![]() |
![]() |
|
Home | Forums | Gallery | Webcams | Blogs | YouTube Channel | Classifieds | Register | FAQ | Donate | Members List | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
![]() |
#1 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 213
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 1 Post
|
![]() Quote:
It's because the opposition knows its all over. Explain please why speed limits on lakes will bring about 1984, but speed limits on roads are ok? Or are you against them as well? |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 5,075
Thanks: 215
Thanked 903 Times in 509 Posts
|
![]()
That's not how I see it.Most fair media will show both sides of a hotly debated story.
__________________
SIKSUKR |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 283
Thanks: 3
Thanked 21 Times in 11 Posts
|
![]()
I don't have a dog in this fight, but it seems to me that if part of the objection to the pilot was the 8-year duration, change it to a one-year pilot, get the information and make an informed decision. Common sense?
My honest opinion is that speed limit or no, it's not going to change anything of significance on the water: I think most boats out there are doing less than 45 MPH, 45+ MPH on a weekend is typically hard to do comfortably with the boat density and associated chop, and then if you even have some boats doing 45+, what's the likelihood of an enforcement officer being in the right place all the time to stop it? My read of MP's data collection to date seems to support the idea that few boats are in excess of 45. And if the even smaller population of night-time boaters is comfortable going over 25, have at it! What are we really debating here? I just don't see this making any difference if it passes or not. I'm now on the sidelines with Paugus Bay Resident on this one ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 321
Thanks: 0
Thanked 9 Times in 3 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
Its not really about how fast a given boat goes. It IS about the direction the lake community is taking. I don't care if they hand out a lot of tickets or not. When the speed limit passes the lake will take a step back from the more speed, more horsepower, more noise direction we are in now. Most of the high speed boats will go somewhere else. I'll say that again so it can sink in. THEY WILL GO SOMEWHERE ELSE!!!! The lake will never go back to "Golden Pond". But it is a big step in that direction. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 213
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 1 Post
|
![]()
Ever since the speed limit debate began we have been told by the opposition that if it passes the lakes area will be economically devastated.
They claim that millions in high speed boat sales, service, hotel and restaurant revenues will be lost. Many people testified to this at the hearings two years ago. Now we are supposed to believe that nothing will be changed by a speed limit! The old argument was not working so they will try a new one. Boats that have moved another body of water can not be breaking the speed limit on Lake Winnipesaukee. That makes a speed limit self enforcing. They will not be speeding, because they will not be here! And the lake will be a little quieter, less hectic and less polluted. |
![]() |
Sponsored Links |
|
![]() |
#6 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Moultonborough, NH
Posts: 484
Thanks: 89
Thanked 138 Times in 72 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
Noise is an issue on some boats and going 45 mph or less isn't gonna change that. Sorry. Pollution is a result of the shear number of boats not the few that are going over 45 mph. One member in particular from Bear island has stated in the past that their boat often exceeds 45 mph(even 60). I wonder if they are aware its causing alot of pollution while doing that scary excessive speed? I just wish the MP would spend more time enforcing the 150' rule. Who cares how fast a boat is going in the wide open spaces anyway? Geesh. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,765
Thanks: 753
Thanked 1,462 Times in 1,018 Posts
|
![]()
You are so right, Paugus, don't quit, we need people like you to speak for our rights. I get very frustrated getting in these kinds of discussions too. And JRC, I agree, very well said. And Local Realtor, I totally agree, it is the 150 rule which is NOT enforced. Evenstar is too young to realize that laws are made for those who don't need them. The others won't follow them anyway. My bitch is why do so many people get involved in this who don't live on or even near the lake. Why does someone who lives in say, Manchester and never comes here, care? Many of these surveys include these people who have no clue.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#8 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: South Down Shores
Posts: 1,944
Thanks: 544
Thanked 570 Times in 335 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
A speed limit on the lake will only become a revenue stream to whomever ends up enforcing it. As for the speedboats going someplace else, I also doubt that. There are really no other nearby inland lakes large enough to make their use fun, and a lot of their owners seem to have a vested interest in Winnipesaukee (slips, condos, homes, etc). True enforcement may also become a bit of an issue, as speedometers are not a given on boats like they are on cars, so there will be a lot of "warnings" written. The sending units for many speedo's on boats are easily fouled, resulting in inaccurate readings. Enforcement of existing rules (150', etc) would probably provide more of a reduction in annoyance than yet another law. If current laws aren't enforced well, what is so special about a speed limit law that makes people think it will have any realistic impact? |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
Senior Member
|
![]()
Edit: I meant Island Lover in the title, But rereading it is appropriate for both parties!
