Go Back   Winnipesaukee Forum > Lake Issues > Boating Issues > Speed Limits
Home Forums Gallery Webcams Blogs YouTube Channel Classifieds Register FAQ Members List Donate Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-25-2008, 03:34 PM   #1
Islander
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 321
Thanks: 0
Thanked 9 Times in 3 Posts
Default

Congratulation to Sandy, BI and the crew at WinnFABS! You fought long and hard for the safety of the Winnipesaukee community.

This will open a new day, and a better lake for all.
Islander is offline  
Old 06-25-2008, 03:36 PM   #2
Ryan
Senior Member
 
Ryan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Mass/Gilford
Posts: 247
Thanks: 216
Thanked 70 Times in 33 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Islander View Post
Congratulation to Sandy, BI and the crew at WinnFABS! You fought long and hard for the safety of the Winnipesaukee community.

This will open a new day, and a better lake for all.
You will also be hard pressed to see any change.
Ryan is offline  
Old 06-25-2008, 03:54 PM   #3
brk-lnt
Senior Member
 
brk-lnt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: South Down Shores
Posts: 1,948
Thanks: 545
Thanked 570 Times in 335 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Islander View Post
You fought long and hard for the safety of the Winnipesaukee community.

Huh? I thought they were fighting for a speed limit...
brk-lnt is offline  
Old 06-25-2008, 07:21 PM   #4
fatlazyless
Senior Member
 
fatlazyless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 9,251
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 314
Thanked 1,120 Times in 827 Posts
Default ...surprised & pleased!

Sure, I'm pleased that Gov Lynch has decided to sign HB 847, but I'm also surprised that it did not meet up with his veto.

Having passed the senate by 14-10 on May 15, I was really wondering what the delay could be. It is safe to assume that the Senate President and the Governor, both Democrats, must have discussions about pending bills before a bill is submitted to the Governor for his signature.

Maybe it was just a case of me getting 'nervous in the service' but I thought that as time went by, HB 847's likelihood of approval was dimming.
......

"A lot of Bills will go across Gov. John Lynch's desk, but few will rise to the level of a veto.
Two considered ripe for the stamp are a bariatric surgery bill and one that sets up a two-year speed limit on Lake Winnipesaukee."

Union Leader, Sunday June 15, Tom Fahey's political opinion column
......

A big round of applause to Governor Lynch, and should he decide to challenge Senator Gregg in November 2010, he will most likely get my vote.
__________________
.... Banned for life from local thrift store!

Last edited by fatlazyless; 06-25-2008 at 09:52 PM.
fatlazyless is offline  
Old 06-25-2008, 09:17 PM   #5
watrskir
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 52
Thanks: 42
Thanked 9 Times in 8 Posts
Default

looks like I wont be voting for lynch again!!
watrskir is offline  
Sponsored Links
Old 06-25-2008, 09:25 PM   #6
fatlazyless
Senior Member
 
fatlazyless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 9,251
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 314
Thanked 1,120 Times in 827 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by watrskir View Post
looks like I wont be voting for lynch again!!
Did you know that his Republican opponent for the governor's race in November, State Senator Joe Kenney, (R) Wakefield was one of two Republican senators who voted yes to HB 847.

There were two Republican senators voting yes, and two Democrats voting no........go figure?

Plus, Senator Kenney is a Lieutenant Colonel in the US Marine Corps.

Maybe, I should vote for Senator Kenney for Governor!
__________________
.... Banned for life from local thrift store!
fatlazyless is offline  
Old 06-26-2008, 07:25 AM   #7
SIKSUKR
Senior Member
 
SIKSUKR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 5,075
Thanks: 215
Thanked 903 Times in 509 Posts
Default

Here's WMUR's story:

Governor to sign boat-speed bill
------------------------------------------------------------
Interesting how the governor says speed was an issue and the story says right after that the NHMP found that speed WAS NOT AN ISSUE.Apparently he has no confidence in his Marine Patrol and does not believe the work they did and he must have conducted his own speed survey to arrive at that conclusion.Pretty lame.
__________________
SIKSUKR
SIKSUKR is offline  
Old 06-26-2008, 07:27 AM   #8
fatlazyless
Senior Member
 
fatlazyless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 9,251
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 314
Thanked 1,120 Times in 827 Posts
Default

Quote:
I'm disappointed the governor is going to sign it. I'm out 70 times a year and I haven't seen anything that says we need it." said Hickok, adding that it will result in the state expending funds on a problem he does not think exists.

Hickok travels Winnipesaukee on everything from a rowing scull to a 28-foot bowrider and said the new law will do little to curb the problems on the state's largest lake.
The last two paragraphs from today's article, June 26 www.citizen.com, by Geoff Cunningham Jr.
.....

And, what about the 27' twin hull Skater-Cat, powered by two Merc 300hp two-strokes, that has seen 107mph, verified by gps, out on the broads?

That is one incredibly hot boat............bbbbbzzzzzz........sort of like Nascar on the water.

I still say Winnipesaukee should have a designated go-fast area and time.....such as Wednesdays and Sundays, noon-3, out on the broads. Winnipesaukee has been growing as a fast boat lake since 1925, and everyone knows that Winnipesaukee is the place to go for big, fast boats.

I could putt-putt out there in my ancient Starcraft and watch the big boats roar back & forth, from behind the safety of a designated orange buoy, off-track border area. Sort of like Nascar on the water.
__________________
.... Banned for life from local thrift store!
fatlazyless is offline  
Old 06-26-2008, 07:52 AM   #9
chipj29
Senior Member
 
chipj29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bow
Posts: 1,874
Thanks: 521
Thanked 308 Times in 162 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Airwaves View Post
Right you are VtSteve, and watch for the influx of Marine Patrol boats, crews and even a couple of Marine Patrol aircraft from all the extra funding provided by HB847!
[sarcasm] That is great news for people who boat on a lake not named Winnipesaukee. Since the MPs will be focusing their manpower on a speed problem there, they will be free to ride unlimited speeds on other lakes! Sweet! [/sarcasm]

Quote:
Originally Posted by fatlazyless View Post
The last two paragraphs from today's article, June 26 www.citizen.com, by Geoff Cunningham Jr.
.....

