Lt. Dunleavy, NHMP, responds....

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by hazelnut

Don't hold your breath..

Way back in the 70's a Cigarette hit a dock in Gilford at high speed. Went airborne, rolled upside down and landed on a cottage. Three dead. Just one of those high speed fatal accidents you guys tell each other never happened. And it was not boat-to-boat so it doesn't count.

Now please call me a liar so you can eat your words later.

[chmeeee]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Way back in the 70's a Cigarette hit a dock in Gilford at high speed. Went airborne, rolled upside down and landed on a cottage. Three dead. Just one of those high speed fatal accidents you guys tell each other never happened. And it was not boat-to-boat so it doesn't count.

Now please call me a liar so you can eat your words later.

Do you really think after 30 years that that has any kind of relevance to our discussion?

[Islander]

Originally Posted by chmeeee

Do you really think after 30 years that that has any kind of relevance to our discussion?

Yes!

We still have Cigarette boats, docks, cottages, alcohol. What has changed since then that would prevent it from happening this summer? Nothing!

[GWC...]

Originally Posted by Islander

Yes!

We still have Cigarette boats, docks, cottages, alcohol. What has changed since then that would prevent it from happening this summer? Nothing!

You are correct.

The Speed Limit Bill will not change a thing, safety-wise...

Interesting Safety Alert by the NTSB...

Does not fit your agenda; but interesting, never-the-less...

[codeman671]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Way back in the 70's a Cigarette hit a dock in Gilford at high speed. Went airborne, rolled upside down and landed on a cottage. Three dead. Just one of those high speed fatal accidents you guys tell each other never happened. And it was not boat-to-boat so it doesn't count.

Now please call me a liar so you can eat your words later.

Back in the 70's? I think an accident 30+ years ago is pushing it in this conversation. I am not calling you a liar, but I think this being brought into the burden of proof in todays arguments is a bit much.

High speed? How fast? How fast were "cigarette boats" back in the 70's? Alcohol involved?

Why not make it illegal for a person operating a boat to have any drinks whatsoever? It seems like alcohol has played a factor in just about every boating accident mentioned. Does a sober person crash their boat into a dock and land on a cottage? Does a sober person run over another boat in Meredith at night while traveling at low speeds? Does a sober person run over another boat on Long Lake on a night with good visibility?

The common denominator is alcohol and the answer to all above is NO!!!

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by codeman671

Back in the 70's? I think an accident 30+ years ago is pushing it in this conversation. I am not calling you a liar, but I think this being brought into the burden of proof in todays arguments is a bit much.

High speed? How fast? How fast were "cigarette boats" back in the 70's? Alcohol involved?

Why not make it illegal for a person operating a boat to have any drinks whatsoever? It seems like alcohol has played a factor in just about every boating accident mentioned. Does a sober person crash their boat into a dock and land on a cottage? Does a sober person run over another boat in Meredith at night while traveling at low speeds? Does a sober person run over another boat on Long Lake on a night with good visibility?

The common denominator is alcohol and the answer to all above is NO!!!

Hazelnut has pointed out in recent posts that drunks don't obey the laws. You want to pass a no alcohol on boats law, fine by me.

If there had been a horsepower limit on the lake in the 70's this accident could not have happened, or at least it would have been a smaller, slower boat hitting the cottage.




What happened to Hazelnut?

[codeman671]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Hazelnut has pointed out in recent posts that drunks don't obey the laws. You want to pass a no alcohol on boats law, fine by me.

If there had been a horsepower limit on the lake in the 70's this accident could not have happened, or at least it would have been a smaller, slower boat hitting the cottage.

What happened to Hazelnut?

He is laughing so hard he started to hyper-ventilate.

He was right, drunks do not obey the law. If they are drunk and behind the wheel they are already breaking the law, and a speed limit will not protect anyone.

How about a homework assignment? A list of all powerboat accidents in the last 30 years (to make a certain few happy), no phantom stuff, actual verifiable accidents that resulted in a death or serious injury IN NH. I think it would be interesting to see the list, and the causes/contributing factors. Nothing in FL, Michigan, or anywhere else. No close calls, actual accidents. This debate and law is about NH boating and NH waterways. Maybe a followup of non-powered boating accidents, which most likely will be GREATER in number.

APS? BI? Islander? Anyone?

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by codeman671

He is laughing so hard he started to hyper-ventilate.

