tallgaloot

You weren't required to give them your ID's. If they asked for them and you handed them over it was completely voluntary. (This may vary depending on your state, some states do require you to show ID when asked, but most states do not). Of course, refuse to show your ID to the wrong cop and you might find your day (or night) ruined as you sit in a cell. Edited to add: New Jersey is a state where you don't have to show ID when asked, even if the officer has a reasonable suspicion that you are about to (or have already) commit a crime.

Thanks Eartha, I have deleted the messages. I have also altered the photo so the number doesnt' show, but it's probably too late if it's on Instagram or something. Lynda If you still have a copy of the picture you can go to Google Image Search, click the little camera, and upload the picture to the search. The search engine will then attempt to find all the sites that are hosting a copy of the picture. (But there may not be any yet, as I think it takes a few days for things to start showing up in search. (Oh, and Google does not keep a copy of your photo, it's for searching only.)

If a CO deletes a find, is the cacher automatically notified? Once or twice I could have sworn my number went down, but I couldn't really remember for sure. Anyway, thanks for your help!

Thank you so much!

THis might be confusing. But I have geo-caching dog tag for my dog who goes caching with me most of the time. When I log a cache I would like a way to link to his TB page because I always think CO's may be interested in seeing him. (Or not, maybe I'm crazy...) But anyway, I already have him "visit" the cache, but I want to leave a log like this "Stopped by with my geo-buddy "Winston" (link to his page), awesome place, TFTC!" Anybody know how to do that?

I know there are a bunch of geocaches that are submerged in water, some that require snorkeling gear! In fact, I'm considering learning to scuba dive just so I can find them, lol. Here's one I saw when traveling once. http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=6fea7518-da3c-4c87-97bd-60da0d8c9c74

I think with the advent of sites like YouTube and cameras that are inconspicuously inside of your phone, more and more people are capturing abusive/crooked/criminal cops on film and of course the media reports these (because people find them interesting) and it is only once in a while that we see a piece about a cop who gives a homeless man a pair of shoes, for example. I think this has led to a turn in the public perception of cops. Are these situations out of the ordinary? Sure. But I think it shocks people to see someone that has been put in the public trust to abuse it so horrendously sometimes, and on film. I'm sure this type of thing has been around since the invention of law enforcement, but now almost nightly people are exposed to a grainy cell phone or dash cam showing behavior unbecoming of a police officer. The public's opinion of law enforcement sinks a little more each time they see a cop beat up an unarmed civilian, write a bogus ticket, shove a 16 year old and call him a "mutt" and so on. Are most police officers great guys? I'm sure they are, but unfortunately there's no news story proclaiming : "this just in! joe nice guy cop didn't lose his temper at a belligerent motorist!" (also- some of the attitude from some of these guys (I think) is regarding their second amendment rights and carry laws.

Or, you know, law school...

Depends on the state. In some states both of these individuals had a right to stay where they were (No matter how reckless or stupid that is). Some states can require a "mandatory" evcuation for fire, police, medical, etc emergencies. But, I don't think any of use were talking about that. I was talking about cops who just don't understand what you're doing and in brusque, irritated cop mode tell someone who is completely within their rights on public property to "get lost", "move along" or (in the previous example) "Get out of Chicago." In short I'm talking about cops who are jerks.

I think it's when I see logs like this one that I get the most bothered:

Got arrested for what?

I hate this last piece of advice. I understand where you are coming from, but citizens need to be aware of their rights. Too many police abuse their power and push people around because they're the ones with the badge, the authority, and the gun. If you are on public property and you are not doing anything illegal, you have no obligation to leave. The police need to have a reason to arrest you and standing on or looking around on public property is not enough. Too often people just give in to the abusive instructions of an ignorant police officer. (now, keep in mind, just because the law will have your back in a courtroom will not make your day any better if the angry cop decides to bring you downtown or taze you for your attitude)

A search of the forums shows me this incident has been covered, but interesting nonetheless.

Inspired me to do a search on a law database for similar incidents. Interesting case People v. Helm in CA. Relevant facts below: Prosecution Evidence On July 15, 2011, Kenyon Harman, his brother, Patrick, his son, Cameron, and his son's friend, Kollin, drove to Victorville to go geocaching for a few days. Geocaching consisted of using a Global Positioning System (GPS) to find geocaches, which were containers that people had hidden throughout the world for others to find, as a game. The understanding among the players was that the geocaches were not to be placed on private property without the owner's permission. After they arrived in the Victorville/Oro Grande area, Kenyon and the others found about 15 geocaches. They drove along a road, in search of the next geocache and decided to hike to the next location. They hiked up a hill with a lot of rocks. The group of four split into two, as Kenyon and Kollin looked for the geocache together, and Patrick and Cameron looked together. Kenyon and Kollin located the geocache and told the two others. As Kenyon and Kollin opened the container, Patrick told Kenyon that someone was approaching in a car below them. Only Patrick and Cameron were visible to the driver at the time. Patrick saw the car stop and observed defendant get out of the car and yell at them to “get out, get out.” Defendant also may have indicated that it was private property. Patrick yelled back to defendant that they were sorry, they did not know it was private property, and that they were leaving. Patrick then told Kenyon that defendant was telling them to leave. Patrick said that they should go, and Kenyon agreed. Kenyon put the geocache back where it was, and the four of them started walking back toward their truck. As they were walking back, they heard two pops and realized that someone was firing a gun at them. They started running as fast as they could. As they were running, they heard four more pops and heard bullets ricochet off the rocks. Cameron felt something hit him in the back of the leg. His leg went numb, and he fell on the ground and held his leg. Kenyon helped him up and they continued on. Cameron stumbled and fell a couple times, as they made their way down the hill. Kenyon and Cameron reached the truck a few minutes after Patrick and Kollin. Patrick called 911, and they all quickly jumped in the truck and drove away. As they were driving, Cameron's leg was hurting severely. They drove to a gas station and then headed to the hospital. Cameron's leg had been hit by a bullet. *2 The police responded to defendant's property. The officers made contact with defendant, found a rifle in his car, and found six .22–caliber rifle shell casings near the driver's door of his car. Defense Evidence Defendant was 71 years old at the time of trial. He lived alone with no telephone and no neighbors close by. He testified at trial that on May 152, a few men came on his property and wanted to buy some of his equipment. He agreed, and the next day, the men returned to pick up the equipment. He let them on his property, and they loaded up the equipment on their trucks, but drove away without paying defendant. On July 15, 2011, defendant heard a vehicle drive by him on his property and heard his dog barking. He waited about 20 minutes, then got in his car and drove toward the hills. He stopped in front of a hill when he saw two people, approximately 250 feet away. He got out of his car and yelled that it was private property and told them to leave. He waited about three minutes and repeated the command. One of the men told him, “no.” The two people started walking toward defendant, and he repeated his command. They said no again. Defendant became scared, so he drove his car back to his trailer to get his rifle. He loaded 12 bullets in his rifle and went back outside. He saw the people still on the hill and fired his rifle. Defendant testified that he knew nothing about the people's intentions, but believed their intentions toward him were bad. He shot three times in the air to scare them away. Then, he shot three times at the rocks. He said he never intended to hurt anybody. (PS- he was sentenced to 7 years in prison for assault with a firearm)