And, what about the 27' twin hull Skater-Cat, powered by two Merc 300hp two-strokes, that has seen 107mph, verified by gps, out on the broads?

That is one incredibly hot boat............bbbbbzzzzzz........sort of like Nascar on the water.

I still say Winnipesaukee should have a designated go-fast area and time.....such as Wednesdays and Sundays, noon-3, out on the broads. Winnipesaukee has been growing as a fast boat lake since 1925, and everyone knows that Winnipesaukee is the place to go for big, fast boats.

I could putt-putt out there in my ancient Starcraft and watch the big boats roar back & forth, from behind the safety of a designated orange buoy, off-track border area. Sort of like Nascar on the water.
Right you are Less. After all, that one boat travelling at 107 mph put so many people in jeopardy. How many accidents did that boat cause again? Please refresh my memory.
chipj29 is offline  
Old 06-25-2008, 09:45 PM   #10
VtSteve
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,320
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 230
Thanked 361 Times in 169 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Islander View Post
Congratulation to Sandy, BI and the crew at WinnFABS! You fought long and hard for the safety of the Winnipesaukee community.

This will open a new day, and a better lake for all.
Absolutely. No longer will completely drunk people be able to speed on the lake, possibly going as fast as 28 mph and running over another boat.
VtSteve is offline  
Old 06-25-2008, 09:54 PM   #11
Airwaves
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: I'm right here!
Posts: 1,153
Thanks: 9
Thanked 102 Times in 37 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by VtSteve
Quote:
Originally Posted by Islander
Congratulation to Sandy, BI and the crew at WinnFABS! You fought long and hard for the safety of the Winnipesaukee community.

This will open a new day, and a better lake for all.
Absolutely. No longer will completely drunk people be able to speed on the lake, possibly going as fast as 28 mph and running over another boat.
Right you are VtSteve, and watch for the influx of Marine Patrol boats, crews and even a couple of Marine Patrol aircraft from all the extra funding provided by HB847!
Airwaves is offline  
Old 06-25-2008, 09:55 PM   #12
2Blackdogs
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 115
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

"They" told us they would leave Winni. Now we should pray for the boaters and the residents along the shores of Long Lake, Lake Ossipee, and Dave R's quiet lake in Maine.
2Blackdogs is offline  
Old 06-25-2008, 10:07 PM   #13
BroadHopper
Senior Member
 
BroadHopper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Laconia NH
Posts: 5,716
Thanks: 3,338
Thanked 1,145 Times in 823 Posts
Talking Nope

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Blackdogs View Post
"They" told us they would leave Winni. Now we should pray for the boaters and the residents along the shores of Long Lake, Lake Ossipee, and Dave R's quiet lake in Maine.
We are not leaving................. This is our lake not yours.
__________________
Someday may never be an actual day.
BroadHopper is offline  
Old 06-25-2008, 10:57 PM   #14
EricP
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 329
Thanks: 28
Thanked 11 Times in 7 Posts
Default

I seriously doubt that anything will change. It's a sad day for the lake actually. There has never been a speed problem on the lake. Once again our legislators wasted our time and money passing a useless law. I am so glad I pay for this kind of intelligence. I congratulate noone as I don't think rewarding fear mongerers is warranted.
EricP is offline  
Old 06-26-2008, 10:50 PM   #15
Airwaves
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: I'm right here!
Posts: 1,153
Thanks: 9
Thanked 102 Times in 37 Posts
Default

At the risk of revealing my true identity as Clark Kent, Define ATC and where you heard or read or saw this:
Quote:
Originally posted by 2Blackdogs
I would strongly disagree with any claim that the damage caused to that boat could have been caused during salvage. That boat is evidence in a criminal investigation. It would have been handled with kid gloves with law enforcement personnel watching. It's hard to argue with facts but easy to say, "Big Deal." Well, the deaths of innocent passengers is a big deal, in my opinion. And two such deaths in six years on one lake caused by people who should know better is an even bigger deal.

This will fuel the speed limit fires and most likely cause speed limits to be established. The facts remain that a boat was traveling at excessive speed at 2 AM without electronics on a night with limited visibility. You can try to dance around these facts as much as you want but they remain facts. The operator, a professional, is 100% responsible for this death. There's no doubt in my mind that the courts will also find similarly, if not in criminal court, certainly in civil court.
Les Hall, ATC Forum Host
Posted - Jun 21 2008 : 15:47:20
Because I WILL follow up!
Airwaves is offline  
Old 06-26-2008, 11:21 PM   #16
Airwaves
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: I'm right here!
Posts: 1,153
Thanks: 9
Thanked 102 Times in 37 Posts
Default Superman to the rescue!

ATC means...."Ask The Captain" It's nothing more that a forum like this one!!!

So you are trying to link what "Ask the Captain" forum says to the accident?

Unless you can show that L Hall is involved in the investigation as he/she appears to suggest;
Quote:
The facts remain that a boat was traveling at excessive speed at 2 AM without electronics on a night with limited visibility. You can try to dance around these facts as much as you want but they remain facts.
If he/she is involved in the investigation I would recommend legal action against him/her immediately! If L Hall isn't, then what is your point? Just another uninformed speculation opinion that in MHO could be sued!


AW (aka Clark Kent)
Airwaves is offline  
Old 06-27-2008, 06:26 AM   #17
VtSteve
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,320
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 230
Thanked 361 Times in 169 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Blackdogs View Post
"The Mod" seems to agree with you, 'cuz my replies are being delayed.

Since I don't want to offend your tender sensibilities too much in one post, I'll proceed very slowly with my rebuttals.

Just now, I found a second "idiot".



Note ye well the date. It was four days before your reply. And I have yet some more surprises for you, and for the forum at large on this issue.
I don't have enough facts to disagree with him or not. Gut reaction, he's right, I don't have any problems at all with his statements. Excessive speed for conditions is a long held navigational rule. Doing 20 mph in heavy fog conditions with no radar, etc... is excessive. Piloting a boat while intoxicated will get you into a heap of trouble if caught, especially in an accident. I don't disagree with any of that, I've stated the above. The facts will probably show this, I don't know.