He was right, drunks do not obey the law. If they are drunk and behind the wheel they are already breaking the law, and a speed limit will not protect anyone.

How about a homework assignment? A list of all powerboat accidents in the last 30 years (to make a certain few happy), no phantom stuff, actual verifiable accidents that resulted in a death or serious injury IN NH. I think it would be interesting to see the list, and the causes/contributing factors. Nothing in FL, Michigan, or anywhere else. No close calls, actual accidents. This debate and law is about NH boating and NH waterways. Maybe a followup of non-powered boating accidents, which most likely will be GREATER in number.

APS? BI? Islander? Anyone?

Careful.... They will think you are starting to drink the coolaid.

This accident doesn't count.... alcohol. And I'm willing to bet they violated the 150' rule. Too long ago... Not boat-to-boat... Accidents on other lakes don't count... That lake is smaller... Coast Guard never said 45/25..., Winnipesaukee has a different shape... yada yada yada.

Like they say, not just a river in Egypt.

Then they post that there is absolutely no evidence to support a speed limit.

[codeman671]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Careful.... They will think you are starting to drink the coolaid.

This accident doesn't count.... alcohol. And I'm willing to bet they violated the 150' rule. Too long ago... Not boat-to-boat... Accidents on other lakes don't count... That lake is smaller... Coast Guard never said 45/25..., Winnipesaukee has a different shape... yada yada yada.

Like they say, not just a river in Egypt.

Then they post that there is absolutely no evidence to support a speed limit.

Try it, the results may surprise you (and I'm not talking about the coolaid)...

I'll make it easy. I'll start.

Littlefield- low speed accident caused by a drunk driver not paying attention.

Jet ski accident from 2007- underage kid on a jetski who legally should not have even been operating it. No mention if speed was a factor. The machine involved was probably capable of no more than 50mph.

Eagle- underage drunk teen hits the rocks and ends up on the island.

Anyone care to add?

[jrc]

BI how can you possibly have any idea how many horsepower that boat had 30 years ago? You can't even they me what year it occurred but you know it had more than 300 hp. You don't even know what kind of boat it was.

I'm not calling you a liar, but I think you basing a lot of facts on stories passed down from friends.

I also thought people wanted to make the lake safer, like it was twenty to thirty years ago. Sounds pretty dangerous with people getting decapitated all the time. Since no one has been decapitated lately (30 years) maybe we have made the lake safer now.

[EricP]

It absolutely amazes me that BI can keep this going. Wanting a law for every potential things that could possibly go wrong is absolutely ridiculous. I seriously think he needs to move to a mountain top somewhere far away from society because he doesn't appear to want to be a part of it unless it is only on his terms. We don't need people like that in our society. I read these posts and shake my head the whole time. Kinda makes the forums that much less enjoyable. Very childish.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by jrc

BI how can you possibly have any idea how many horsepower that boat had 30 years ago? You can't even they me what year it occurred but you know it had more than 300 hp. You don't even know what kind of boat it was.

I'm not calling you a liar, but I think you basing a lot of facts on stories passed down from friends.

I also thought people wanted to make the lake safer, like it was twenty to thirty years ago. Sounds pretty dangerous with people getting decapitated all the time. Since no one has been decapitated lately (30 years) maybe we have made the lake safer now.

I told you it was a Cigarette. How low could the horsepower have been.

This accident was part of the testimony in the Moultonboro HB162 hearing. It happened in the spring of 1975. It was a Cigarette. I don't know the speed but obviously it was moving pretty good. The owner was the uncle of a forum member. It was talked about years ago. Try a search.

Again this accident could have happened last summer or next summer. Nothing has changed. The operator may not have had a safe boating certificate back then, but would that have changed anything? He probably knew that BWI and hitting a cottage while inverted were bad ideas.

APS has been posting about this accident for two days. This is what codeman said about the accident yesterday.

I am not familar with this one...Sounds like your typical crap to me. Please scan-in some documentation of this revelation.

[Skip]

Since the conversation here has turned much to the topic of impaired operation I thought that this article is extremely relevant.

Some honestly believe that the simple implementation of a rule or regulation will be followed with blind obedience by the great majority of those affected by such change.

What this study shows, as many of us in law enforcement have dealt with on a daily basis for decades, is the simple fact that drunk driving kills and maims thousands each year and all the laws in society have not been enough of an effective deterrent to stem the flow of blood.

Anyway, the story about this particular study is very sobering, to say the least.