Oh. PS- You can't shoot somebody for just stepping on your property. (Of course that legal lesson for the property owner won't help you much if you're dead)

Yikes. At least it didn't end with anybody getting shot, I guess. Is this a normal reaction to Geocaching in your area? (THis is why Geocaches on private property make me super nervous)

I think my travelbug has gone away for good. It was my first TB and I only released it in December. Somebody picked it up (a member with no finds) and promised to bring it on its way (It was heading east). It's been a month and I went to go contact him to see how he was doing and find this message under his profile. "The "send message" feature is disabled because this user is currently inactive." Has my TB gone the way of many TB's before it?

I always make the mistake of forgetting that people discussing topics on forums don't behave like they do in public. I was not meaning to offend you, and I'm sorry if you were somehow offended. You seem to be missing my point, but your comment, "We don't know of any basic members in our area" does not necessarily translate to "The majority of geocachers in our area are premium members" which was your original point in regards to the bulk of favorite points coming from premium members (if they were to open it to basic members). But besides the point, I am always shocked to see the animosity from so-called "serious" cachers towards others or from "premium members" towards "basic members." It's just a hobby/game.

Actually I'm losing sight of my original point. You said you weren't aware of "any" basic members and I was simply pointing out that you have had many visit your very own geocaches over the years.

I agree. We don't know of any basic members in our area, so sample size would be predominantly premium members anyway. - That probably changes towards more urban areas. Looking at your current active caches you have a good percentage of people finding your cache that are not premium members. Typical Basic members are not generally going to be going to events or getting to know you, they just do it for fun. Well, since you brought it up... Just on one of our hides, there were 18 basic members who found it within the past two years. All but 4 are no longer caching. - In fact, most stopped within their first year. Tell me how those numbers are gonna help again... 18 out of how many? And just because they're premium members now, doesn't mean they started that way.

I agree. We don't know of any basic members in our area, so sample size would be predominantly premium members anyway. - That probably changes towards more urban areas. Looking at your current active caches you have a good percentage of people finding your cache that are not premium members. Typical Basic members are not generally going to be going to events or getting to know you, they just do it for fun.

My point is not that it's a reward for premium members. My point is that the more favorite points being allowed, the more likely we'll have a legitimate voting system that rewards the best geocaches. Like I mentioned before if you go to UrbanSpoon or IMDB to pick out a restaurant or movie based on user reviews, you're much more likely to trust restaurants or movies that have thousands of reviews, than some that only have a few. The larger the sample size, the more legitimate the voting system, because the masses counterbalance the outliers of people who favorite cache which doesn't deserve it.

I think if you did read any of the posts above, you'd see that one of the reasons it's currently limited to premium members is otherwise, it would easily be open to abuse. I did read the thread above. I don't buy the abuse argument. This whole game is based on mutual trust. People can log finds they never found, virtually move trackables, etc, etc. There's other ways they could avoid the situation anyway, such as with IP numbers.

Sorry to resurrect this one a little bit. But I just posted this on the geocaching blog comments section today and thought I'd share my thoughts here: Favorite points should be available for all users to leave (not just premium members), and I will tell you why. Leaving a favorite point is not really benefit for premium members, it's a benefit for the cache you have just visited. Limiting it to premium members is limiting the number of favorite points some great caches out there can get. Secondly, voting works best when there is a larger sample size. When you look at movie, restaurant, or any other review, would you rather see it got 95/100 with 2 people voting or 93/100 with 900 people voting. The larger the sample size legitimizes the favorite point system. Caches that are really great will get many, many favorite points and attract the warranted attention. Caches that are just ho-hum will get very few (or none at all) favorite points and get the attention they deserve. In my area right now, there are a few caches with 1 or 2 favorite points, a few with 3 or 4. Many with none at all. In its current state, except for a few exceptions, the great caches just aren't getting the favorite points they deserve and it makes the voting system meaningless when a great cache and a not so great cache have the same amount of favorite points. TLDR? Let basic members vote for favorite points to improve the sample size and legitimize the system.

I have this theory that people are hiding caches but waiting to post them in hopes that they get the coveted 2 millionth cache.