WaylandersMA

Mark132 Everything read on an internet site is not a fact. If you have reputable citations for those facts I would like to see them and please don't send me NRA or any shills to the gun lobby linked facts. And if I refute them with Center for Disease control Data please don't mention black government helicopters or I'll tell you your aluminum foil is on too tight. VF: that's a good one I've seen that one too although the 80,000 malpractice seems to get higher and higher. But just for fun let us take your numbers as fact and mix with some data. The CDC says around 2,300,000 million Americans die each year. This is total. A good thing because if we didn't get rid of that 1% each year it would get crowded real fast. That number is a fact beyond dispute. (700,000 or so heart disease, 500,000 cancer a couple 100,000 by stroke etc..) just doing this from memory so don't quote me . Believe it or not most of these people die in hospitals under the care of a physician. (Not most of the 28,000 by firearms, some make it to an ER before cashing it in but most don't). When those 2.3 million people died there was likely a physician present trying to prolong the persons life. It's that Hipocratic oath or something that makes them do this not so pleasant job. Your quote: According to E. Drew Britcher, Attorney, 80,000 of those deaths are malpractice. My conclusion: 3.8% of the deaths in the United States happened within earshot of an attorney. Wow, I did not know there where that many lawyers. [Warning: this post is laden with sarcasm and half truths, you work it out.]

Mark132 Everything read on an internet site is not a fact. If you have reputable citations for those facts I would like to see them and please don't send me NRA or any shills to the gun lobby linked facts. And if I refute them with Center for Disease control Data please don't mention black government helicopters or I'll tell you your aluminum foil is on too tight. VF: that's a good one I've seen that one too although the 80,000 malpractice seems to get higher and higher. But just for fun let us take your numbers as fact and mix with some data. The CDC says around 2,300,000 million Americans die each year. This is total. A good thing because if we didn't get rid of that 1% each year it would get crowded real fast. That number is a fact beyond dispute. (700,000 or so heart disease, 500,000 cancer a couple 100,000 by stroke etc..) just doing this from memory so don't quote me . Believe it or not most of these people die in hospitals under the care of a physician. (Not most of the 28,000 by firearms, some make it to an ER before cashing it in but most don't). When those 2.3 million people died there was likely a physician present trying to prolong the persons life. It's that Hipocratic oath or something that makes them do this not so pleasant job. Your quote: According to E. Drew Britcher, Attorney, 80,000 of those deaths are malpractice. My conclusion: 3.8% of the deaths in the United States happened within earshot of an attorney. Wow, I did not know there where that many lawyers. [Warning: this post is laden with sarcasm and half truths, you work it out.]

I would only make one change and remove the word "irresponsible" from, "Irresponsible comments such as those by Mr. Rugel" Mr Rugel had reports coming into him that stated various things. He didn't seem to be embellishing or acting irresponsibly, he was just reporting the incidents that the other rangers had unsurfaced. nb. I used to read these morning reports all the time. The weirdest stuff happens in NP's and the rangers for the most part do a great job. Personally I wish they would rip out every tarred road and ban RV's from NP's (trolley them in), and many rangers wish that too. But they have to manage what they have.

with a compass around my neck. The only time I do track up is if I am retracing my track in the car on a road with a lot of curves. Zoom in and you can pretend it is a video game. But keep eyes on road!

with a compass around my neck. The only time I do track up is if I am retracing my track in the car on a road with a lot of curves. Zoom in and you can pretend it is a video game. But keep eyes on road!

