![]() |
![]() |
|
|||||||
| Home | Forums | Gallery | Webcams | Blogs | YouTube Channel | Classifieds | Register | FAQ | Members List | Donate | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
|
#1 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 140
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 1 Post
|
Quote:
thanks for keeping us up to date with stats. it is much appreciated. i think your comparison on a per thousand basis is more helpful than other, possibly intentionally mis-leading numbers. thanks
__________________
"You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know" |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2 | ||
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 381
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
Quote:
Just using boating fatalities distorts the findings, as a single disaster -- or including commercial figures -- can skew the results for a given year. Alaska, for example, suffers an average of 20 fatalities per year among just commercial crabbing vessels. http://www.alaskajournal.com/stories...40712002.shtml Quote:
Because New Hampshire even requires registration of 12-foot windsurfers, its stats should indicate a safe watery environment. That being said, New Hampshire has admitted their statistics-collecting is flawed*, as has their FBI felony reporting*. The "baddest-boater" stats should include "murder in the third-degree" (Manslaughter) figures. Any attorney with "Westlaw" Internet access should be able to bring those stats up for the Forum. If you peruse the Coast Guard stats, you'll see that February "peaks" for the majority of states in cold-water boating accidents/fatalities. New Hampshire is not included. 'Wonder why? *Documentation I've posted here twice before. Last edited by madrasahs; 07-17-2004 at 06:06 AM. Reason: Added "unregistered" |
||
|
|
|
|
|
#3 | ||
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Dover, NH
Posts: 1,615
Thanks: 256
Thanked 514 Times in 182 Posts
|
Quote:
You have come full circle and finally realized the fallacy of your own perceptions against a certain class of boat. I couldn't have proven my point any better than with your own words in your latest post! Let me again remind you of your own findings; Quote:
I know...it's very painstakingly slow on those dial-up connections, but it is a necessary evil if one wants to be taken seriously in a debate. Perhaps if you ever get up this way again you could spring for broadband..it will open up whole new worlds of opportunities for you (or so say the statistics). In closing, this extended debate should serve as a warning to readers that statistics must be peoperly employed to bear meaningful fruit. In the case of the so called "off-shore boat", data shows that there are so few accidents and/or fatalities per year within this classification that statistical data is insignificant/meaningless when compared to the classifications of other boats. The fact of the matter remains that boating is an extremely safe hobby with little chance of you or your loved ones becoming injured or killed when compared to a myriad of other daily activities. All it takes is a little common sense (and a little less prejudice) to enjoy this endeavor to it's maximum. Skip Last edited by Skip; 07-17-2004 at 08:09 AM. Reason: in closing.... |
||
|
|
|
|
|
#4 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 381
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
Fatalities and Manslaughters are not equivalents.
Quote:
Offshores comprise a proportionately very tiny percentage of New Hampshire's numbered and unnumbered boats. (For all the mayhem, that is....) Check out page 33, though: "Accidents by Boat Length". There is a spike at 36-feet (Littlefield-zone), and a major spike at 40-foot (to 65-foot). Still, the only access to boating manslaughters is through "Westlaw" subscription, (All trial attorneys use it). Or...schlepping through the Internet.... Last edited by madrasahs; 07-18-2004 at 05:12 PM. Reason: more schlepping |
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|