Lemon Fresh Dog

probably about the same as they would be for a noncacher taking a walk in a park. Do you have any info on where I might find this out? I'm really trying to for my own interest. I dd a search for National Park crime stats in Canada (where I live) as well as for the US (because I travel there). Nada.... Maybe I need a better search methodology? I'm going to try StatsCan (Canada) -- does the US have a similar government statistics agency?

Hey! A specific example! As a percentage of all visitors to Yosemite over the past 10 years, these three murders are statistically small. (although I'm sure that is little consolation to the victims!). As a comparision, how many accidental gun deaths have occured in the park during the same period of time? (I really, really do not know - does anyone have a website link where I can find this out?). This will allow me to make a comparison of risk versus reward when it comes to carrying a gun. (again, a PERSONAL decision)

Although I have posted some pretty long notes, I just have to come back to my initial question. Maybe by re-phrasing it I can get some clarification. Here it goes ... 1) How dangerous is geocaching? 2) What are the chances of being attacked by someone where a GUN is required for defense while geocaching? I RESPECT everyones decision to do whatever they want when it comes to the laws in their areas. I'm just sincerely curious. I just want to get some idea of what the real danger is. Not the percieved danger, not the hypothetical danger, not the "could happen", but rather the "did happen". What will I do with this information? -- make my own personal decisions about where to cache and how to cache. This topic has delved into the realm of gun-control/gun-law aurguments and that's okay too -- it's been quite civil and intelligent with few exceptions (a bit off-topic though). For me personally, this isn't what I am mostly interested in. My own PERSONAL bias is that I do not like or care to have guns -- you can have your own PERSONAL bias too -- isn't freedom cool? There have been some posts that have talked about danger in general, I would like danger in the specific. Given that geocaching is fairly new as a sport, I would also be interested in experiences or information on the danger of outdoor activities in general. Does anyone have sources for statistics on homicides in rural areas where the there was no connection between the victim and criminal? (I'm making the assumption that this would be similar to a geocacher encountering a "bad-guy" and getting killed. As a disclaimer -- I am NOT trying to lead anyone here to share any belief that I may personally hold. I am interested in my own belief's and fact-finding only out of curiosity.

I became a premium member to support the site more than anything else. I think it's great that the hobby doesn't require membership to enjoy and am fortunate enough that I can pay and help support the site to keep it running. It is an unfortunate economic reality that bandwidth and site maintenance are not free, but I also realize that not everyone is going to have the extra cash. This site does a good job of blending free and pay-for benefits and shoudl be commended. Hopefully, we all choose to support the site -- either econonmically or otherwise (by placing caches, introducing others to the hobby, etc, etc) One feature I would like to see as a premium member would be the ability to place my new caches on a members-only initial set-up and then have it automatically switch to a wide-open cache. This would give members the first chance to find the caches and then open it up to the general population. Maybe this is something that is already possible?

Ug....It seems I am becoming a #2. I have to find something else to do when it's cold outside.

That IS an interesting article. Thanks for the link. I tend to agree that "when in Rome...." Currently I still haven't the personal need, but that may change. Discussions such as this help me keep abreast of what others are doing and consider where my own actions need to be modified .... just not yet!

Yeah, right. I guess you are the one person who has tried to argue their case where they didn't try to imply the US was at the top of the list. If you are that one person, I humbly apologize. I'm not sorry I stopped an attack made from false assumptions, though. Also, many anti-gun people make arguements from what they think is the truth. So, no, I don't care what you think. I only care about observable facts, not assumptions and lies. Sorry if you take this as an attack, but that's the way I feel. Heck, I don't paticularly care if you carry or not. Just don't make it out as those who legally carry as folks you need to be "phobic" about. That's insulting. Apology accepted. I wasn't attacking US gun policies or US citizens. I remain afraid of people with guns -- it sort of goes with the territory. I respect some folks that carry (I have family that own guns and trust and repect them, some people in this forum seem quite level-headed). Even when I have had guns in my hand I am somewhat phobic of them -- sort of a healthy fear for their power. I'm somewhat trained in their use, but not a professional. You really seem to think I am attacking you and your way of life? Not so. Maybe we're not reading the same statistics. I haven't quoted any stats or alluded to them though. I'm just talking personal experience and asking others about theirs.

