typing too fast for Opponents, the SL bill would have been signed by any Governor.

How could that be made more clear?

Two FACTS for you to consider:
1. The link that you posted is not an article. It is a letter to the editor. Hence, it is one persons opinion. Yes, I believe there is a big difference.
2. SBONH does NOT equal NHRBA. Sure some SBONH members might have been members of NHRBA. But it is a completely different leadership group from what I understand.

What makes you think the SL bill would have been signed by any governor? Can you back up that claim?

[ApS]

Originally Posted by chipj29

2. SBONH does NOT equal NHRBA. Sure some SBONH members might have been members of NHRBA. But it is a completely different leadership group from what I understand.

1) Well, that is very interesting: it's previously been posted that only one SBONH member has been shared with Erica's-own NHRBA.

Fosters.com writes this excerpt:

Ric Perreault- VP of the NHRBA and Dick Hickok ([NHRBA] Board of Directors).

http://www.fosters.com/apps/pbcs.dll...69/0/citnews02

Are those two among the missing?

2) In addition, below are items on NHRBA's own mission-statement from the website GraniteGrok.

3) In your consideration of the Erica's hugely-discredited NHRBA, how do these "talking points" differ from those of the brand-new SBONH?

______________________________
______________________________

NHRBA:


1) Issues of current laws not being followed or enforced (headway speeds, 150 foot passage rule),

2) lack of statistics showing [speed] is a problem,

3) personal responsibility vs insistence on personal rights (kayaking in the middle of the Broads).

4) The role of mandatory boating education classes and certifications.

5) Freedom vs encroaching Nanny Statism.

6) Cost of enforcement.

7) Different boats are built for different speeds.

8) Class envy.

9) Would removal of performance boats cut down the chop experienced by small craft?

10) Noise problems

11) Accidents in the state wholly due to speed in the State (not alcohol related)? Zero.

______________________________


Other than jabbing sticks into quiet areas of New Hampshire law, I fail to see how SBONH has accomplished any mission separation from Erica's hugely-discredited NHRBA.

[chipj29]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

1) Well, that is very interesting: it's previously been posted that only one SBONH member has been shared with Erica's-own NHRBA.

Fosters.com writes this excerpt:
http://www.fosters.com/apps/pbcs.dll...69/0/citnews02

Are those two among the missing?

2) In addition, below are items on NHRBA's own mission-statement from the website GraniteGrok.

3) In your consideration of the Erica's hugely-discredited NHRBA, how do these "talking points" differ from those of the brand-new SBONH?

______________________________
______________________________

NHRBA:


1) Issues of current laws not being followed or enforced (headway speeds, 150 foot passage rule),

2) lack of statistics showing [speed] is a problem,

3) personal responsibility vs insistence on personal rights (kayaking in the middle of the Broads).

4) The role of mandatory boating education classes and certifications.

5) Freedom vs encroaching Nanny Statism.

6) Cost of enforcement.

7) Different boats are built for different speeds.

8) Class envy.

9) Would removal of performance boats cut down the chop experienced by small craft?

10) Noise problems

11) Accidents in the state wholly due to speed in the State (not alcohol related)? Zero.

______________________________


Other than jabbing sticks into quiet areas of New Hampshire law, I fail to see how SBONH has accomplished any mission separation from Erica's hugely-discredited NHRBA.

I honestly do not know the exact number of NHRBA members who are now members of SBONH. I would suggest you refer to SBONH for those numbers, if that info is availabile.

However, my main point was that SBONH gas NOTHING to do with NHRBA. And I stand behind that point.

[lawn psycho]

APS, you can repeat the same stuff over and over again in an effort to discredit people. However, even the Blizzard case which you want to highlight had nothing to do with 45/25.

As a speed limit advocate, I'd like to see you provide factual evidence that the law has any impact on safety. I'd like to see you admit that the request for a NWZ in the Barber's Pole area even after the SL passed, casts a shadow on the law's effectiveness.

If you can show me true data that supports the speed limit I would support it. If it's about specific people that you want to be the focus then you've lost objectivity.

Meanwhile you can beat the dead horse that is the Blizzard story. That's not what will play out in Concord.

Think big picture. There are many lakes in this country where there is no safe passage rule, no rafting restrictions, no speed limit, and yet there is no pandomonium and weekly loss of life.

[VtSteve]

And there are many states that have had a speed limit in place for many, many years, that continue to suffer fatalities and accidents.

Some of us move forward and do what we can to enjoy boating, and enjoy it safely. Others will stand on their soapbox until there's nobody left to preach to.

[LIforrelaxin]

Originally Posted by Acres per Second

[

Other than jabbing sticks into quiet areas of New Hampshire law, I fail to see how SBONH has accomplished any mission separation from Erica's hugely-discredited NHRBA.

So as one of the founding members of SBONH, and as in fact one of the two people that meet, to start laying the foundation for the group that would become SBONH, let me say this.... NHBRA or its officers have had nothing to do with SBONH, its development, and its stance on issues....

Now as for the talking points you also listed... Sure like NHBRA, SBONH is against the speed limit... the fact that the reasoning, and argument points are the same, is a sign, that both groups understand the issues, and facts that surround the debate.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by lawn psycho

However, even the Blizzard case which you want to highlight had nothing to do with 45/25.

When driving on New Hampshire's roads, I don't achieve the marked speed limit in darkness, rain, drizzle, snow, sleet, hail or fog.

Had there been a speed limit, could this aspect of safety have reduced injury, pain, property damage, and averted an unnecessary fatality?

Originally Posted by LIforrelaxin

So as one of the founding members of SBONH, and as in fact one of the two people that meet, to start laying the foundation for the group that would become SBONH, let me say this.... NHBRA or its officers have had nothing to do with SBONH, its development, and its stance on issues....

Your "insider knowledge" of these issues begs two questions,

1)

"Did you have any part in the NHRBA?"

2)

"Were your two references to NHBRA intentional?"

Originally Posted by LIforrelaxin

Now as for the talking points you also listed... Sure like NHBRA, SBONH is against the speed limit... the fact that the reasoning, and argument points are the same, is a sign, that both groups understand the issues, and facts that surround the debate.

Then you'd accept former NHRBA members or a former boat club President into your organization?

Is there a club requirement that those former members/Presidents must declare they had no connection to NHBRA?