Marsh Jones wrote in message news:acy_a.94762$cF.29148@rwcrnsc53...
Tim Ingram wrote:
squall. High initial stability, loss of secondary stability.

Marsh



You might as well get this right:

http://www.1stBooks.com/bookview/16818

(paste in browser address bar if necessary)

As you will read in the described contents of the book: Sponsons are
not intentended for WW. WW is a special murder technique on its' own.
Most people do not die on WW. They die of hypothermia, wearing a PFD
or not.

The rate of US canoe and kayak deaths per exposure hour far exceeds
the worst vehicle scandals (Ford Firestone 15+), the fatalities in
19th century mining in Great Britain 1000+, and the current fatalities
in Iraq per exposure hour, in harm's way.

You have participated in the largest experiment in social psychology
since the Yale/Milgram experiments of the 60's. Goldhagen's "Hitler's
Willing Executioners", describes a similar group behavior to RBP, such
as the SS, basing execution on inferior "skills or other qualities".
This was a best-seller in Germany, as well as a 1994 Harvard
dissertation.

You have recently contributed to the murder of 2, eleven year old Girl
Guides.

Tim

...rising to bait... ...can't help myself... ...CTRLAlt... ...
oh, what the hell:

Since I don't do whitewater, but do a *lot* of fla****er canoeing and
kayaking, particularly in cooler climes, I'll call you on this one. Not
sponsons, dry suits, Mustang survival suits or anything else will
prevent underequipped, ill prepared, unskilled people from venturing out
in conditions above their ability. Any device that provides this sense
of false security has about the same utility as an out of date condom.

Just a simple stat, taken from:
http://198.66.37.82/issues/articles/DrowningFacts.html

"According to the United States Coast Guard, deaths associated with
recreational boating numbered 734 in the United States and its
territories. Drowning accounted for 517 of the deaths. The Coast Guard
estimates that about 450 boaters who drowned could have been saved by
wearing a life jacket. Alcohol was reported to be involved in 191 (26%)
of the deaths."

This covers all recreational boaters in the US, not just canoes and
kayaks for the year 1998. Most boating deaths reported in Minnesota
involve some combination of night, storm, no PFD, and alcohol, not
canoes or kayaks. In the past year, I cannot recall a single death
related to a kayak or canoe in this state,which has more registered
canoes and kayaks per 100,000 residents than any other. We have more
people die every year on snowmobiles than in all boats. (maybe a new
market - sponsons for snowmobiles)

As you have directly, and without warrant, called me an accessory to
murder, I'll take the unprecedented action for me and suggest you take
your sponsons, remove the arms so they don't get in the way, and put
them where the sun don't shine.

Marsh

Stupidly Marsh, You do not understand rate of death.

Canoes and Kayaks have the highest rate of death in US history. This
is due to the deliberate behavior of a tiny industry (about 100,000
new boats a year total!) deliberately organized to murder as many
people as possible.

Stupid Marsh. Good thing it is such a tiny industry or we could have
millions of dead citizens. But yours is only a tiny death cult.

Stupid, mean and deadly to kids, or any one else in a kayak or canoe.

Tim

Tim Ingram wrote:

Stupid, mean and deadly to kids, or any one else in a kayak or canoe.

Hmmm, that sounds exactly like sponsons, to me. False security designed around false premises and a false
conspiracy theory.

Since you're so enamored of "statistics", you should read the ACA report "Critical Judgement". Then again, you
wouldn't want to be confused by facts, would you? Wait, let me guess, it's all just "industry propaganda" right?
Part of the vast kayak conspiracy that only YOU have the power and insight to see. Wow, you really are special,
Tim!

You need to go back on your meds. And please, wipe that foam off your mouth.

BTW, I really like the rant about the SS. I'll save that one so I can show it to people who mistakenly give your
ranting any credence. It will show them just how unstable and delusional you really are.

--
Regards

Brian

....stuff deleted
...and the number of kayakers is still tiny. Not the same situation
at all.

Mary,

Small population means little political clout. This is just the type of
potential group for which pooly considered law is enacted.

You must realize that the helmet laws were enacted simply because those who
cycled (age range 5-16) had zero political power. No vote, no risk of
enacting laws that offend. Because kayaking is growing more popular (mostly
fla****er), there are a greater number of low skilled people on the water
and an increased risk of death to those individuals. Since the numbers of
boaters is still pretty low, lawmakers acting now can enact dumb laws that
won't hurt them at the polls.

Rick

"Rick" writes:

...stuff deleted
...and the number of kayakers is still tiny. Not the same situation
at all.

Mary,

Small population means little political clout. This is just the type of
potential group for which pooly considered law is enacted.

Well, no, it really isn't. You see, in order to enact legislation
of any kind, SOMEone has to give a damn about it. SOMEone has to
want to do it. So can you tell me who, exactly, wants to nail
sponsons on the boats of all paddlers? Sponsonboy doesn't count; he
doesn't got a vote in the USofA.

You must realize that the helmet laws were enacted simply because those who
cycled (age range 5-16) had zero political power.