The opposition is very much alive. Growing everyday, and its because of people like you and your ranting and raving. For that I thank you. Here's the deal folks for those of you that don't know. Round 1 Winnfabs lost HB 162 in the Senate. Round 2 Winnfabs invokes their right to petition the Commissioner. Round 3 Starts because Winnfabs finds out Commissioner is not going to step on Legislatures toes, thus HB 847 is born. Round 3.1 is that the committee on HB 847 decides to table the bill until there is more data, that is supposed to come from the petition that WINNFABS brought to the commissioner. Today round 3.2 WINNFABS finds out what their petition would have really meant, meaning the fact WE DO NOT NEED a speed limit, so what do they do. WINNFABS makes sure to scuttle THEIR OWN PETITION. Now for those faithful forum readers, it is obvious that they are not only out for the GFBLs as they call them, the recent thread on rafting shows that the same people want to get rid of the Big Obtrusive Cabin Cruisers.... In the end, they want, loons calling as they pass by in birch bark canoes..... It is time that they are called out for what they are. Extremists, Winnfabs will win if the public believes their nonsense. I am here to tell you all, Stand up, be counted make the time to beat these people back! Come to the hearings, take the day off work if you have to. I have, many others have, if you don't we will all lose our ability to enjoy our lakes. Unless you have that birch bark canoe they all want to see..... Last edited by WeirsBeachBoater; 08-17-2007 at 08:34 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Moultonboro, NH
Posts: 1,679
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 354
Thanked 640 Times in 291 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
![]()
__________________
-lg |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#11 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 213
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 1 Post
|
![]()
Yes the argument has changed from it will destroy the economy to it will not change a thing. If it will not change anything, then there is no reason not to give it a try.
If it doesn't work I will be in favor of a repeal. Speed limits failed in the Senate by two votes. Those Senators have been replaced. The petition was for a lakewide speed limit. Barrett decided that meant an 8 year test study in two small areas. Just a delay tactic. |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Moultonborough, NH
Posts: 484
Thanks: 89
Thanked 138 Times in 72 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
If we want the lake to be a safer place, then we all should join together and ask the MP to step up enforcement of the 150' rule. I also would like to ask: If a boat is going in excess of 45 mph and is no where near another boat, why is that unsafe? Islander obviously feels that 60+ mph is safe, or they likely wouldn't be traveling on the lake at those speeds endangering us all, so to speak. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#14 |
Senior Member
|
![]()
I will try and reel in my emotion and keep my posts civilized. But this is just the type of thing that fires me up. Obviously 1 person trying to look like 3 or more by using different screen names. That is a tactic the pro speed side has used from the beginning. Remember they are the ones telling us that there are thousands of speed limit supporters. Why do I always see the same half dozen at the hearings then???? Maybe the 6 are the thousands. After all perception is reality!
|
![]() |
![]() |
#15 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Moultonboro, NH
Posts: 2,934
Thanks: 478
Thanked 694 Times in 389 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
Edit, You know this type of dishonesty, and that is what it is, really ticks me off. This person should be ashamed of themself, like I said before, these people or should I say this person will resort to any DISHONEST tactic to gain what she wants. IL, Islander, BI, please don't go away mad, just go away. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#16 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 321
Thanks: 0
Thanked 9 Times in 3 Posts
|
![]()
The webmaster never said we were one person, just the same ip.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#17 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Moultonborough, NH
Posts: 484
Thanks: 89
Thanked 138 Times in 72 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#18 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: NH
Posts: 2,689
Thanks: 33
Thanked 439 Times in 249 Posts
|
![]()
Don't get the noose just yet
![]() ![]() Although Islander and Island Lover are indistinguishable, Bear Islander has a different tone. I suspect husband and wife, with wife playing two roles. I could be wrong, maybe a third party is in the mix, a daughter perhaps. Or maybe Bear Islander is a great actor. He has the willpower and stamina to get to the North Pole, he may stop at nothing to get this law passed. Does it really matter that much? They all just parrot the WinnFabs talking points. |
![]() |
![]() |
#19 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Moultonborough, NH
Posts: 484
Thanks: 89
Thanked 138 Times in 72 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
![]() In my post above I was asking them to come on the record and clear things up. They have the opportunity but seem to have decided to leave the dark cloud hanging over the whole charade. Big Surprise. For those that haven't read it before, I'll say it again, my boat will barely go 50 mph, so speed limits really don't effect me. It's this style of getting things done that has got really got my hackle up. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#20 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 321
Thanks: 0
Thanked 9 Times in 3 Posts
|
![]()
I am just one person. The same ip only implies the same neighborhood. The webmaster however, by linking me with a member that has a public identity, seems to have violated his own TOS. If you can't discredit the message, discredit the messenger!
|
![]() |
![]() |
#21 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 140
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 1 Post
|
![]() Quote:
__________________
"You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know" |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#22 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 321
Thanks: 0
Thanked 9 Times in 3 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
Now you can call Metrocast on Monday and turn us in. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#23 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Dover, NH
Posts: 1,615
Thanks: 256
Thanked 514 Times in 182 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
![]() Oh what a tangled web we weave, When first we practice to deceive! - Sir Walter Scott Last edited by Skip; 08-18-2007 at 01:31 PM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#24 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: I'm right here!
