Re: Mostly finished - red tape
By:Chris Menard
Date: 10/24/2000, 8:04 am
Date: 10/24/2000, 8:04 am
In Response To: Re: Mostly finished - red tape (Ross Leidy)
: That's a nice loophole, and with the weight of your boats, it wouldn't be
: difficult to justify. But do you simply declare it's a racing vessel when
: the Oklahoma Division of Watercraft officer starts writing a ticket? It
: would be great to find an equivalent loophole in Ohio, but even if I
: could, I expect the burden of proof to be mine (know how screwy things are
: here).
: Ross
Just claim that it's shorter then 9 feet (and swelled when the wood hit the water).
"Non-motorized watercraft nine feet in length or less. "
Any one know of similer Mass. laws
Messages In This Thread
- Re: Mostly finished - red tape
Ross Leidy -- 10/23/2000, 10:17 pm- Re: Ohio Laws
Shawn Baker -- 10/24/2000, 11:55 am- Re: Ohio Laws
Ross Leidy -- 10/24/2000, 12:07 pm
- Re: Mostly finished - red tape
Chris Menard -- 10/24/2000, 8:04 am- Mass. draws line at the motor
Chris Menard -- 10/24/2000, 8:10 am- Re: So does Montana *NM*
Shawn Baker -- 10/26/2000, 6:16 pm- Nevada does the same *NM*
Jeff Fine -- 10/26/2000, 3:39 pm - Nevada does the same *NM*
- Re: So does Montana *NM*
- Re: Mostly finished - red tape
jay roberts -- 10/23/2000, 10:49 pm- Re: Mostly finished - red tape
Ross Leidy -- 10/23/2000, 10:59 pm- Re: Mostly finished - red tape
Rehd -- 10/26/2000, 8:40 pm
- Re: Mostly finished - red tape
- Re: Ohio Laws
- Re: Ohio Laws