Cool! What month's issue? I'd like to check it out.

With your cache you can do what you want -- I think keeping the logbook is fun. If you discover someone elses cache has a full log it would be courteous to let them know - I'd appreciate if someone let me know.

I like the guidelines (notice I avoided the word code?). Travel Bugs: I don't care that there is stuff in here about them. They are an aspect of the game and the guidelines explain how they should be handled. Whether they are or not remains to be seen. Guns: Leave this out -- it's up to individuals to make their own decisions. (why this was even brought up here I don't know) We're having a good time in the Firearm forum with this. Safety:(and SAFETY only): This is the only area where I would add a little. I think that part of placing a cache is to regularly read the logs of cache-seekers and respond to any and all safety concerns by archiving, replacing, or modifying a cache as conditions warrant. I also think that it is a good guildeline to cache seekers to immediately report any safety concerns they may have to the cache owner and to expect a response from the cache owner within a reasonable time-frame. If no response is forthcoming, then maybe an escallation process could be added to the guidelines? It's a tough one when it comes to rules, codes, guidelines. Here are my thoughts: Rules (mandatory): Relating to health, safety, legallity Guidelines (optional): Accepted community norms that increase/maintain the enjoyment of the game By blending these two areas into a voluntary "code" the risk becomes that some people see them as rules (mandatory) while others see them as guidelines (optional). IMHO - Travel Bugs would be part of a Guideline, caches in areas of extreme, immediate, unavoidable, unreasonable danger should be covered by a rule banning them. (and I hate most rules) Maybe a line about "respect that others may not play the game in the same manner that you choose to play the game. Do not interfere with their enjoyment of the game by destroying or modifying game pieces they are using to play" <-- covers TB's, Micros and self-appointed cache-cops.

Sounds like a great course! It would be nice to find a resource for "Outdoor training" that addressed all age groups.

Some very interesting reponses have come to this discussion in the past few posts! Thank you very much -- because I sincerely respect a persons right to carry a gun if they so chose (despite some folks thinking I am telling THEM not to carry a gun). I also really like to understand things through intelligent discussion. The worst thing I have ever found while in the woods was the reminents of a grow operation. Had the person(s) that were part of this operation still been in place, I might have been in danger. I have yet to encounter a situation where I wanted/needed a gun (weapon yes, gun no) One thing I have noticed here is that those that seem to be posting are very reasonable about the use of a gun as a tool. I have seen little false bravado about how a gun can protect you. Maybe our community has a large number of military, LEO or other types of persons that use guns in a "tool" capacity. The biggest intellectual challenge I have with guns is that I agree that "guns do not kill people, people kill people", but I also think that people with guns have a tool that facilitates this process a great deal. The only time I can think of wanting a gun is if I was confronted with someone else that had a gun. Even then, I would prefer to avoid or remove myself from the situation ASAP. Which sort of makes me come full-circle. Why cache in an area where there is a danger to your life which requires a gun? If this is indeed ANY area in the world, then I guess we are in a somewhat sad state all together -- which may be the case. I guess what I was initially interested in (oh, so many posts ago) was in getting some idea of how much people had actually used guns in self-defense while caching. Are we talking 1 in 10 trips, 1 in 1000? How dangerous is caching? Where I live (Calgary, major Canadian city on the outskirts of the Rocky Mountains) we have major urban as well as serious outdoor cultures. There has been a serious increase in gun-related violence too! Mostly gang members shooting gang members at 2am in the "rough" area of town -- not a time or place I cache. When I am deep backcountry, avalanche danger is my biggest concern -- how much should I be worried about people? (I'm not afraid of animals). Please. please do not think I am questioning peoples rights here -- I am questioning why they choose the tool. I would do the same if we were dicussing table saws. As for gun culture striking me as odd, it is only because it is (hopefully) a culture based on a tool that people will (hopefully) never, ever have to use.