[Bear Islander]

As Skip points out, it's hard to stop a drunk. However a horsepower limit will "limit" the damage he can do.

The Cigarette accident in Gilford was talked about on the forum, including a post from the operators nephew. Do a search for 8/21/2003 to 8/28/2003. Look for "Baja gets air" and "Boat enters cottage - upside down.."

There is also a post there where I recommend a horsepower limit. It seems I didn't come up with this as part of a WinnFABS plot.

[chipj29]

OK so a person in a certain style boat "could" go fast, and "could" crash the boat into a cottage. So that is the rationale (at least part of it) for a speed limit.

OK so in my car, I "could" go fast, and "could" crash my car into a house. But since there is a speed limit, there is no chance of that?

My point is this: Lots of things "could" happen, with or without a speed limit. Accidents happen at ALL speeds, and they involve ALL types of boats. You simply cannot prevent them all. Since there have been zero reported accidents in the last few years where speed over 45/25 have been cited as the MAIN cause of the accident, then the speed limit law will not make the lake safer.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by chipj29

OK so a person in a certain style boat "could" go fast, and "could" crash the boat into a cottage. So that is the rationale (at least part of it) for a speed limit.

OK so in my car, I "could" go fast, and "could" crash my car into a house. But since there is a speed limit, there is no chance of that?

My point is this: Lots of things "could" happen, with or without a speed limit. Accidents happen at ALL speeds, and they involve ALL types of boats. You simply cannot prevent them all. Since there have been zero reported accidents in the last few years where speed over 45/25 have been cited as the MAIN cause of the accident, then the speed limit law will not make the lake safer.

Your question points out that a horsepower limit is a better solution. Thanks!

And thanks again, speed has to be the MAIN cause of the accident, I forgot that one. The best way is a horsepower, or length, or weight limit. A speed limit is less effective but will work.

The "rationale" along these lines for a speed limit it simple. Most owners of 1,700 HP boats will not choose a lake with a 45 mph speed limit to boat on. It is reported that the number of high horsepower boats on Lake George dropped dramatically after they enacted a speed limit.

I'm hoping the Capt. Boneheads will be the first to go, they NEED speed.

There is no simple way to stop drunks. There ARE simple ways to move him to another lake. Several high performance boaters have claimed they will leave if HB847 passes. I thank them for their honesty.

Is there anyone out there that thinks the number of high horsepower boats on the lake will not be effected by HB847?

[hazelnut]

BI,

Why should I bother posting you are your own worst enemy. The more you post the deeper it gets in here. Hysterical.... By the way my favorite quote so far...

"I don't know the speed but obviously it was moving pretty good."


Hysterical. Lets pass a law based on this accident coupled with your statement.

[chipj29]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Your question points out that a horsepower limit is a better solution. Thanks!
My Nissan has roughly 175 HP, yet it can go 125 on the highway if I want. What would a horsepower limit accomplish?
And thanks again, speed has to be the MAIN cause of the accident, I forgot that one. The best way is a horsepower, or length, or weight limit. A speed limit is less effective but will work.
Work to do what?
The "rationale" along these lines for a speed limit it simple. Most owners of 1,700 HP boats will not choose a lake with a 45 mph speed limit to boat on. It is reported that the number of high horsepower boats on Lake George dropped dramatically after they enacted a speed limit.

I'm hoping the Capt. Boneheads will be the first to go, they NEED speed.
So it really IS about a certain type of boat...
There is no simple way to stop drunks. There ARE simple ways to move him to another lake. Several high performance boaters have claimed they will leave if HB847 passes. I thank them for their honesty.

Is there anyone out there that thinks the number of high horsepower boats on the lake will not be effected by HB847?

In addition to the bolded points, I will just say that the Capt Boneheads come in all shapes and sizes, from a sea kayak to a bow rider to a GFBL.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by chipj29

In addition to the bolded points, I will just say that the Capt Boneheads come in all shapes and sizes, from a sea kayak to a bow rider to a GFBL.

The answers to your bolded comments are right in the text.

You are quite right about Boneheads coming in all sizes. The question is what kind of boat do you want to land on your home, a Cigarette or a sea kayak? If a sea kayak hits a dock at full speed it might scuff its bows. If a Cigarette hits a dock at full speed..... people die.

[codeman671]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

If a Cigarette hits a dock at full speed..... people die.