But your continued linking of nonsensical statements, weaving them into a discussion where they have no place, is not right. If someone is intoxicated, and drives an express cruiser into the rocks on a dark and foggy night, the first thing that comes to my mind is not the size or speed of the boat. Your first thoughts are the type of boat and the speed. Most people wouldn't think of a speed limit first as a solution, you would.

So I'm not offended at all, just amazed really.

Forgot train of thought, not enough coffee. I wouldn't term that response idiotic. In fact, as I've stated, I agree with his broad statements. Who knows what this case will show, I think I am leaning a few ways, but I don't know the facts.

The response you pasted above is not offensive, at least not to be. But please don't for a minute think that anyone would relate your responses to that one. If you think you're that straighforward, don't. Your first two sentences to my reply are confusing enough, to follow that with a sensible response apparently copied from another site is even more confusing. That post id not idiotic, but yours are.

Last edited by VtSteve; 06-27-2008 at 10:04 AM. Reason: Forgot main reply
VtSteve is offline  
Old 06-29-2008, 08:36 AM   #18
2Blackdogs
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 115
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

BoaterEd is definitely not the same kind of forum. They deal with life and death issues on a much broader, national, and even international scale.

VtSteve writes:
Quote:
The response you pasted above is not offensive, at least not to be. But please don't for a minute think that anyone would relate your responses to that one. If you think you're that straighforward, don't. Your first two sentences to my reply are confusing enough, to follow that with a sensible response apparently copied from another site is even more confusing. That post id not idiotic, but yours are.
Last edited by VtSteve; 06-27-2008 at 10:04 AM. Reason: Forgot main reply
Thank you for editing that, as I had trouble following your first attempt at it.

VtSteve, I still stand by my own observations of moon and weather. Do you stand by your own speed limit posts that anyone can view on the World Wide Web? Or is it, somehow, unfair to list these?

Quote:
"Lake Champlain is quite a bit different than Winni. Not as congested, spread out."

"Can we all agree that it's stupid to go through a 6mph zone at 80mph at night? Can we at least respect ourselves and others to do that? How stupid is it that they go 90 in a NWZ, and they want a 45 mph speed limit on the lake?"

"Yes, we all have a few beers."

"Courtesy was not their forte. You know the type, the ones that spoil the school dance for everyone, the ones that spoil parties due to their being obnoxious."

"Absolutely wild in a Donzi 18. My BIL had one that freaked me out at about 70."


"The drinks on the lake are getting quite expensive."

"Some adolescents never learn. And almost always, they ruin it for others."

"Bear Islander truly needs a smack up side the head to bring him to reality."

"I knew it would come to this. Just a few ******* ruin it for everyone. But the arrogance of a few standout powerboats is all the weenies need for a group to focus on. As they say, police yourselves or perish."

~VtSteve
Well, enough of that.

As I earlier told Evenstar and am advising you and Airwaves now, the Speed Limit forum will gradually diminish into nothingness once the rants fade away.

The House and Senate granted approvals, and the Governor will sign HB847.

On this lake, Vermonters and Mainers need to accept this Legislature's long-considered debate, just as others must accept the consequence that some unwanted company will be visiting you.

The Granite State has spoken.




Sincerely yours,

Pond scum
2Blackdogs is offline  
Old 06-30-2008, 01:21 PM   #19
VtSteve
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,320
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 230
Thanked 361 Times in 169 Posts
Default

Well, I see that not only do you have enough time to follow me around on the internet, you also take my posts out of context, without links. Probably wise for you, since everyone would wonder why you were quoting me in the first place. You've rarely answered direct questions, nor do you reply without an evasive answer.

One note, That was most certainly not my writing about Bear Islander. Perhaps you should link it and admit your intent. You're a very intellectually dishonest person BD, and I'm sure that many speed limit supporters would prefer that you weren't on their side on this issue, at least not on paper.

You're childish, and quite unethical. But character issues don't deter you at all, just your agenda. You will note that I use the same online name in all forums, so perhaps that helped you out a bit. I have nothing to hide about my online posts, in fact, I'd prefer that people saw what I posted on other boards. Fairly consistent and open.
VtSteve is offline  
Old 06-30-2008, 01:22 PM   #20
Airwaves
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: I'm right here!
Posts: 1,153
Thanks: 9
Thanked 102 Times in 37 Posts
Default

2Blackdogs
I guess I missed the point of you latest post. I was responding to your acertion that something Les Hall of ATC wrote was fact. I pointed out that Les Hall is nothing more than a poster on a forum much like this and that unless he is directly involved in the investigation, he is just speculating without direct knowledge.

When we learn the facts of the case then we can discuss them, til then I'll wait.
Airwaves is offline  
Old 06-30-2008, 02:52 PM   #21
VtSteve
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,320
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 230
Thanked 361 Times in 169 Posts
Default

Perhaps I can understand Don not wanting to flood another site or sites, and I'm fine with this.

Here's some of my (unedited) posts.

"It's been 10 years since I was over at Winni, spending some 30 years on the lake. There were quite a few go fast boats way back, but certainly not with the engines and size as are available now.

My advice, is to just use common sense. Realize that lakes are for everyone, and you'll have to deal with everything from cayaks and canoes to huge cabin cruisers. Be courteous, and you'll earn the respect of the MP. After awhile, they'll get to know who the trouble makers are, and the majority will be fine."
__________________________________________________ ___________

"It's all about attitude men. I grew up on that lake, around the time of the first series of noisemakers. Not real speed, just noise. I love fast boats, and I love that lake. The problem was always to contain those that snubbed everyone's rights. Courtesy was not their forte. You know the type, the ones that spoil the school dance for everyone, the ones that spoil parties due to their being obnoxious.

I'm all for freedom on the lake, and winced when I saw the speed limit pass. Back in the 80's, maybe earlier, I knew it would come to this. Just a few a-holes ruin it for everyone. My own personal belief is that most of the a-holes are the new wakeboard boat set. But the arrogance of a few standout powerboats is all the weenies need for a group to focus on. As they say, police yourselves or perish.