Posts: 1,153
Thanks: 9
Thanked 102 Times in 37 Posts
|
![]()
Islander, Island Lover, Bear Islander...whichever he is, wrote:
Quote:
There are no speed limits now and there hasn't been a speed related fatality or accident that I am aware of since safety certificates became widespread in NH. To legislators reading this, the problem isn't speed, it's the violation of the 150 foot rule. If that is enforced accidents will be reduced. As far as WinnFABS getting the plug pulled on the pilot program it seems to me that the information being collected was NOT proving their point, so another end run was needed! A new law isn't needed, just enforcement of laws already in place, and for that matter an MP officer can cite someone if they believe he/she is operating a boat at excessive speed for the conditions. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#25 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Moultonboro, NH
Posts: 2,934
Thanks: 478
Thanked 694 Times in 389 Posts
|
![]()
You know it's funny, I was reading posts from Islander yesterday before the truth came out and I was thinking, I can't tell the difference between these two people, Islander and Island Lover. Of course she will just lie, weasle and try to argue her way out of this, true to form.
Islander: "I am just one person." No question about that, there is just no way to figure out how many other different identities you post under. You are so bagged. ![]() Islander: "The webmaster however, by linking me with a member that has a public identity, seems to have violated his own TOS. " The webmaster pointed out three different identities to the same computer, you outed yourself under one of your identities. To try and turn this back on him is sleazy. Islander: "If you can't discredit the message, discredit the messenger!" You have discredited yourself, try being honest for a change. |
![]() |
![]() |
#26 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 140
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 1 Post
|
![]() Quote:
i read it that you were saying that metrocast set you up this way, my mistake. i understand how wireless routers/hubs/firewalls work. but i also understand that it doesn't travel very far and the three of you are in very close proximity to each other, most likely next door neighbors; certainly no more than a few hundred yards away from each other. and please, don't PM me again; i'm not interested.
__________________
"You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know" |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#27 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 321
Thanks: 0
Thanked 9 Times in 3 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
You apparently do not understand how "routers/hubs/firewalls" work because your assumptions are incorrect. I offered you a full explanation but you are "not interested". So live in ignorance. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#28 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 518
Thanks: 19
Thanked 62 Times in 15 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
I hope and pray that the Legislators voting on this bill are taking into consideration MORE than 1, 2 or 3 people's opinions on a message board!! I'm confident that BOTH sides of the argument have many supporters..not just 1 or 2. On the flip side, still undecided on a speed limit. I have no problem with my boat as 45 is plenty fast for me and around 30 I'm usually screaming at my hubby or kiddos to slow down anyway...but...my jetski is a different thing altogether. Going 45 is fast but I've gone a lot faster at times while still obeying boating laws. Slowing down when I needed to wasn't a problem. It's also extremely difficult to NOT go over 45...I've tried to keep the throttle at 45 consisently and you just can't do it. Technically if there were a speed limit I could be stopped if I was clocked at 46....it's just a difficult thing to control. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#29 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,325
Thanks: 5
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_address_translator
__________________
[Assume funny, clever sig is here. Laugh and reflect... ![]() ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#30 | |
Moderator
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#31 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 140
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 1 Post
|
![]() Quote:
can you comment whether or not they are from the same house or does metrocast actually use one modem in an entire neighborhood? i find it odd that metrocast would set up an entire neighborhood with one single modem/ IP address. the only way possible is for a strong wireless connection. at the very least, they all certainly know each other and these comments aren't from a random group of strangers all agreeing with each other.
__________________
"You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know" |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#32 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Central MA
Posts: 2,352
Thanks: 18
Thanked 535 Times in 179 Posts
|
![]()
Metrocast and all the other providers do not set up a whole neighborhood with one IP. The cable modem to a residence gets the ip... those connected to that modem through a wireless router.. all use the same ip when connecting to the internet... so you can hook up a wireless router and those PCs within range of it can hop on to the internet.. this is what all the fuss is about when setting up your home network... you need to put security on it to prevent your neighbors and unsavory characters from using your connection... Of course you can give the security info to your neighbors to let them do the same... The three posters absolutely can be different households or different people in the same household.. and in some cases... one poster might have an opinion to express and use the other poster to help edit the writing so as to be more coherent... hence the similar writing styles.
I know a few people who do that.. so lighten up folks!! IG
__________________
Island Girl ....... Make Lemonade |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
|
|