Good points. My theory has always been that guns and crime do not correlate. However, guns can be used to commit some very nasty crimes (as can other "tools"). One idea that I have is that the cultural history of a nation can idicate the potential for crime. For example, the US was founded through some pretty serious conflict - revolutionary war, civil war -- this conflict built the nation and there are some really good things that come from it too - high worker productivity and respect for the individual for example. That said, I have never compiled stats on the correlation of crime to state-building techniques. Also, I think there are different types of crime - so a blended crime stat may mask the correlation (if it exists). Crime rates are also generated on reported crimes. A community with 100 police would, presumably, have a higher crime rate as more people are catching people commiting crimes. This is an interesting thread, but I think I am guilty of taking it off-topic. Apologies all around.

Thanks for the post Rat! I was busy typing my post above and didn't see your post until I submitted. I would definately change my mind given proper evidence. In fact, I have! If I ever cache in a US area where there are a large number of gun-owners I would probably seek to cache in a group where someone was both in possession of, and well-trained to use a gun. Possibly a LEO. Especially if some of the people that responded to my previous posts knew I was in town! That stated, I also cache for fun and would have second thoughts about even caching in such an area. I realize I am naive in the security of where and how I live. Thankfully naive. I had one of my cache placements in an area where drug use was discovered and moved it to prevent possible harm to fellow cachers. If I lived in an area where there were potentially dangerous people I might not place a cache. (percentages....I KNOW that crazy people are everywhere, but there has to be a reasonable risk of encountering them to make me question cache placement). I prefer to live and play in as safe an environment as I can -- I don't feel safer with a gun in most cases. BTW - I have used both rifles and assorted handguns for target shooting and have had some training in their use. So I'm not phobic - I just cannot understand the absolute LOVE that people have for them -- stopping power, rate of fire, caliber, etc, etc.

I agree that if you outlaw guns then only outlaws will have guns. The genie is out of the bottle and, especially in the case of the US, there is a cultural and historical context to gun ownership that would be very hard to change (assuming that a majority ever would even want to). As the discussion seems to have evolved into an analysis of whether guns are useful or not outside of geocaching, my opinion is that we should all exercise a little caution when expressing our opinions. First. It was suggested in a response to one of my earlier posts that I am trying to tell people how to live. I'm not. My personal opinion is that guns and the surrounding culture around guns is weird. You may see guns as the ultimate expression of freedom - I do not. I've just never been facinated by the things. It's not a phobia -- it's an opinion. Different then some, yes. Right or wrong -- obviously I think right, others think wrong. I respect that. I wish others would. Second. Some statistics have been quoted as to the incidence of violent crime in areas where guns are controlled. Please source your stats - I'm sincerely interested in a website or source. Mostly, I am interested in whether people here are comparing apples to apples. I think I am safe in stating that not all violent crimes involve guns, guns are not to blame for all violent crime. What are the percentages of deaths in violent crimes involving guns versus deaths in violent crimes where guns were not involved? Statistics require context to have any relevance. Third. You cannot separate the part from the whole. If a city within a state has rigid gun laws, it still exists within that state, and more globally the country in question. Statistics from the city may not be indicative of a norm. Again, it is a logical falicy to mis-use statistics out of context. Even country-to-country statistics are suspect. For example, Canadian culture is much different from US culture - Canada did not have a Revolutionary or Civil War and we tend to be less individualistic as a whole. Population density is also much different. (Plus many more things). Canada is also experiencing a move to urbanization which tends to increase violent crime. As for statistics about a specific town or region, there may be other factors separate from gun ownership that lead to safer or riskier environments. I have yet to find a source to confirm my thought that drug-use and the activities surrounding it may be a bigger indicator of risk of violence in an area. Does anyone have a source for stats on this? Forth. False analogy does not make me believe you. Comparing a gun to a first aid kit or seatbelt fails to compare purpose or use. I didn't ask how many people had stuff they didn't use or didn't need with them. I asked ... how many people have actually, honestly used a gun for defense? Many people seem to have used it to provide a sense of security (which I am NOT judging the validity of! - I suppose if I took a stroll into a warzone or an area that I knew to be dangerous I'd want to carry a gun too!). Fifth. Hypothetical situations are not reality. Separate what could happen from what actually happens and I'd be more apt to find interest in views contrary to my own. I still lack evidence of the positive use of a weapon other than theoretical ("I know that IF I had a gun IF this happened then ...") Personally, I have never been in a situation I felt I needed a gun to resolve. That's just me though. Mostly, I respect people's right to their beliefs. Even if I completely disagree. What gets my underwear in a knot is when people do not respect my right to a contrary belief and attempt to use logical falicy to justify their sense of philosophical superiority or to suggest I am advocating something I am not. Based upon my culture, experience, location, and knowledge - I do not and have no plans to ever carry a gun. Furthmore, I have no love for guns and see them as causing more harm than good based on how I have actually seen them used (yes - I am anti-hunting too). Sorry if that offends you, but that's MY opion. I'm open-minded to hearing other's views, but I recognize that it would take some pretty convincing evidence to make me change my mind. Maybe you can give me some examples of how guns saved the day for you! (law enforcement would be one area I think guns are useful -- I'm still not on-board with geocaching guns) Again -- I respect your views. I just may not agree -- okay!?