Some adolescents never learn. And almost always, they ruin it for others."
__________________________________________________ _________

"Whether the site sucks or not is of no importance to me. Obviously it's not the caliber that this one is. I've not had an issue there at all.

The best way to find the root of a problem is to listen to all sides. It's taken two years plus to find the core issues. It didn't take me that long at all, that's what I do.

When people have the ability and the support to enact legislation that can impact your favorite things in a negative manner, it makes sense to find out what the fuss is all about. In a nutshell,

1) It's not really about speed, as I guessed.
2) Noise (you've heard this one before I suspect)
3) Reckless behavior
4) Disrespect for the lake, it's residents, and boating.

That's what "Some" in the GF community have left as an impression on those folks. What percentage it is, I have no idea, probably the same few all the time.

If I could keep my lake from having a ridiculous speed limit by eliminating the real bozos that are screwing it up, I'd make sure I did it. It's easy to be contentious online, and it typically is. But go fats boaters have families like everyone else, and most take pride in their boats, not to mention the investments made. I'd wager a guess than most on this forum have far more boating expertise and common sense than the majority of recreational boaters.

I'd not frequent a lake that has the types of restrictions Lake George has on it now, and I suspect they have those limits for the very same reasons Winni is looking into it. If we're all lucky, the law will not pass, and better solutions will prevail."

My response to the Lake George accident thread. Where the driver of a Cobalt bowrider was charged with BUI after running up onto an island.

"The drinks on the lake are getting quite expensive."

Get it BD?

__________________________________________________ _______

Last edited by VtSteve; 06-30-2008 at 02:57 PM. Reason: missed one
VtSteve is offline  
Old 06-30-2008, 03:15 PM   #22
Bear Islander
Senior Member
 
Bear Islander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,766
Thanks: 32
Thanked 441 Times in 207 Posts
Default

The member responsible for "Bear Islander truly needs a smack up side the head to bring him to reality." is Cal not VtSteve.
Bear Islander is offline  
Old 07-01-2008, 07:29 AM   #23
2Blackdogs
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 115
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

My midnight view of landforms miles away was possible due to the fully lighted night sky silhouetting them. One solar light on unlighted islands' docks would contribute nothing to night sky pollution, but benefit the night boater. If the N***A was truly an organization for Winni boaters, it's a suggestion they never published during their entire existence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Airwaves View Post
2Blackdogs
I guess I missed the point of you latest post. I was responding to your acertion that something Les Hall of ATC wrote was fact. I pointed out that Les Hall is nothing more than a poster on a forum much like this and that unless he is directly involved in the investigation, he is just speculating without direct knowledge.

When we learn the facts of the case then we can discuss them, til then I'll wait.
Les doesn't have the advantage of having viewed the scene as I have. But he's "The Mod", as Vermont Steve would call him at BoaterEd.com, and is characteristically very much on-target with his observations.

Given that, which opinions do you disagree with?

Quote:
This will fuel the speed limit fires and most likely cause speed limits to be established. The facts remain that a boat was traveling at excessive speed at 2 AM without electronics on a night with limited visibility. You can try to dance around these facts as much as you want but they remain facts. The operator, a professional, is 100% responsible for this death. There's no doubt in my mind that the courts will also find similarly, if not in criminal court, certainly in civil court.

Les Hall, ATC Forum Host
Right out of the box, Les turned out correct on the Governor's signing of HB847!

Quote:
The woman hit an island, ripped off the front third of the boat and then bounced back 20 or so feet. That fact that she hit the island and did as much damage as she did is prima facie evidence of excessive speed.

Les Hall, ATC Forum Host
Indisputable evidence.

Quote:
The two accidents that we have discussed here, both resulting in fatalities, were caused by people who certainly should have known better than to operate in the manner that caused the deaths. But we all get complacent. After running in the same waters year after year, it's just human nature to get a little cocky and relax our standards. However, one of the quotes from a previous thread sums it up best:

"The sea is selective, slow at recognition of effort and aptitude but fast in sinking the unfit"

Or, in this case, the irreverent.


Les Hall, ATC Forum Host
No comment needed.

Quote:
headline reads Boat crash: Beer cans, a night out

THAT, of course, led to this

http://www.unionleader.com/article.a...6-117786073e99

headlined Governor to sign boat-speed bill

Les Hall, ATC Forum Host
THAT is what I said, but it got deleted here! "Sterile objectivity" not allowed here.

Quote:
The legislation had passed prior to the accident. However, he hadn't decided if he would sign it or not. However, the head of the organization, misleadingly called the NH recreational boaters association that was formed for the sole purpose of fighting the limits, decided to drink (we don't know how many yet), take her go-fast out on a dark night and run, at speed, into an island, killing one of her best friends. At the very least, it nullifies all the arguments they had been making about self regulation. After this, the public would have been all over him if he had vetoed the legislation.

Les Hall, ATC Forum Host
"The organization" was resurrected by www.winnilakers.com to fight speed limits. (And stole "The Mods" logo for a long time).

As a result of the collision, the Governor had no options left to veto the bill, and used the airwaves to sign it, even before it could arrive at his desk.

A nice use of the word "airwaves" right, "Airwaves"?

Quote:

RULE 6
Safe Speed
Every vessel shall at all times proceed at a safe speed so that she can take proper and effective action to avoid collision and be stopped within a distance appropriate to the prevailing circumstances and conditions.
In determining a safe speed the following factors shall be among those taken into account:
(a) By all vessels:
(i) the state of visibility;

Les Hall, ATC Forum Host
If anyone should side with Les Hall on this, it is Airwaves, but I could be wrong.

It's one thing to be distracted by dropping your cellphone at night while driving, and another to speed merrily along in foggy conditions. Even totally wasted drunks can keep their cars between the curbstones, with the occasional big maple interrupting progress. Here, we have Diamond Island.

Airwaves wants to wait for the answer to come from the back of the courtroom, like Perry Mason.

