Yet Another Tragic Case......

On Sun, 2 Dec 2007 14:13:22 -0500, "Eisboch" <rce.DeleteThis@nowhere.com> wrote:

>There's a direct corollary to boating here. There are minority interest
>groups constantly trying to restrict or ban boater's right to enjoy their
>interests. Some are well founded, but many are simply attempts to restrict
>boaters because "they" don't share the same interest.

Yes, and some boater offended their sensibilities in some way by
running with an open exhaust or throwing a wake over their seawall,
etc.
 >> Stay informed about: Yet Another Tragic Case...... 

On Sun, 2 Dec 2007 13:39:19 -0500, "Eisboch" <rce.DeleteThis@nowhere.com> wrote:

>But you have to realize that for every death or serious injury, there are
>hundreds of thousands, if not millions, that never crash or have an
>accident.

Not to be argumentative but I think that motorcycle accident and death
rates are way higher than that. We average about one motorcycle death
per week here in SWFL.

http://blogs.consumerreports.org/cars/2007/09/motorcycle-deat.html

"The fatality rates for cruiser and "standard" riders rank the lowest,
at 5.7 deaths per 10,000 registered motorcycles. Touring bikes, such
as the Harley example, averaged 6.5 deaths, with sport bikes totaling
10.7 deaths per 10,000."
 >> Stay informed about: Yet Another Tragic Case...... 

On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 18:03:38 -0500, HK <payer33859 RemoveThis @mypacks.net> wrote:

>>> It should be mandatory. Period.
>>
>> So you believe that it is a proper role of government to protect
>> people from themselves?
>>
>> What do you do when they take away your unsafe, low transom boat?
>>
>> (for your own good, of course)
>>
>
>
>Ever the a**, eh, Dwayne?

Just answer my question Hairy. I believe there's a legitimate
philosophical issue at stake:

Do you believe that it is a proper role of government to protect
people from themselves?
 >> Stay informed about: Yet Another Tragic Case...... 

Wayne.B wrote:
> On Sun, 2 Dec 2007 14:13:22 -0500, "Eisboch" <rce.RemoveThis@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>> There's a direct corollary to boating here. There are minority interest
>> groups constantly trying to restrict or ban boater's right to enjoy their
>> interests. Some are well founded, but many are simply attempts to restrict
>> boaters because "they" don't share the same interest.
>
> Yes, and some boater offended their sensibilities in some way by
> running with an open exhaust or throwing a wake over their seawall,
> etc.
>

I am all for freedom of boating, as long as it matches my kind of
boating. Since i don't fish, I think all fishing should be restricted
to 7 days a year, and all fishing boats should be taxed 50% higher than
I am. This will substantially reduce our gas consumption, and will help
reduce wakes and busy traffic on the weekend. To make sure all
fisherman are included in the tax, I recommend we register all fishing
poles.

Eisboch and Wayne won't have to pay the tax, since I think their kind of
boating is the preferred boating style.
 >> Stay informed about: Yet Another Tragic Case...... 

Wayne.B wrote:
> On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 18:03:38 -0500, HK <payer33859.TakeThisOut@mypacks.net> wrote:
>
>>>> It should be mandatory. Period.
>>> So you believe that it is a proper role of government to protect
>>> people from themselves?
>>>
>>> What do you do when they take away your unsafe, low transom boat?
>>>
>>> (for your own good, of course)
>>>
>>
>> Ever the a**, eh, Dwayne?
>
> Just answer my question Hairy. I believe there's a legitimate
> philosophical issue at stake:
>
> Do you believe that it is a proper role of government to protect
> people from themselves?
>


Sure. I ain't no loonitarian. I believe in helmet laws, seat belts, a
really effective, hard-working FDA (not a Bush FDA), a really effective,
hard-working OSHA (not a Bush OSHA), et cetera.
 >> Stay informed about: Yet Another Tragic Case...... 

Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
> Wayne.B wrote:
>> On Sun, 2 Dec 2007 14:13:22 -0500, "Eisboch" <rce.RemoveThis@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>
>>> There's a direct corollary to boating here. There are minority
>>> interest groups constantly trying to restrict or ban boater's right
>>> to enjoy their interests. Some are well founded, but many are simply
>>> attempts to restrict boaters because "they" don't share the same
>>> interest.
>>
>> Yes, and some boater offended their sensibilities in some way by
>> running with an open exhaust or throwing a wake over their seawall,
>> etc.
>>
>
> I am all for freedom of boating, as long as it matches my kind of
> boating.

No one wants to tax your playing with your rubber duckies in your tubby.
 >> Stay informed about: Yet Another Tragic Case...... 

HK wrote:
> Wayne.B wrote:
>> On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 18:03:38 -0500, HK <payer33859.RemoveThis@mypacks.net> wrote:
>>
>>>>> It should be mandatory. Period.
>>>> So you believe that it is a proper role of government to protect
>>>> people from themselves?
>>>> What do you do when they take away your unsafe, low transom boat?
>>>>
>>>> (for your own good, of course)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Ever the a**, eh, Dwayne?
>>
>> Just answer my question Hairy. I believe there's a legitimate
>> philosophical issue at stake:
>>
>> Do you believe that it is a proper role of government to protect
>> people from themselves?
>>
>
>
> Sure. I ain't no loonitarian. I believe in helmet laws, seat belts, a
> really effective, hard-working FDA (not a Bush FDA), a really effective,
> hard-working OSHA (not a Bush OSHA), et cetera.
>

Does the FDA and OSHA magically become good the day a Democrat is sworn
into the office of the president?
 >> Stay informed about: Yet Another Tragic Case...... 

