Quote:
Originally Posted by bigpatsfan
I disagree with the statement that kayakers have “won”. I believe that kayakers actually “lost”. What the speed limit law is going to do, is to allow boaters to “feel” safer on the big lake. This increased sense of safety will significantly boost the total number of boats on the lake. Of course with more boats come more accidents, more wake damage etc. The end result is the ability to enjoy a quiet kayak ride on the big lake has significantly been reduced with the new speed limit law. I do not believe was the kayaker's intent. So kayakers lost and so did the boaters. The only one that won is the State as they will collect more money for both increased boat registrations and speeding tickets.
As for the "Illegal kayaking...say it ain't so!" post, I do not believe that this thread started out with a goal to hurt or damage kayakers. “The ability to laugh at oneself is a sign of confidence”
Thirdly, to the kayakers, don’t you find your statements “that there is no evidence” on what the kayaker was doing ironic as that is what the speed limit opponents are saying when they say there is no evidence that speeding is an issue.
Even with everything that was posted, I still like kayaking and kayakers and still like boaters and go fast boaters. I took the thread as what it was supposed to be,
|
Your theory that a speed limit will increase the number of accidents and make the lake less safe is openly ridiculous. Your logic is twisted and convoluted beyond recognition. By your way of thinking our highways and roads would be safer if we eliminated all speed limits.
How do you explain the fact that it has not worked out your way on any of the other lakes that have enacted speed limits?
As to you third point. When the opposition claims there is "no evidence that speeding is an issue" they are either lying or misinformed. There is plenty of evidence. You may disagree that a speed limit is the solution. However to say that the evidence does not exist is idiotic.
The evidence has been presented, you have read it, therefore it "exists".