NH House Bill 162
01-08-2006, 05:31 PM
#111
Charter Member #232
Charter MemberThread Starter
Re: NH House Bill 162
Originally Posted by ^HB162^
I quote the actual New Hampshire law about the jurisdiction. You quote some chart notes that refer to the entire county. AND YOU THINK YOU ARE CORRECT?
Ask your mama for a quarter, go down to the WalMart and buy a clue!
Ask your mama for a quarter, go down to the WalMart and buy a clue!
Jon
__________________
Put your best foot forward!
Put your best foot forward!
01-08-2006, 05:35 PM
#112
Registered
Re: NH House Bill 162
Originally Posted by damdonzi
Anyone can twist statistics, take misleading polls and even go so far as to patheticly try and link a fatality in order to pass this law. All this does is emphasize how this is clearly not about a speed limit.
I'm still waiting for Winnipesaukee specific (Let me try and be a little more clear here), FACTS ONLY PERTAINING TO LAKE WINNIPESAUKEE, that show a need for such a law. Maybe something that would contradict what the head of Marine patrol himself publicly states? Like I said, I'm still waiting.....
More important things at hand.... GO PATS!!!
I'm still waiting for Winnipesaukee specific (Let me try and be a little more clear here), FACTS ONLY PERTAINING TO LAKE WINNIPESAUKEE, that show a need for such a law. Maybe something that would contradict what the head of Marine patrol himself publicly states? Like I said, I'm still waiting.....
More important things at hand.... GO PATS!!!
.....still holding my breath.
01-08-2006, 06:41 PM
#113
Registered
Re: NH House Bill 162
Originally Posted by ^HB162^
pm203
I "came clean" many posts ago. I'll be more clear and elaborate.
I think the lake is becoming to much about speed and size. Bigger and faster is not the direction I want he lake to go in. Some are afraid to canoe or kayak on the lake because of speed and congestion. We now have HUGE Carvers and a boat that goes 130 mph. This is just to much for this lake.
Nothing will fix the lakes problems, but a speed limit is one step we can take. The biggest problem is the direction we are going in. Every year more and more boats going faster and faster. Plus PWCs that are to the point of being out of control. Were can it end but more Jack Hartmans.
If performance boaters wish to stay and follow the rules they have every right to. And if somebody wants to open it up out on the broads now and then, I don't really care. If they go 150' of my dock at high speed I'm calling the MP.
Clear enough?
I "came clean" many posts ago. I'll be more clear and elaborate.
I think the lake is becoming to much about speed and size. Bigger and faster is not the direction I want he lake to go in. Some are afraid to canoe or kayak on the lake because of speed and congestion. We now have HUGE Carvers and a boat that goes 130 mph. This is just to much for this lake.
Nothing will fix the lakes problems, but a speed limit is one step we can take. The biggest problem is the direction we are going in. Every year more and more boats going faster and faster. Plus PWCs that are to the point of being out of control. Were can it end but more Jack Hartmans.
If performance boaters wish to stay and follow the rules they have every right to. And if somebody wants to open it up out on the broads now and then, I don't really care. If they go 150' of my dock at high speed I'm calling the MP.
Clear enough?
01-08-2006, 06:48 PM
#114
VIP Member
VIP Member
Re: NH House Bill 162
Originally Posted by damdonzi
Thanks for clarifying that this is your personal agenda, and not any majority whatsoever. And for those of you on the board that don't know what the Jack Hartman reference is, this is another glaring example of the type of fear tactics that these people try to use, instead of credible Winnipesaukee specific information related to speed. He was the victim of a fatal accident which these people horribly continue to reference in the self-serving hopes of gaining sympathy for thier agenda. It is nothing other than shameful.
and was killed by an intoxicated operator...funny how those things are left out
__________________
Chris G.
Chris G.
01-08-2006, 07:10 PM
#115
Toxic FORMULA
Platinum Member
Re: NH House Bill 162
Originally Posted by CMG
and was killed by an intoxicated operator...funny how those things are left out
Hit and run intoxicated boater. Who was nice enough to turn himself in the next day After he sobered up so they couldn't prove it
He could have been running a cruiser , but they use the fact that it was a performance boat against us and that he was SPEEDING at an estimated 28 mph at night
01-08-2006, 07:18 PM
#116
Registered
Join Date: May 2003
Location: In the Mountains
Posts: 11,772
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: NH House Bill 162
Originally Posted by ^HB162^
pm203
I "came clean" many posts ago. I'll be more clear and elaborate.
I think the lake is becoming to much about speed and size. Bigger and faster is not the direction I want he lake to go in. Some are afraid to canoe or kayak on the lake because of speed and congestion. We now have HUGE Carvers and a boat that goes 130 mph. This is just to much for this lake.
Nothing will fix the lakes problems, but a speed limit is one step we can take. The biggest problem is the direction we are going in. Every year more and more boats going faster and faster. Plus PWCs that are to the point of being out of control. Were can it end but more Jack Hartmans.
If performance boaters wish to stay and follow the rules they have every right to. And if somebody wants to open it up out on the broads now and then, I don't really care. If they go 150' of my dock at high speed I'm calling the MP.
Clear enough?
I "came clean" many posts ago. I'll be more clear and elaborate.