That's not going to happen.

Bear Islander,

I threw that one in, knowing who said it, but I happen to like the lighthearted way Cal expresses himself here though we disagree. The opponents are truly two-faced, there and here.

I was looking for intellectual honesty from Vermont Steve, but didn't get it. There was no correct attribution, and no link to any of three sites the quotes were taken from. We got spoon-fed "answers" instead, and no mention of the beers they prefer while boating.

BI, since you surf the SL opponents' site, how about the origin of this quote?

Quote:
id find out the trouble makers on the lake and make their lives a living hell...
2Blackdogs is offline  
Old 07-01-2008, 10:01 AM   #24
SIKSUKR
Senior Member
 
SIKSUKR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 5,075
Thanks: 215
Thanked 903 Times in 509 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Blackdogs View Post
As I earlier told Evenstar and am advising you and Airwaves now, the Speed Limit forum will gradually diminish into nothingness once the rants fade away.
Sincerely yours,

Pond scum
Let's hope so because the rants that come from members like yourself do nothing but polarize the two sides instead of having meaningfull discussion.Especially when your rants accuse a member of posting something that was not even his as pointed out by someone on your side of this debate.

Pond Lilly
__________________
SIKSUKR
SIKSUKR is offline  
Old 07-01-2008, 11:13 AM   #25
Bear Islander
Senior Member
 
Bear Islander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,766
Thanks: 32
Thanked 441 Times in 207 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SIKSUKR View Post
Let's hope so because the rants that come from members like yourself do nothing but polarize the two sides instead of having meaningfull discussion.Especially when your rants accuse a member of posting something that was not even his as pointed out by someone on your side of this debate.

Pond Lilly
I have to disagree with you on one point. 2Blackdogs is not a member of "our side" of the debate. He has been a member of the forum for more than four years yet the majority of his posts have been about an accident that happened two weeks ago. And he NEVER posted about speed limits until two days AFTER the Senate passed HB847. He had nothing to say about speed limits until it was all over.

He is a member of the "accident speculation" movement, not the speed limit movement.

As the forums unofficial spokesperson for the pro speed limit side I declare that 2Blackdogs is not a member of our group.
Bear Islander is offline  
Old 07-01-2008, 11:15 AM   #26
VtSteve
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,320
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 230
Thanked 361 Times in 169 Posts
Default

Sorry BI, he hates GF boats and loves the speed limits. You'll have to keep him on your side, no room for him here.
VtSteve is offline  
Old 07-01-2008, 01:41 PM   #27
Bear Islander
Senior Member
 
Bear Islander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,766
Thanks: 32
Thanked 441 Times in 207 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VtSteve View Post
Sorry BI, he hates GF boats and loves the speed limits. You'll have to keep him on your side, no room for him here.
How about a swap then?

Two members for one, plus a boater to be named later.
Bear Islander is offline  
Old 07-01-2008, 02:19 PM   #28
VtSteve
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,320
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 230
Thanked 361 Times in 169 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bear Islander View Post
How about a swap then?

Two members for one, plus a boater to be named later.

I'd immediately trade BD and TB to the minors, where they would be released. I'll agree to the turnip to be named later. I'll also agree to not make huge protest waves near Bear Island, which would very quickly erode your camp's waterfront. And, not being one to flout the law, I promise next trip over there, I WILL NOT do 90mph through the NWZ. AND, I absolutely, positively, WILL NOT circle Evenstar from 151' making large, loopy waves to see how her sea kayak handles the big stuff.

Just kidding Hon.....

Seriously BI, we both have lots more in common as lake lovers than we disagree on. We also share some of the same problems and concerns. It's doubtful I'll get over your way this year, although I'd like to. Love to meet some of you peeps sometime.
VtSteve is offline  
Old 07-08-2008, 01:46 PM   #29
SIKSUKR
Senior Member
 
SIKSUKR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 5,075
Thanks: 215
Thanked 903 Times in 509 Posts
Default Here it is,all signed.

We should all feel safe now and you will not see any more so called "speed" related accidents on Winni.I know I feel so much safer.

From WMUR:

New Law Sets Speed Limits For Lake Winnipesaukee

POSTED: 10:50 am EDT July 8, 2008
UPDATED: 11:08 am EDT July 8, 2008


CONCORD, N.H. -- Boaters who drive fast on Lake Winnipesaukee next summer will risk speeding tickets.

Gov. John Lynch signed a bill into law Monday that sets speed limits on the lake for two years. The speed limits will be 45 mph during the day and 25 mph at night, effective Jan. 1.

Boat speed limits have been debated for years. This plan differs from past plans because it applies only to Lake Winnipesaukee and would go off the books in two years.

Speed-limit supporters had argued two years would be plenty of time for a test. They said people are afraid to canoe or swim, especially on weekends when boat traffic is most congested.

Opponents said the limits are unnecessary. They pointed to a state Marine Patrol study last summer that found few boats exceeded the proposed limit. Out of 3,852 boats clocked by radar, only 83 were going faster than 45 mph.

They argued it made no sense to pass a law in hopes a small, inconsiderate group would change its habits.

Two years ago, the House passed a bill to impose limits on all lakes and rivers, but the Senate killed it.
__________________
SIKSUKR
SIKSUKR is offline  
Old 07-08-2008, 01:57 PM   #30
Airwaves
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: I'm right here!
Posts: 1,153
Thanks: 9
Thanked 102 Times in 37 Posts
Default Time line issue?

I find it interesting that when I contacted Governor Lynch's office in mid-June asking what he was going to do about the bill his staff wrote back and said the bill had not reached his desk and that they wouldn't make a decision until it did.

June 25, a week and a half after the June 17th Diamond Island accident the governor tells the Union Leader he's going to sign it. That would lead me to believe, based on his staffer's comments, that it had arrived at his desk and he liked it.

July 7, Seven working days and 13 calendar days after the newspaper article, he signs it.

A couple of questions come to mind.

Since under NH law he has 5 days to sign or veto a bill after it reaches his desk, when did he get it? After all his staff said he wouldn't decide until it reached his desk and he's quoted on 6/25 as saying his decision had nothing to do with the Diamond Island accident.