BAR wrote:
> HK wrote:
>> Wayne.B wrote:
>>> On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 18:03:38 -0500, HK <payer33859 DeleteThis @mypacks.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> It should be mandatory. Period.
>>>>> So you believe that it is a proper role of government to protect
>>>>> people from themselves? What do you do when they take away your
>>>>> unsafe, low transom boat?
>>>>>
>>>>> (for your own good, of course)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ever the a**, eh, Dwayne?
>>>
>>> Just answer my question Hairy. I believe there's a legitimate
>>> philosophical issue at stake:
>>>
>>> Do you believe that it is a proper role of government to protect
>>> people from themselves?
>>>
>>
>>
>> Sure. I ain't no loonitarian. I believe in helmet laws, seat belts, a
>> really effective, hard-working FDA (not a Bush FDA), a really
>> effective, hard-working OSHA (not a Bush OSHA), et cetera.
>>
>
> Does the FDA and OSHA magically become good the day a Democrat is sworn
> into the office of the president?


Nope. But they get better, and spend a bit more time protecting the
public, and not the GOP corporate benefactors.
 >> Stay informed about: Yet Another Tragic Case...... 

thunder RemoveThis @TAKEOUTgti.net wrote:
> On Mon, 03 Dec 2007 12:46:19 -0500, Wayne.B wrote:
>
>
>> http://blogs.consumerreports.org/cars/2007/09/motorcycle-deat.html
>>
>> "The fatality rates for cruiser and "standard" riders rank the lowest,
>> at 5.7 deaths per 10,000 registered motorcycles. Touring bikes, such as
>> the Harley example, averaged 6.5 deaths, with sport bikes totaling 10.7
>> deaths per 10,000."
>
> That is a higher rate than I would have thought, and considering that it
> is per registered motorcycle, not per mile, it is quite high. I'm
> guessing, but I would think that the average motorcycle only averages a
> couple of thousand miles per year.


Evolution in action.
 >> Stay informed about: Yet Another Tragic Case...... 

"Wayne.B" <waynebatrecdotboats.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b9g8l35fmb8ptk5il086s6m23cjt9fkpv1@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 18:03:38 -0500, HK <payer33859.TakeThisOut@mypacks.net> wrote:
>
>>>> It should be mandatory. Period.
>>>
>>> So you believe that it is a proper role of government to protect
>>> people from themselves?
>>>
>>> What do you do when they take away your unsafe, low transom boat?
>>>
>>> (for your own good, of course)
>>>
>>
>>
>>Ever the a**, eh, Dwayne?
>
> Just answer my question Hairy. I believe there's a legitimate
> philosophical issue at stake:
>
> Do you believe that it is a proper role of government to protect
> people from themselves?
>


Slight detour: Kids learn both good and bad habits from their parents. Even
the stupidest parents might wear seat belts if they were afraid of being
ticketed, and then their kids see them doing the right thing. I like the
law. And, the cops *do* write a lot of tickets here for failure to use
belts.
 >> Stay informed about: Yet Another Tragic Case...... 

On Mon, 03 Dec 2007 13:12:50 -0500, HK <payer33859.RemoveThis@mypacks.net> wrote:

>thunder@TAKEOUTgti.net wrote:
>> On Mon, 03 Dec 2007 12:46:19 -0500, Wayne.B wrote:
>>
>>
>>> http://blogs.consumerreports.org/cars/2007/09/motorcycle-deat.html
>>>
>>> "The fatality rates for cruiser and "standard" riders rank the lowest,
>>> at 5.7 deaths per 10,000 registered motorcycles. Touring bikes, such as
>>> the Harley example, averaged 6.5 deaths, with sport bikes totaling 10.7
>>> deaths per 10,000."
>>
>> That is a higher rate than I would have thought, and considering that it
>> is per registered motorcycle, not per mile, it is quite high. I'm
>> guessing, but I would think that the average motorcycle only averages a
>> couple of thousand miles per year.
>
>
>Evolution in action.

You picked the right word to talk about how Harleys are getting better!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_engine
--
John H
 >> Stay informed about: Yet Another Tragic Case...... 

On Mon, 03 Dec 2007 12:53:34 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
<rpsmithersIII.TakeThisOut@example.net> wrote:

>Wayne.B wrote:
>> On Sun, 2 Dec 2007 14:13:22 -0500, "Eisboch" <rce.TakeThisOut@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>
>>> There's a direct corollary to boating here. There are minority interest
>>> groups constantly trying to restrict or ban boater's right to enjoy their
>>> interests. Some are well founded, but many are simply attempts to restrict
>>> boaters because "they" don't share the same interest.
>>
>> Yes, and some boater offended their sensibilities in some way by
>> running with an open exhaust or throwing a wake over their seawall,
>> etc.
>>
>
>I am all for freedom of boating, as long as it matches my kind of
>boating. Since i don't fish, I think all fishing should be restricted
>to 7 days a year, and all fishing boats should be taxed 50% higher than
>I am. This will substantially reduce our gas consumption, and will help
>reduce wakes and busy traffic on the weekend. To make sure all
>fisherman are included in the tax, I recommend we register all fishing
>poles.
>
>Eisboch and Wayne won't have to pay the tax, since I think their kind of
>boating is the preferred boating style.

Whoa, what about us fishing guys that don't fish on weekends? Where's my
lobbyist again?
--
John H
 >> Stay informed about: Yet Another Tragic Case...... 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: Yet Another Tragic Case......