If someone hits a dock at full speed in a 19' bowrider with less than 300hp people can die as well. If someone hit a dock at 40mph on a jet ski people can die as well.

Do you agree?

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by codeman671

If someone hits a dock at full speed in a 19' bowrider with less than 300hp people can die as well. If someone hit a dock at 40mph on a jet ski people can die as well.

Do you agree?

Absolutely. And as the weight and speed of the boat increases so does the degree of damage and the death toll.

Do you agree?

[codeman671]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Absolutely. And as the weight and speed of the boat increases so does the degree of damage and the death toll.

Do you agree?

Degree of damage to the boat and dock yes, death toll depends on other factors.

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Absolutely. And as the weight and speed of the boat increases so does the degree of damage and the death toll.

Do you agree?

NO!

*****************

[Mark]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Your question points out that a horsepower limit is a better solution. Thanks!

And thanks again, speed has to be the MAIN cause of the accident, I forgot that one. The best way is a horsepower, or length, or weight limit. A speed limit is less effective but will work.

The "rationale" along these lines for a speed limit it simple. Most owners of 1,700 HP boats will not choose a lake with a 45 mph speed limit to boat on. It is reported that the number of high horsepower boats on Lake George dropped dramatically after they enacted a speed limit.

I'm hoping the Capt. Boneheads will be the first to go, they NEED speed.

There is no simple way to stop drunks. There ARE simple ways to move him to another lake. Several high performance boaters have claimed they will leave if HB847 passes. I thank them for their honesty.

Is there anyone out there that thinks the number of high horsepower boats on the lake will not be effected by HB847?

Why does speed have to be the MAIN cause of the accident?

Capt Bonehead has a need for speed? What kind of smoke was in the air that you pulled that factoid from? The vast majority of Capt Boneheads are not going as fast as 45 m.p.h. or faster.

Bear Islander I have heard your solution argument before. Don't deal directly with the problem just ship them elsewhere. What do you do with drunk boaters just move them to a different place so they are someone elses problem. How did that solution work for the Catholic Church problem people. It hurt rather than helped people in the long run. Face the problem head on.

You believe that speed limits will make the lake some level of better for We the People. For us. It is easy to do. What about the public on the lakes where you are sending the law breaking drunk boaters? Do you not care about all US citizens equally?

The speed limit will effect law abiding people. The ones that will pull over for the cops. It will not do much for the renegades.

Taking the easy way out doen not always work. I was so for the speed limits until I really read over the messages on the forum and became convinced that more boat speed limit legislation is not the best solution for the public.

[DoTheMath]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

As Skip points out, it's hard to stop a drunk. However a horsepower limit will "limit" the damage he can do.

The Cigarette accident in Gilford was talked about on the forum, including a post from the operators nephew. Do a search for 8/21/2003 to 8/28/2003. Look for "Baja gets air" and "Boat enters cottage - upside down.."

There is also a post there where I recommend a horsepower limit. It seems I didn't come up with this as part of a WinnFABS plot.

BZZZZT! Wrong answer - as I showed you before, a 20' boat with a 250 hp outboard that can do 80+ mph blows away your theory on the hp limit being a way to "slow down" the lake and limit any speed related accidents by limiting the hp!

And how about we look at ALL the accidents in the last 30 years that invloved drinking and boating - and how many of those were in performance boats where speed was a direct factor, and how many in non-performance boats - you know, anything but those big-bad "Cigarette" boats.

Again - people kill people - guns don't kill people!!! It's not the boat - it is the OPERATOR! A 22' bowrider at 45mph is just as dangerous with a drunk behind the wheel as any other boat on the water - including a kayak with a drunk operator!

Your not going to prevent car accidents by outlawing sports cars - just like you're not going to prevent accidents like you mentioned (back in 1975 ) by getting "Cigarette" boats off the lake! Call a spade a spade - will ya, it's not the speed that bothers you - it's the boats! Don't hate the playa - hate the game!!

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by DoTheMath

Again - people kill people - guns don't kill people!!! It's not the boat - it is the OPERATOR! A 22' bowrider at 45mph is just as dangerous with a drunk behind the wheel as any other boat on the water - including a kayak with a drunk operator!

A 22' bowrider at 45mph is just as dangerous with a drunk behind the wheel as any other boat on the water - including a kayak with a drunk operator!

If you really believe that I suggest you enroll in a basic physics course, because you do not know how to Do The Math.

