"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...


If you want to make a lot of noise with your boat, take it where no one
else is. Or perhsps you'll find a more neighborly penis substitute.


I think you're onto something here, Harry. Unless my memory fails me, in the
1960s (when I first began reading my dad's boat magazines cover to cover),
boats like Cigarettes were only mentioned with regard to ocean racing. I
don't recall them being a common retail item. They were owned by real
sailors who competed in weather that would horrify your average Dave. Now,
anyone with the money can buy a boat in that category. Unfortunately, this
raises questions:

1) Why don't they take them out to the kind of water they were really
designed for, i.e.: slamming through 6 foot waves at 80mph?

2) Why do they insist on using them so close to boaters who crave quiet?
Could it be because some people have a childish need to be noticed?

"swatcop" wrote in message
om...



"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
More often than you may realize, cops have to deal with situations which
involve no violation of the law. But, smart cops show up anyway because
they
know that if they don't, they'll have a REAL problem on their hands
otherwise.

You may want to ask a cop about this next thing, but I know you're not
too
keen on getting involved with your local public servants.

Forget hostage situations. Forget armed robbers. Forget bomb scares.
What
is
the most dangerous and unpredictable situation for which cops are called
regularly? Hint: 99% of the time, it initially involves no laws being
broken.

"Disturbance" calls.

Hey! You blew it! Dave Hall was supposed to guess this one. :-) Then, he was
supposed to explain to us why a cop should show up at someone's house just
because the neighbor heard yelling, something that's not illegal. Finally,
he was going to tell us why, if nothing illegal was going on, do these
situations turn ugly. Sort of like this one:
http://www.democratandchronicle.com/...IP5_news.shtml

"Backyard Renegade" wrote in message
om...


The way to make a positive change is to make your compadres see things
more from the user point of view and bring your practical experience
as a boater and a human to the job

I'm not sure who you mean by "compadres", but if you mean the jetskiers
themselves, that'll be a tough nut to crack. First of all, around here
they're 90% teenagers. Ask 100 teenagers how often they need a quiet
afternoon. Let me know if you get positive answers from more than one or two
of them. It's up to their parents to explain to them that some boaters are
out on the water to get AWAY from lawnmowers and string trimmers and morons
who think "loud pipes save lives", and that it's their job to make sure that
nobody has to hear their jet skis at "normal lawnmower distances".

Failing this, there's nothing wrong with them being hunted down and
reoriented by the cops. What's are the other options? Put up with the noise?
The bad driving? The drunkenness? Or, chase them down ourselves?

I already made an argument a few weeks back on the same thing. The State
defining the SOP mode of transportation as a "priviledge" opens the door to
a whole lot of infringements to personal liberty. It probably looked
innocuous then, with very few cars being mostly a pain in the ass to horse
traffic. The true "slippery slope" effect again. hehe

That said, highway revenues need to be generated, preferably by those that
use the roads. I could easily see requiring cars to bear an annual "tax
paid" sticker, with the fine for the lack of said sticker being double the
tax.

Past that, there's nothing going on on the roads that the criminal code and
tort law was never equiped to handle. IMHO

-W

"Keith" wrote in message
...
Maybe it's time we re-examined this "it's a priviledge, not a right" line.
I
guess when horses were the prevalent mode of transportation, driving an
auto
was a "priviledge" of the rich, who could afford them. Nowadays, how would
one survive without a car, at least in most parts of the U.S.? You'd get
killed trying to ride a bike to work in a lot of big cities, run over by
those "Priviledged" auto drivers. Driver's licenses are still just another
revenue generation tool, since obviously there are plenty of accidents by
all those "trained and approved" drivers.

It reminds me of those parents who get their kid something like a bike or
horse, just to have something to take away to punish them later.

"Keith" wrote in message
...
Maybe it's time we re-examined this "it's a priviledge, not a right" line.
I
guess when horses were the prevalent mode of transportation, driving an
auto
was a "priviledge" of the rich, who could afford them. Nowadays, how would
one survive without a car, at least in most parts of the U.S.? You'd get
killed trying to ride a bike to work in a lot of big cities, run over by
those "Priviledged" auto drivers. Driver's licenses are still just another
revenue generation tool, since obviously there are plenty of accidents by
all those "trained and approved" drivers.

It reminds me of those parents who get their kid something like a bike or
horse, just to have something to take away to punish them later.

There are still statutes on file that pertain to how you ride your horse.
That's a privilege, too. I don't disagree with you about the
"money-making-machine" that has taken over the system, though.
--
-= swatcop =-

"If it wasn't for stupid people I'd be unemployed."

Oops, sorry..