I think the lake is becoming to much about speed and size. Bigger and faster is not the direction I want he lake to go in. Some are afraid to canoe or kayak on the lake because of speed and congestion. We now have HUGE Carvers and a boat that goes 130 mph. This is just to much for this lake.
Nothing will fix the lakes problems, but a speed limit is one step we can take. The biggest problem is the direction we are going in. Every year more and more boats going faster and faster. Plus PWCs that are to the point of being out of control. Were can it end but more Jack Hartmans.
If performance boaters wish to stay and follow the rules they have every right to. And if somebody wants to open it up out on the broads now and then, I don't really care. If they go 150' of my dock at high speed I'm calling the MP.
Clear enough?
Notice all the "I's"......
I think the lake is becoming........
Not the direction I want.......
I'm calling the MP.......( now it's important to remember this is the same MP that stood up at the public hearings and stated that speed was not the problem.)
"Nothing will fix the lake's (sorry I have to use correct punctuation here and possession requires an apostrophe) problems, but a speed limit is one step we can take". Now I have a reasonably good command of the English language (as demonstrated better than yours) and I read that statement to mean that you state that nothing will fix the lake's problems, which one could assume that nothing would include a speed limit, yet you want a speed limit, after stating that nothing will fix the lake's problems. That my uneducated rubberheaded idiot is a circlejerk, a totally contradictory to itself, statement. That is why I say you don't even put up a good fight. You can't even win against yourself.....
And in referencing to the Carver, I would make an educated guess that you are referring to large wakes, which I believe, there is ALREADY a law on your own books with regard to that. AAHHHHAAAAAAAA, here's a novel idea, try enforcing laws that ALREADY EXIST. My, why didn't YOU think of that.....
And as already pointed out by another poster, the death you refer to involved alcohol, something that I don't believe a speed limit will help very much, that is unless you are going to ask for a special "drinking at only "X" mph law....
You have a right to your opinion, but make no mistake about it, IT IS ONLY YOUR OPINION. NOTHING ELSE. And you and your group are only trying to force YOUR OPINIONS on everyone else, most of who DO NOT SHARE your opinions, particularly the head of your own Marine Patrol.
Once again, you just got your azz handed to you on a silver platter, CLEAR ENOUGH......
If this were a hockey game, there wouldn't be enough left of you to punch....
Can someone please bring me a couple of bags of ice to ice my knuckles down a bit....
Last edited by Formula Outlaw; 01-08-2006 at 07:26 PM.
01-08-2006, 07:49 PM
#117
Registered
Join Date: May 2003
Location: In the Mountains
Posts: 11,772
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: NH House Bill 162
Originally Posted by ^HB162^
If I forgot to say he was drinking, then you guys forgot to say he was found not guilty of that charge by a jury. And that the receipt from where he was drinking showed he had three glasses of wine over 2 1/2 hours.
That accident is the reason why some people support HB162. That may not be right or fair.... but its true.
That accident is the reason why some people support HB162. That may not be right or fair.... but its true.
Hey loser, stick a fork in yourself, in this Forum, YOU'RE DONE...
01-08-2006, 07:49 PM
#118
Registered
Re: NH House Bill 162
Originally Posted by ^HB162^
If I forgot to say he was drinking, then you guys forgot to say he was found not guilty of that charge by a jury. And that the receipt from where he was drinking showed he had three glasses of wine over 2 1/2 hours.
That accident is the reason why some people support HB162. That may not be right or fair.... but its true.
That accident is the reason why some people support HB162. That may not be right or fair.... but its true.
No, you forgot to say anything whatsoever about it, and we called you on it.
Finally, an admission of the wrong that you are doing:
"That may not be right or fair....but its true."
01-08-2006, 07:53 PM
#119
Toxic FORMULA
Platinum Member
Re: NH House Bill 162
This kayak and canoe line gets me . There's plenty of places to use kayaks and canoes that WE CAN'T GO and they also have to go where we can , so WE have to leave or slow down. Now wait a minute , why don't you just tell me to buy a smaller , paddle powered boat so i can go where they do? You would certainly object and make a mockery of me if I suggested THEY get BIGGER boats.
Personally I wouldn't be caught in a canoe or kayak in a lake the size of Winni unless it was in some protected orsecluded area, But maybe I'm the only one with common sense
. There's plenty of places to use kayaks and canoes that WE CAN'T GO and they also have to go where we can , so WE have to leave or slow down. Now wait a minute , why don't you just tell me to buy a smaller , paddle powered boat so i can go where they do? You would certainly object and make a mockery of me if I suggested THEY get BIGGER boats.Personally I wouldn't be caught in a canoe or kayak in a lake the size of Winni unless it was in some protected orsecluded area, But maybe I'm the only one with common sense
01-08-2006, 08:50 PM
#120
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Re: NH House Bill 162
Originally Posted by ^HB162^
I quote the actual New Hampshire law about the jurisdiction. You quote some chart notes that refer to the entire county. AND YOU THINK YOU ARE CORRECT?
Ask your mama for a quarter, go down to the WalMart and buy a clue!
Ask your mama for a quarter, go down to the WalMart and buy a clue!
Go back to pluking vegetarian turkeys for a living...
I'll see you on Winne on our few trips a year there ... making as much noise as possible and going by at 80 mph. If I get a ticket (wich I won't) I'll pay it and keep annoying you.
Good day now.