A kayak with a drunk operator, a 22' bowrider with a drunk operator, a 1,700 horsepower Nor-Tech with a drunk operator. They are all just as dangerous?

I really hope some Senators are reading this.

[DoTheMath]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

A 22' bowrider at 45mph is just as dangerous with a drunk behind the wheel as any other boat on the water - including a kayak with a drunk operator!

If you really believe that I suggest you enroll in a basic physics course, because you do not know how to Do The Math.

A kayak with a drunk operator, a 22' bowrider with a drunk operator, a 1,700 horsepower Nor-Tech with a drunk operator. They are all just as dangerous?

I really hope some Senators are reading this.

I hope they are too! And yes, I stand by that statement and my math is just fine - as is my physics comprehension! I am not looking to split hairs and discuss semantics here, I am simply stating that a drunk behind the wheel (or paddle) of ANY BOAT is dangerous and has the POTENTIAL to kill. I'm not looking to discuss the whole E=MC2 or how weight has an effect on impact with varying speeds, or why you think a Nor-Tech (amazingly well built and performing boat, BTW) with 1,700hp is "extra dangerous" or whatever...


Just admit it - you hate the player, not the game!! You hate the "big-bad" performance boats - for whatever twisted reason you have come up with in your head - and want to run them out of town...

Do you know Acres Per Second by chance?

[codeman671]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

I told you it was a Cigarette. How low could the horsepower have been.

This accident was part of the testimony in the Moultonboro HB162 hearing. It happened in the spring of 1975. It was a Cigarette. I don't know the speed but obviously it was moving pretty good. The owner was the uncle of a forum member. It was talked about years ago. Try a search.

APS has been posting about this accident for two days. This is what codeman said about the accident yesterday.

I am not familar with this one...Sounds like your typical crap to me. Please scan-in some documentation of this revelation.

My question still stands. I have yet to see any proof which I simply asked for. I searched by your criteria and nothing came up. Why don't you just post a link and get it over with?

Was it a Cigarette or a Baja? You say Cigarette yet you have us searching for Baja. Did Baja even make a true performance boat in the 70's??? According to my searches Baja made their first boat in 1976 and the longest boat they made was a 19' with 170hp. Cigarette did make a limited production of boats prior to 1975. Almost all were 28' and shorter, and even the 35-36' model was probably no more than a 60mph boat with the power they were equipped with standard.

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by codeman671

My question still stands. I have yet to see any proof which I simply asked for. I searched by your criteria and nothing came up. Why don't you just post a link and get it over with?

Was it a Cigarette or a Baja? You say Cigarette yet you have us searching for Baja. Did Baja even make a true performance boat in the 70's??? According to my searches Baja made their first boat in 1976 and the longest boat they made was a 19' with 170hp. Cigarette did make a limited production of boats prior to 1975. Almost all were 28' and shorter, and even the 35-36' model was probably no more than a 60mph boat with the power they were equipped with standard.

I said it before and I'll say it again.... Don't hold your breath

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by codeman671

My question still stands. I have yet to see any proof which I simply asked for. I searched by your criteria and nothing came up. Why don't you just post a link and get it over with?

Was it a Cigarette or a Baja? You say Cigarette yet you have us searching for Baja. Did Baja even make a true performance boat in the 70's??? According to my searches Baja made their first boat in 1976 and the longest boat they made was a 19' with 170hp. Cigarette did make a limited production of boats prior to 1975. Almost all were 28' and shorter, and even the 35-36' model was probably no more than a 60mph boat with the power they were equipped with standard.

So the damage to the boat increases with speed but the damage to the people inside remains the same. I don't think so!

The links don't work as well in the old forum.

http://www.winnipesaukeeforum.com/ar...noframes;index

However I don't think that link takes you to where I came from. Give it a try.

(edit)

Sorry, it doesn't work. but if you fill in the dates on the seach page and select "All messages in the date range" it will take you there.

[Bear Islander]

Try this

http://www.winnipesaukeeforum.com/ar...mes;read=62784

The Baja was another accident that lead to the Cigarette accident.

[codeman671]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

So the damage to the boat increases with speed but the damage to the people inside remains the same. I don't think so!

Maybe or maybe not. At a higher speed the boat may plow through the dock and end up on land, not killing anyone. There is no right or wrong answer, too many other factors come into play. A larger boat may not sustain critical damage and may remain largely intact, where as a small boat may be more likely to become a pile of rubble.

Found it, thanks.