--
-= swatcop =-

"If it wasn't for stupid people I'd be unemployed."

Um, let me re-word that - I do not agree with the wheelbarrows full of cash
that we hand the government every year for the privilege of being allowed to
operate a vehicle.

--
-= swatcop =-

"If it wasn't for stupid people I'd be unemployed."

"swatcop" wrote in message
m...



"Keith" wrote in message
...
Maybe it's time we re-examined this "it's a priviledge, not a right"
line.
I
guess when horses were the prevalent mode of transportation, driving an
auto
was a "priviledge" of the rich, who could afford them. Nowadays, how
would
one survive without a car, at least in most parts of the U.S.? You'd get
killed trying to ride a bike to work in a lot of big cities, run over by
those "Priviledged" auto drivers. Driver's licenses are still just
another
revenue generation tool, since obviously there are plenty of accidents
by
all those "trained and approved" drivers.

It reminds me of those parents who get their kid something like a bike
or
horse, just to have something to take away to punish them later.

There are still statutes on file that pertain to how you ride your horse.
That's a privilege, too. I don't disagree with you about the
"money-making-machine" that has taken over the system, though.
--
-= swatcop =-

"If it wasn't for stupid people I'd be unemployed."

Already have that in Texas. You pay a tax on the licence plates, and another
"fee" for the safety inspection. Oh, yea. Major taxes on fuel for things
that drive on the highway. They could just increase the license plate fee a
few $$ a year and be revenue neutral by discontinuing driver's license fees.
We could always replace that with a national ID card... oops, more
infringement. They really DO want to be able to stop you and say... "ze
paperz, pleaze".

Remember when they came up with that idea to permanently affix your SS
number on a permanent tooth when you get one? They keep coming up with the
ideas... good thing we have resisted such Hitler nonsense so far.

"Clams Canino" wrote in message
news:wr%Db.581659$Fm2.540702@attbi_s04...
I already made an argument a few weeks back on the same thing. The State
defining the SOP mode of transportation as a "priviledge" opens the door
to
a whole lot of infringements to personal liberty. It probably looked
innocuous then, with very few cars being mostly a pain in the ass to horse
traffic. The true "slippery slope" effect again. hehe

That said, highway revenues need to be generated, preferably by those that
use the roads. I could easily see requiring cars to bear an annual "tax
paid" sticker, with the fine for the lack of said sticker being double the
tax.

Past that, there's nothing going on on the roads that the criminal code
and
tort law was never equiped to handle. IMHO

-W

"Keith" wrote in message
...
Maybe it's time we re-examined this "it's a priviledge, not a right"
line.
I
guess when horses were the prevalent mode of transportation, driving an
auto
was a "priviledge" of the rich, who could afford them. Nowadays, how
would
one survive without a car, at least in most parts of the U.S.? You'd get
killed trying to ride a bike to work in a lot of big cities, run over by
those "Priviledged" auto drivers. Driver's licenses are still just
another
revenue generation tool, since obviously there are plenty of accidents
by
all those "trained and approved" drivers.

It reminds me of those parents who get their kid something like a bike
or
horse, just to have something to take away to punish them later.

I beat him to it!

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"swatcop" wrote in message
om...



"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
More often than you may realize, cops have to deal with situations
which
involve no violation of the law. But, smart cops show up anyway
because
they
know that if they don't, they'll have a REAL problem on their hands
otherwise.

You may want to ask a cop about this next thing, but I know you're not
too
keen on getting involved with your local public servants.

Forget hostage situations. Forget armed robbers. Forget bomb scares.
What
is
the most dangerous and unpredictable situation for which cops are
called
regularly? Hint: 99% of the time, it initially involves no laws being
broken.

"Disturbance" calls.

Hey! You blew it! Dave Hall was supposed to guess this one. :-) Then, he
was
supposed to explain to us why a cop should show up at someone's house just
because the neighbor heard yelling, something that's not illegal. Finally,
he was going to tell us why, if nothing illegal was going on, do these
situations turn ugly. Sort of like this one:
http://www.democratandchronicle.com/...IP5_news.shtml

On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 15:41:13 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

What's are the other options? Put up with the noise?
The bad driving? The drunkenness? Or, chase them down ourselves?

================================================== ==

Actually it gets worse than that. Annoyed people gang up to assert
their democratic right to get laws passed. Laws that then become
applicable to all boaters, not just the ones that caused the trouble
in the first place. Next thing you know you've got speed zones, no
wake zones and no-boating-of-any-kind-whatsoever zones. All because
of a bunch of half wits on a jetski asserting their right to act like
jerks. Same for the straight pipe exhaust crowd.