Quote:
|
Originally Posted by snowbird
....Skip, you asked for the RSA OR Administrative rule, then proceeded to question the definition of houseboat. Yes, that question arises from the wording of the RSA. But-----
Are you also saying the rule given on page 44 is NOT a rule? If not, what is it? I think it is MP's interpretation of an RSA, as many others are. ...You raise an interesting and frustrating example, to be sure. Perhaps you can tell me why lawyers do not craft wording that everyone can understand?
 ... |
A few final thoughts, and I will happily continue the discussion off-line.
There is no administrative rule nor RSA that has a blanket effect of banning boats form anchoring on inland waters in New Hampshire. There is a specific RSA that bans a narrowly defined specific craft, that being a houseboat. The guide you mention as well as the on-line course are documents generated by a third party company on their interpretation of law as provided by the NHMP. Neither source has a force of law.
Your final point would make sense, if only the folks that pass the laws would heed the advice of the attorneys hired by them. In many cases the citizen lawmakers take it upon themselves to push forward or ammend legislation against the advice of the attorneys we pay to prevent them from the mistakes that emotionally charged legislation usually invokes.
In closing, I firmly believe that the powers to be at NHMP are fully aware of the loophole in the RSA, and have not brought it forward because if folks actually realized what the RSA covers, they may not be so inclined to ban boats that are not houseboats. Plus, how do you explain to the General Court that you either never realized the problem, or realized it and chose to ignore it all these years?
Finally, the danger in ammending or proposing new legislation is not knowing where it will lead.
Case in point?
The fiasco that has encompassed the helium ballon bill! But that's a whole 'nother thread!