Hmmmm?
Airwaves is offline  
Old 07-08-2008, 02:02 PM   #31
fatlazyless
Senior Member
 
fatlazyless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 9,251
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 314
Thanked 1,120 Times in 827 Posts
Default

Wow....Airwaves....talk about being a regular Perry Mason! Without a doubt, the Governor's decision to sign HB 847 was based on SAFE BOATING and had nothing to do with any one individual boat accident.

By the way, did you know that Gov Lynch also signed a law, starting Jan 1, that requires drivers and passengers of snowmobiles & atv's, who are less than 18 years old, to wear helmets and eye protection.

NH is now the only state out of 50 which does not have a mandatory car/light truck seatbelt law for adults, 18 & older. All drivers of bigger trucks & buses, 12000lb gvw & up, are required to wear seatbelts by federal law.

As far as I know, there are no states which require seatbelts in recreational boats or jetskis.
__________________
.... Banned for life from local thrift store!

Last edited by fatlazyless; 07-08-2008 at 02:33 PM.
fatlazyless is offline  
Old 07-08-2008, 04:44 PM   #32
Pineedles
Senior Member
 
Pineedles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Moultonborough & CT
Posts: 2,550
Thanks: 1,072
Thanked 672 Times in 369 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fatlazyless View Post
As far as I know, there are no states which require seatbelts in recreational boats or jetskis.
Thank God for that! I may be the captain, but I don't want to literally go down with my ship.
Pineedles is offline  
Old 07-08-2008, 05:45 PM   #33
Skip
Senior Member
 
Skip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Dover, NH
Posts: 1,615
Thanks: 256
Thanked 514 Times in 182 Posts
Post Hemets & eye protection were already required...

Quote:
Originally Posted by fatlazyless View Post
...By the way, did you know that Gov Lynch also signed a law, starting Jan 1, that requires drivers and passengers of snowmobiles & atv's, who are less than 18 years old, to wear helmets and eye protection...
No, that's not what the Governor signed.

RSA 215-C:49 already required operators and passengers under 18 to wear head & eye protection for a number of years now.

What the Governor signed was an ammendment to this existing law that actually says the required head & eye protection must meet or exceed Federal standard FMVSS 218 (DOT certified).

Hope this clarifies the Governor's action.

Skip
Skip is offline  
Old 07-08-2008, 05:52 PM   #34
flyry49
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 15
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fatlazyless View Post
Wow....Airwaves....talk about being a regular Perry Mason! Without a doubt, the Governor's decision to sign HB 847 was based on SAFE BOATING and had nothing to do with any one individual boat accident.
safe boating? actually this bill has nothing to do with safe boating. there hasn't been any accidents during the day linked to speed. and all the ones where people we.re going fast were alcohol related. Lynch signed it because senate passed it. Lynch doesn't experience this lake, all he knows is what the media says, and we all know how inaccurate they can be. and when people complain about stupid issues like this speed limit he assumes maybe there is a problem. I'll be supporting lynch's opponent the best i can. its funny how he claims to be cutting government spending and now hes going to invest into this nonsense
flyry49 is offline  
Old 07-08-2008, 10:23 PM   #35
EricP
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 329
Thanks: 28
Thanked 11 Times in 7 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyry49 View Post
I'll be supporting lynch's opponent the best i can.
As will I in November
EricP is offline  
Old 07-09-2008, 11:23 AM   #36
watrskir
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 52
Thanks: 42
Thanked 9 Times in 8 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EricP View Post
As will I in November

I already started the campain
watrskir is offline  
Old 07-08-2008, 10:31 PM   #37
Islander
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 321
Thanks: 0
Thanked 9 Times in 3 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyry49 View Post
safe boating? actually this bill has nothing to do with safe boating. there hasn't been any accidents during the day linked to speed. and all the ones where people we.re going fast were alcohol related.
Except that isn't true is it.

There was a daytime fatal accident on Winni last summer that did not involve alcohol. You people keep repeating these lies over and over til you believe them yourself.
Islander is offline  
Old 07-08-2008, 10:44 PM   #38
EricP
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 329
Thanks: 28
Thanked 11 Times in 7 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Islander View Post
Except that isn't true is it.

There was a daytime fatal accident on Winni last summer that did not involve alcohol. You people keep repeating these lies over and over til you believe them yourself.
So 1 accident requires a law? Ridiculous....You people will never get it. There is no problem on the lake with speed. There are zillions of problems with safe passage violations. And accusing people of lying is insulting.

The Govenor needs to go, he probably hasn't been on the lake much and if he took the time to do that he'd know there's no speeding problem. I can't be represented by lazy people. He was either too lazy to see for himself or to lazy to check facts. Plus he's easily swayed by fear mongerers, not a quality I want in a leader.
EricP is offline  
Old 07-09-2008, 08:43 AM   #39
Bear Islander
Senior Member
 
Bear Islander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,766
Thanks: 32
Thanked 441 Times in 207 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EricP View Post
So 1 accident requires a law? Ridiculous....You people will never get it. There is no problem on the lake with speed. There are zillions of problems with safe passage violations. And accusing people of lying is insulting.

The Govenor needs to go, he probably hasn't been on the lake much and if he took the time to do that he'd know there's no speeding problem. I can't be represented by lazy people. He was either too lazy to see for himself or to lazy to check facts. Plus he's easily swayed by fear mongerers, not a quality I want in a leader.
You may think the Governor needs to go because he signed the speed limit bill. But are you aware that your only alternative is Joe Kenney, one of the co-sponsors of the speed limit bill? This legislation had wide support, except on this forum.

Perhaps you are the one that will never get it. Yesterday the boys and girls camps on the island had their sail boats out. We don't see that very often because it can only happen mid-week when the lake is less congested.

Read from a recent article what the Boston Globe thinks Winnipesaukee's reputation is...
"Long known for thrill-seeking boaters, arcades, and nighttime firework displays that drown out the calls of the loons, Lake Winnipesaukee in the last decade has become an increasingly favored spot of corporate high-flyers and self-made entrepreneurs."