And those many kids who cycled had these appendages known as parents
who cared about what might happen if their child's head hit the
pavement. IOW, there were a great many concerned people -- many
millions -- and, rightly or wrongly, they saw helmet laws as a
solution.

No vote, no risk of
enacting laws that offend. Because kayaking is growing more popular (mostly
fla****er), there are a greater number of low skilled people on the water
and an increased risk of death to those individuals. Since the numbers of
boaters is still pretty low, lawmakers acting now can enact dumb laws that
won't hurt them at the polls.

Lawmakers don't enact laws on issues that ABSOLUTELY NOBODY cares
enough to agitate them about. A lot of people cared about bike
accidents; very few people care about kayak accidents, and with the
exception of one lone nutter, NONE of them think sponsons is a
solution that would merit anything even faintly scented of a legal
requirement. No lawmaker is going to spent a nanosecond of effort
on something like this when they can instead spend time on
legislation that someone cares about, and for which their efforts
will somehow be rewarded. QED.

--
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::
Mary Malmros
Some days you're the windshield,
Other days you're the bug.

If you need to strap plastic bags to the hull to make a boat safe, you
have either chosen the wrong boat for the job, or the design sucks! If
you need a stable flat water boat that kids can stand in, buy or build
one... don't try to make one out of something that is not. The hardest
thing about building boats for folks is telling them that that
beautiful hull they saw last week on TV or in a mag won't work for the
type of boating they intend. Boats are always a compromise but if you
choose the right boat, and learn how to use it, you will be as safe as
can be expected when fooling with nature.
Scotty aka Effin'A... and no, I do not spellcheck ng stuff... sorry.

Cogent, as always, Mary. And yet... And yet... he has already managed
to get some office of the USCG to task one of its contractors with
looking into the question of (A) whether sponsons can indeed be
lifesavers, and (B) if so, whether they should be required equipment.
And the contractor assigned the task to a young woman with no paddling
expertise, hence no sound judgment in the matter, nor even enough
knowlege to ask the right questions (of Timmy OR of the paddling
community).

I'd like to trust the good judgment of a USCG faced with Ingram's
incoherent ravings, but...

-Richard


Mary Malmros wrote in message ...
"Rick" writes:

...stuff deleted
...and the number of kayakers is still tiny. Not the same situation
at all.

Mary,

Small population means little political clout. This is just the type of
potential group for which pooly considered law is enacted.

Well, no, it really isn't. You see, in order to enact legislation
of any kind, SOMEone has to give a damn about it. SOMEone has to
want to do it. So can you tell me who, exactly, wants to nail
sponsons on the boats of all paddlers? Sponsonboy doesn't count; he
doesn't got a vote in the USofA.

You must realize that the helmet laws were enacted simply because those who
cycled (age range 5-16) had zero political power.

And those many kids who cycled had these appendages known as parents
who cared about what might happen if their child's head hit the
pavement. IOW, there were a great many concerned people -- many
millions -- and, rightly or wrongly, they saw helmet laws as a
solution.

No vote, no risk of
enacting laws that offend. Because kayaking is growing more popular (mostly
fla****er), there are a greater number of low skilled people on the water
and an increased risk of death to those individuals. Since the numbers of
boaters is still pretty low, lawmakers acting now can enact dumb laws that
won't hurt them at the polls.

Lawmakers don't enact laws on issues that ABSOLUTELY NOBODY cares
enough to agitate them about. A lot of people cared about bike
accidents; very few people care about kayak accidents, and with the
exception of one lone nutter, NONE of them think sponsons is a
solution that would merit anything even faintly scented of a legal
requirement. No lawmaker is going to spent a nanosecond of effort
on something like this when they can instead spend time on
legislation that someone cares about, and for which their efforts
will somehow be rewarded. QED.

Hey, Scott! Glad to see that you came back!

--
-Richard, His Kanubic Travesty

================================================== ====================
Richard Hopley, Winston-Salem, NC, USA
rhopley[at]earthlink[dot]net 1-301-775-0471
Nothing really matters except Boats, Sex, and Rock'n'Roll.
rhople[at]wfubmc[dot]edu 1-336-713-5077
OK, OK; computer programming for scientific research also matters.
================================================== ====================



(Backyard Renegade) wrote in message . com...
If you need to strap plastic bags to the hull to make a boat safe, you
have either chosen the wrong boat for the job, or the design sucks! If
you need a stable flat water boat that kids can stand in, buy or build
one... don't try to make one out of something that is not. The hardest
thing about building boats for folks is telling them that that
beautiful hull they saw last week on TV or in a mag won't work for the
type of boating they intend. Boats are always a compromise but if you
choose the right boat, and learn how to use it, you will be as safe as
can be expected when fooling with nature.
Scotty aka Effin'A... and no, I do not spellcheck ng stuff... sorry.

Mary Malmros wrote in message ...
"Rick" writes:

...stuff deleted
...and the number of kayakers is still tiny. Not the same situation
at all.

Mary,

Small population means little political clout. This is just the type of
potential group for which pooly considered law is enacted.