Mopar -- thank you for your intelligent and well-put post. This is the type of discussion I enjoy. Couple of things you asked: Gun Registry in Canada -- waste of time in my opinion, waste of money -- won't work. How many crimes has it prevented? -- let's go for ZERO! Violent Crime -- I'm intereted in these stats. Specifically, I am interested in violent crime using guns versus other violent crime. If you have these stats or can refer me to a website re: these stats I am interested. There are many factors that cause rises in crime. Although you may have figured out I'm not a big gun fan -- I also would never equate gun ownership as the sole source of all violent crime. I actually am much more of the opinion that drug-use if a bigger driver of violence. I'm not sure that an armed population versus an un-armed population provides any statistical correlation one way or the other. Your city analysis for the US is interesting, but I have a problem in that these cities still exist within an armed nation. Is it fair to limit the crime analysis to the single factor of gun laws. I don't know and am interested in knowing. To all -- please be fully aware that I am NOT attacking your right, desire or need to own a gun. I just don't share the desire or need (I have the right because I can go buy a gun if I wanted). If you think I am attacking your opinion or person -- you are wrong.

Um....you're making assumptions. When I asked which country had the most gun deaths I wasn't trying to point any fingers. I just wanted to know the answer. The analysis of how these deaths occur (suicide vs. homicide vs. self-defense -- whatever) would also interest me. You're assuming I am asking because I am "attacking" a specific country's gun policies -- not the case. As for not caring what I think -- too bad. I care what you think (hence I participate in the forums) -- I just don't always agree. Sorry if alternate opinions offend you. It's part of a free country to listen to and analyze discenting opinions. I don't care that you disagree -- it sadens me slightly that you are unable to take alterate opinions as nothing short of a personal attack -- which they are NOT. I still haven't read any convincing aurguments that have compelled me to re-think my opinions. I'm also not so close-minded as to think I wouldn't change my opinions. I just need better arguments or some examples based in fact. So, I still remain -- gun-less.

I'm not phobic about guns. I'm phobic about people with guns. What country has the most guns in the world? What country has the most gun deaths PER CAPITA in the world? Basically, the societal problem of guns exists and in that context, carrying a gun may make sense in certain areas -- areas I will not cache in. So, my answer the original question: no.

Hmmm -- it seems this conversation is very, very theoretical when it comes to the NEED for guns. It sounds more like the WANT for guns. In a previous post, I asked if anyone had ever NEEDED a gun while Geocaching -- I got one response. Gun culture wierds me out.