Perhaps one day you will realize the speed limit is not primarily about safety and it never was. Its about replacing "thrill-seeking" with "family" in future articles.
Bear Islander is offline  
Old 07-09-2008, 09:17 AM   #40
SIKSUKR
Senior Member
 
SIKSUKR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 5,075
Thanks: 215
Thanked 903 Times in 509 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bear Islander View Post
Perhaps one day you will realize the speed limit is not primarily about safety and it never was. Its about replacing "thrill-seeking" with "family" in future articles.
Ya,we wouldn't want any thrill-seeking would we?Like thrillseeking on a rocket ride perhaps?
__________________
SIKSUKR

Last edited by SIKSUKR; 07-09-2008 at 10:11 AM.
SIKSUKR is offline  
Old 07-09-2008, 09:54 AM   #41
Ryan
Senior Member
 
Ryan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Mass/Gilford
Posts: 247
Thanks: 216
Thanked 70 Times in 33 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bear Islander View Post
"Long known for thrill-seeking boaters, arcades, and nighttime firework displays that drown out the calls of the loons, Lake Winnipesaukee in the last decade has become an increasingly favored spot of corporate high-flyers and self-made entrepreneurs."

Perhaps one day you will realize the speed limit is not primarily about safety and it never was. Its about replacing "thrill-seeking" with "family" in future articles.
"Thrill Seeking Boaters" have the same rights to enjoy the lake as do family boaters, kayaks, canoes, swimmers, and sailboats. Unless, of course, your agenda is to get them off the lake....
Ryan is offline  
Old 07-09-2008, 11:04 AM   #42
VtSteve
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,320
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 230
Thanked 361 Times in 169 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bear Islander View Post
You may think the Governor needs to go because he signed the speed limit bill. But are you aware that your only alternative is Joe Kenney, one of the co-sponsors of the speed limit bill? This legislation had wide support, except on this forum.

Perhaps you are the one that will never get it. Yesterday the boys and girls camps on the island had their sail boats out. We don't see that very often because it can only happen mid-week when the lake is less congested.

Read from a recent article what the Boston Globe thinks Winnipesaukee's reputation is...
"Long known for thrill-seeking boaters, arcades, and nighttime firework displays that drown out the calls of the loons, Lake Winnipesaukee in the last decade has become an increasingly favored spot of corporate high-flyers and self-made entrepreneurs."

Perhaps one day you will realize the speed limit is not primarily about safety and it never was. Its about replacing "thrill-seeking" with "family" in future articles.
If that's how it is, about 75% of all posts on speed limits would have vanished. The debate could have been focused on the real problems, congestion and the ability of the MP to enforce the real laws. I seriously doubt the new law will eliminate many of the boats. Sure, some percentage of the GF boats will dissapear. But the majority of the reckless tubers, PWC's, and whatever other boats that routinely ignore the 150' rule will still be there. Generally speaking, the law doesn't impact them most of the time. You really should hope that gas prices remain high, which will have the single biggest impact on lake congestion.

If only people could have been honest in this entire debate. Common ground is in abundance over most of the major problems with safety. You yourself mention many, the NWZ violations being just one aspect. Lake congestion is, and always has been, a major problem on weekends. What makes it a safety issue has been obvious to most people in this debate. But as always, it hard to come up with solutions if the debate itself is disingenuous. I feel it has been, and many of your own comments post-passage have only proven it.
VtSteve is offline  
Old 07-09-2008, 01:23 PM   #43
brk-lnt
Senior Member
 
brk-lnt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: South Down Shores
Posts: 1,948
Thanks: 545
Thanked 570 Times in 335 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bear Islander View Post
Read from a recent article what the Boston Globe thinks Winnipesaukee's reputation is...
"Long known for thrill-seeking boaters, arcades, and nighttime firework displays that drown out the calls of the loons, Lake Winnipesaukee in the last decade has become an increasingly favored spot of corporate high-flyers and self-made entrepreneurs."
Unfortunately the staff at the "Glob" seem to think the world ends at the last T stop. I would consider their opinions entertaining, but not necessarily steeped in fact. For example what are the "arcades" they seem to think number in such great quantities that they should be used as one of the core descriptions of the area? You've got Funspot and what else?

In my visits to the lake before buying a place in Laconia, and time spent thereafter, never once did I hear Winnipesauke primarily described as a place for thrill-seeking boaters, arcades, or fireworks.

Using that sentence as support for a position is no better than "I read it on the Internet, so it must be true".
brk-lnt is offline  
Old 07-09-2008, 03:52 PM   #44
EricP
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 329
Thanks: 28
Thanked 11 Times in 7 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bear Islander View Post
You may think the Governor needs to go because he signed the speed limit bill. But are you aware that your only alternative is Joe Kenney, one of the co-sponsors of the speed limit bill? This legislation had wide support, except on this forum.

Perhaps you are the one that will never get it. Yesterday the boys and girls camps on the island had their sail boats out. We don't see that very often because it can only happen mid-week when the lake is less congested.

Read from a recent article what the Boston Globe thinks Winnipesaukee's reputation is...
"Long known for thrill-seeking boaters, arcades, and nighttime firework displays that drown out the calls of the loons, Lake Winnipesaukee in the last decade has become an increasingly favored spot of corporate high-flyers and self-made entrepreneurs."

Perhaps one day you will realize the speed limit is not primarily about safety and it never was. Its about replacing "thrill-seeking" with "family" in future articles.
The only thing I realize is you have an agenda, you are entitiled to have an agenda and I am glad you only get 1 vote. I to only get 1 vote, I have no agenda, I don't like stupid , needless laws. Nothing you say or do will ever convince me that a speed limit law will do anything to change the lake, it won't even help your agenda of returning the lake to the days of yesteryear, it just won't happen. Nothing I say will change your agenda, stalemate. However, as the population grows so will the number of people on the lake and my bets are that enforcing the laws already on the books will produce more safety results than this new law that isn't on the books till 1/1/09.