Well, no, it really isn't. You see, in order to enact legislation
of any kind, SOMEone has to give a damn about it. SOMEone has to
want to do it. So can you tell me who, exactly, wants to nail
sponsons on the boats of all paddlers? Sponsonboy doesn't count; he
doesn't got a vote in the USofA.

You must realize that the helmet laws were enacted simply because those who
cycled (age range 5-16) had zero political power.

And those many kids who cycled had these appendages known as parents
who cared about what might happen if their child's head hit the
pavement. IOW, there were a great many concerned people -- many
millions -- and, rightly or wrongly, they saw helmet laws as a
solution.

No vote, no risk of
enacting laws that offend. Because kayaking is growing more popular (mostly
fla****er), there are a greater number of low skilled people on the water
and an increased risk of death to those individuals. Since the numbers of
boaters is still pretty low, lawmakers acting now can enact dumb laws that
won't hurt them at the polls.

Lawmakers don't enact laws on issues that ABSOLUTELY NOBODY cares
enough to agitate them about. A lot of people cared about bike
accidents; very few people care about kayak accidents, and with the
exception of one lone nutter, NONE of them think sponsons is a
solution that would merit anything even faintly scented of a legal
requirement. No lawmaker is going to spent a nanosecond of effort
on something like this when they can instead spend time on
legislation that someone cares about, and for which their efforts
will somehow be rewarded. QED.

It is a pleasure to respond to Malmrose here since she has always
represented a peculiar perspective regarding murder in canoes and
kayaks, in her posts on RBP. It is wonderful to see her attempt to
justify here the murder of girl guides, scouts and anyone else who is
lured to death in a kayak or canoe. (They aren't politically important
enough!) Nice one.

The Washington snipers also murdered politically unpowerful people
near the Capital. And they only murdered a tenth of all US canoe and
kayak murders. But they sure ****ed off a lot of decent people in
America.

And if you read the description of the contents of my book, you will
see that the US Congress and the USCG are plenty ****ed off with all
of you:

http://www.1stBooks.com/bookview/16818 (Just paste into browser
address bars.)

Nystrom and a few others, also in these recent posts, display
everything I have said regarding organized murder by the ACA and RBP
posters. This evidence is so powerful regarding your reckless
disregard for human life, that most citizens would be inclined to ask:
"How damn crazy are these murdering morons?"

Well, the Oklahoma City bombing opened the story of many deadly cults
now operating in America. You just happen to have kayaks and canoes as
modus operandi, making them as deadly as possible, to kill as many as
possible.

(An amazingly high death rate, considering how tiny an industry. But
water is actually one of the easiest ways to kill people.)

And obviously in these posts, we are seeing a self-reinforcing cult
that actually congratulates itself on getting away with the murders of
the "politically unpowerful" (as with Malmos). Well, if you check the
laws of the US (I am a US citizen, born in Pennsylvania), you will
find that organized and deliberate murder, or hurting any US citizens
deliberately, will result in the strongest sanctions.

The US Coast Guard has the power to barbeque your cult fast, and they
are not pleased with the bait and switch scam perpetrated upon them by
the ACA for ten years. The evidence of this book is overwhelming.

But my next book will be even more overwhelming in examining your
posts as examples of intent toward deliberate, cold-blooded murders of
citizens, right in the USA.

You are so stupid, in your cult thinking to expose yourself like
Nazis, or the KKK (who were more clandestine). But please keep it up.
Goldhagen's "Hitlers Willing Executioners" had nothing to study like
this. An actual murder cult on the internet!

Incidentally, withdrawing your posts will do no good. I have them in
archives. You are sick killers.

Tim

"Tim Ingram" wrote in message
om...
Mary Malmros wrote in message
...


snippage of absolutely idiotic spew...




...that most citizens would be inclined to ask:
"How damn crazy are these murdering morons?"
=================
most sane people would ask who's the bozo that thinks that those who go
boating are murderers...

you lose, timmy, just on your specious use of language...




snippage of rest of hate filled rantings....

Tim Ingram wrote:

And if you read the description of the contents of my book, you will
see that the US Congress and the USCG are plenty ****ed off with all
of you:

What makes you think that any of us are going to waste our money on a book that's full of nothing
but lies and the ramblings of an obvious lunatic. You couldn't care less about safety in kayaks or
anywhere else; all you care about is selling airbags and books to line your pocket. You are the
most depraved individual I've ever encountered.

But my next book will be even more overwhelming in examining your
posts as examples of intent toward deliberate, cold-blooded murders of
citizens, right in the USA.

Oh, good, please do publish our posts and your character assassination attempts. Not only will it
serve to show anyone who reads it who the resonable people in this debate are, but it will also
provide perfect evidence to sue you into oblivion for defamation.

Incidentally, withdrawing your posts will do no good. I have them in
archives. You are sick killers.

There's nothing I've said in this debate that I would even think of withdrawing. I've also saved a
several gems from you and it's time to start sending them to the people you do business with.
They've put up with your insane attacks on the industry to this point, but you've pushed this
nonsense too far. I hope you enjoy your forthcoming bankruptcy, Tim.

--
Regards

Brian