You used the GPS to catch your wife cheating and that will allow you to get on with your life. Respect yourself the most! I'm sorry to hear about this sadness and sincerely wish you well. My only advise (if you take advise from starngers! )-- put that GPS to good use by taking your son out on caching adventures! As tough as this will be on you -- it will be far more difficult to a young child that is effectively powerless and does not understand what and why this is happening. GPS your way to a good father/son relationship -- you'll both need it as you rid yourself of the waster in your life. (I'm blindly taking your side in this, but am okay with that)

Personally, I do not think there is a magical number we can use to determine if someone should be allowed to place caches or the number of caches they should be able to place. A rule just won't solve what I see as the problem described in the post. What would help? I like the idea of a rating system for finders. This would be similar to the book rating systems at sites like Amazon and Audible. It would allow you to see what others think and also provide a feedback tool for the cache placer. This would allow people to compete for placing the best, most interesting and well-recieved cahce! 5-star cacher! I'd really like to know what people think about the caches I have placed. Another idea I like is to hold people accountable for cache maintenance. When you place a cache, I notice that you agree to maintain it. I think this is important to avoid useless litter. How to actually do this is beyond my feable mind to figure out. Thoughts? In my short caching life, I have placed about 7 caches. They are all in various containers (mostly good-quality tupperware-type stuff that seems to be holding up very well). They are pretty "standard", but were also part of a learning process for some more involved caches that I am creating for spring. (the 7 Seas Cache is in the works!) Without this learning, would not have known that a certain type of container was subject to cracking, or that caches placed on the ground get stepped on and may crack. (both fixed through cache maintenace!)

Were the six folks acting in self-defense against a man with a gun? Road rage+baseball bat+gun+males aged 18-25 = bad, bad situation. I'm sure his parents don't care to analyze what went wrong. They probably just want their son back.

A quick comment -- I'm pretty impressed with the civility of this forum thus far. Ussually any discussions I see online about guns gets ugly pretty fast. It seems most people here are very respectful of people with alternate views. Onto my post! I asked about people that had used guns and was asked what I meant. I would define it as using the gun to protect onesself -- discharge not required. I'd also like to know from the law officers out there about situations involving guns where the person that had the gun became the victim. The tragic story of the fellow killed by the baseball bat is very, very sad. Why am I interested? I am facinated by gun-culture versus gun-fact. Some folks in my family have guns and often talk about range, stopping power, discharge rate, etc. Basically, a facination with the technical specifications of the "tool". As a "computer geek" my peers also do this with computer system specifications. For myself, I'm more interested in how a tool is used and not as much in the actual tool itself. So... my interest in this topic is sparked by the initial question: "Do you carry a gun", but I am interested in the posts that are here which relate to "Why do you carry a gun" and then, quite specifically, my morphed question of "Have you ever had to realize the potential of the gun you carry?" Maybe it's the old Boy Scout in me! -- never carry any more gear than you need, never go unprepared. Where do guns "fit". Personally, I have never needed a gun, wanted a gun, felt I would have been better off with a gun. Either urban or back country (and I have encountered Grizzlies with cubs, cougars (mountain lions to some of you), and wolf. I'm actually most afraid of a bull moose. I'm open-minded though. I am interested in YOUR experiences. Hope that's okay here. Just curious.

Way back in the early 90's I invested in an Internet provider (actually a BBS System that eventually offered Internet access at the low-low rate of $1 per HOUR). Anyhow -- I needed a screen name and thought I should look for something NEW! something FRESH! Something LEMON FRESH! -- what would be better with a lemon-fresh scent? - a dog. Lemon Fresh Dog was born. It was better than wet-dog. I have since discovered that there is apparently some flower called a Lemon Fresh Dog -- wierd. Anyhow, it has become my online name and the place where I post my BLOG (Lemon Fresh Doghouse). This whole internet has brought out the weirdness in us all, hasn't it?

What is a lame cache? As they say - "one mans trash is anothers treasure". I hope that people would be honest in the comments about the caches I place. While some are in easy locations, I try to theme them or take people on a walk -- however, maybe they are lame? I don't think so, but maybe they are. My concern is in limiting the amount of caches that someone can place. If someone does a good job, this limit will punish them.