As for the kids camps, if I were responsible for the lives and safety of those kids I would find things to do on the weekends that don't involve venturing out onto the lake and save those events for Monday-Thursday or even Friday AM. Don't most camp cycles run Sunday - Saturday anyway? So basically between kids coming and going on those 2 weekend days it makes sense to keep them close at hand anyway. It's not rocket surgery, and the kids will never feel like they are missing anything if the events are scheduled consistently on weekedays. There's more to camping than just the lake, and they should have events to keep them occupied as such.

The Boston Globe article? I could care less, the media can't be trusted anyway so citing articles in rags I could care less about mean nothing to me.
EricP is offline  
Old 07-09-2008, 01:00 PM   #45
Turtle Boy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 176
Thanks: 17
Thanked 22 Times in 11 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EricP View Post
So 1 accident requires a law? Ridiculous....You people will never get it. There is no problem on the lake with speed. There are zillions of problems with safe passage violations. And accusing people of lying is insulting.

The Govenor needs to go, he probably hasn't been on the lake much and if he took the time to do that he'd know there's no speeding problem. I can't be represented by lazy people. He was either too lazy to see for himself or to lazy to check facts. Plus he's easily swayed by fear mongerers, not a quality I want in a leader.
Lazy? Go to his web site and check out his bio...hospital boards, youth sports, president of a company, active in UNH alumni. This seemed like a good time for a repost of a story by tupelo from a few weeks ago.

A Brief and Irreverent History of Early Motoring and Speed Limits on NH Highways
Turtle Boy is offline  
Old 07-09-2008, 01:07 PM   #46
WeirsBeachBoater
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 709
Blog Entries: 9
Thanks: 39
Thanked 148 Times in 65 Posts
Default Interesting up to this part.

"after 2 years when it was seen that the whole NH economy did indeed not collapse as had been warned, and people still found great enjoyment using their cars, the "no limits" crowd slowly faded away.
THE END"

This part is all wrong.
WeirsBeachBoater is offline  
Old 07-01-2008, 01:23 PM   #47
SIKSUKR
Senior Member
 
SIKSUKR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 5,075
Thanks: 215
Thanked 903 Times in 509 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bear Islander View Post
I have to disagree with you on one point. 2Blackdogs is not a member of "our side" of the debate. He has been a member of the forum for more than four years yet the majority of his posts have been about an accident that happened two weeks ago. And he NEVER posted about speed limits until two days AFTER the Senate passed HB847. He had nothing to say about speed limits until it was all over.

He is a member of the "accident speculation" movement, not the speed limit movement.

As the forums unofficial spokesperson for the pro speed limit side I declare that 2Blackdogs is not a member of our group.
Then we can agree to disagree.Are you telling me 2BD is not a supporter of the speed limit?Please.Pretty sad when neither side wants anything to do a member.Don't get me wrong though BI,I do not put him/her in the same group as you.As much as I disagree with a lot of your viewpoints,I don't see you sink to the same levels.You have also called out a certain member for being inappropriate for obvious reasons and I believe,because it was making the pro speed limit side look bad.That's how I saw it.
__________________
SIKSUKR
SIKSUKR is offline  
Old 07-01-2008, 01:32 PM   #48
Airwaves
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: I'm right here!
Posts: 1,153
Thanks: 9
Thanked 102 Times in 37 Posts
Default Today the day?

If I recall Skip's posting about the process correctly, and assuming the Governor had the bill on his desk when the Union Leader article reported that he will sign it, then the bill has to be signed by the end of the day today?

If not what happens? Is the legislature still in session, does it become law without his signature or is it a pocket veto?

I only suggest the governor had the bill on his desk at the time the UL article was published because I had contacted his office and they said it had not arrived and no decision would be made until it did.

I have not seen any AP or other story indicating that it has already been signed.
Airwaves is offline  
Old 06-27-2008, 07:38 AM   #49
chipj29
Senior Member
 
chipj29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bow
Posts: 1,874
Thanks: 521
Thanked 308 Times in 162 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Blackdogs View Post
"The Mod" seems to agree with you, 'cuz my replies are being delayed.

Since I don't want to offend your tender sensibilities too much in one post, I'll proceed very slowly with my rebuttals.

Just now, I found a second "idiot".



Note ye well the date. It was four days before your reply. And I have yet some more surprises for you, and for the forum at large on this issue.
Looks just like any of the posts here...one persons OPINION.
chipj29 is offline  
Old 06-25-2008, 09:54 PM   #50
hazelnut
Senior Member
 
hazelnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,348
Blog Entries: 3
Thanks: 508
Thanked 462 Times in 162 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Islander View Post
Congratulation to Sandy, BI and the crew at WinnFABS! You fought long and hard for the safety of the Winnipesaukee community.

This will open a new day, and a better lake for all.
Congrats to your efforts. I truly hope this legislation does what you think it will do. NO, not chase GF-Boats off the lake but increase safety on the lake. It will be quite a while before we can assess the impact but time will certainly tell.
hazelnut is offline  
Old 06-30-2008, 05:19 PM   #51
Coastal Laker
Senior Member
 
Coastal Laker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: In the Beautiful Lakes Region of course!
Posts: 130
Thanks: 1
Thanked 9 Times in 4 Posts
Default A Better Lake for Many, Not All

Quote:
Originally Posted by Islander View Post
Congratulation to Sandy, BI and the crew at WinnFABS! You fought long and hard for the safety of the Winnipesaukee community.

This will open a new day, and a better lake for all.
How will we know at the conclusion of 2010 if the light traffic on the lake is due to fuel prices getting worse and the affordability of boats diminishing, or the speed limits preventing people from buying new boats or coming here? Regardless, traffic on the lake is less and less what it was only a few years ago.
Coastal Laker is offline  
Old 06-30-2008, 05:25 PM   #52
VtSteve
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,320
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 230
Thanked 361 Times in 169 Posts
Default

Most every lake has seen slow traffic this year for some reason or another. Pretty calm and quiet here as well, with no speed limits.
VtSteve is offline  
 

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:18 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.

This page was generated in 0.25937 seconds