I know I was going to hit a nerve when I posted an anti-carry message. That's the way the culture of the US is and I hope I could just add some information to the anti side. If you do carry you should know what you are getting into and why. looking at the cold hard facts of why over 28,000 people die with a bullet hole in them every year in the US just makes you a more informed person. Ignoring the mumbers is just ignorance. A few suggestions if you do carry a gun with you into the woods to protect youself and others from two-legged critters. Learn how to use it before you do it. Go to a range and shoot a lot over a good chunk of time. Know how to pull it out take the safety off and on in your sleep. If the range allows you to shoot objects such as pumpkins, frozen gourds then do it. You will understand better the power you have that can reach quite a distance. A paper target doesn't show you that. Understand muzzle velocity. Find out what the velocity of the slug is after traviling a 1/2 mile, and 2 miles. Understand what happens when you shoot a bottle out of a marsh at a 60 degree down angle. (It skips and travels about waste high for a considerable distance). If you run into a confrontation in the woods do not even imply that you have a firearm unless you are completely willing to use it with lethal force. "I have gun so you better back off" doesn't work unless you know how to use it and that you will use it. Shooting to injure doesn't work either. If you are in a situation which ends with you firing you have to shoot to kill. It ain't the movies. Then you have to live with your decision. Could I or would I have avoided the situation if I was not carrying a firearm? This is where I will repeat the first one. Shoot often at a range. Leave the firearm at the range if you can. If you leave it in a house use a locked gun safe. The amunition should be locked in a seperate box. But if you think about it a cell phone with you or by your bed is better protection. Either the confrontation happens in seconds and you will not have the ability to use it or the confrontation takes some time to come to a head and a cell call might be a better help. I grew up with guns. I feel very comfortable with guns. It wouldn't even cross my mind to keep one for protection or carry one for protection. It is the untrained person with a gun that freaks me out. I would never want to run into this type of a person while carrying myself. In all my hikes in the woods I have met a lot of people with guns. Virtually all were quite polite. Politeness sort of goes hand and hand with someone who knows what they are doing and are comfortable with guns. The few times I have been nervous is bumping into people in canyons/ valleys around major cities. Never shot or carried a pistol and they are strutting with the shoulder harness. Around Los Angeles seems to be the worst. The wrong attitude. The wrong attitude is "I want to feel safe so I'll go to K-Mart and buy a Glock and throw it in my pack". These people scare me. They act less predictably then a wounded bear. I would never want to have a gun around this type of person because I would not want to shoot them. I would end my sentences with "sir" and avoid them.

I know I was going to hit a nerve when I posted an anti-carry message. That's the way the culture of the US is and I hope I could just add some information to the anti side. If you do carry you should know what you are getting into and why. looking at the cold hard facts of why over 28,000 people die with a bullet hole in them every year in the US just makes you a more informed person. Ignoring the mumbers is just ignorance. A few suggestions if you do carry a gun with you into the woods to protect youself and others from two-legged critters. Learn how to use it before you do it. Go to a range and shoot a lot over a good chunk of time. Know how to pull it out take the safety off and on in your sleep. If the range allows you to shoot objects such as pumpkins, frozen gourds then do it. You will understand better the power you have that can reach quite a distance. A paper target doesn't show you that. Understand muzzle velocity. Find out what the velocity of the slug is after traviling a 1/2 mile, and 2 miles. Understand what happens when you shoot a bottle out of a marsh at a 60 degree down angle. (It skips and travels about waste high for a considerable distance). If you run into a confrontation in the woods do not even imply that you have a firearm unless you are completely willing to use it with lethal force. "I have gun so you better back off" doesn't work unless you know how to use it and that you will use it. Shooting to injure doesn't work either. If you are in a situation which ends with you firing you have to shoot to kill. It ain't the movies. Then you have to live with your decision. Could I or would I have avoided the situation if I was not carrying a firearm? This is where I will repeat the first one. Shoot often at a range. Leave the firearm at the range if you can. If you leave it in a house use a locked gun safe. The amunition should be locked in a seperate box. But if you think about it a cell phone with you or by your bed is better protection. Either the confrontation happens in seconds and you will not have the ability to use it or the confrontation takes some time to come to a head and a cell call might be a better help. I grew up with guns. I feel very comfortable with guns. It wouldn't even cross my mind to keep one for protection or carry one for protection. It is the untrained person with a gun that freaks me out. I would never want to run into this type of a person while carrying myself. In all my hikes in the woods I have met a lot of people with guns. Virtually all were quite polite. Politeness sort of goes hand and hand with someone who knows what they are doing and are comfortable with guns. The few times I have been nervous is bumping into people in canyons/ valleys around major cities. Never shot or carried a pistol and they are strutting with the shoulder harness. Around Los Angeles seems to be the worst. The wrong attitude. The wrong attitude is "I want to feel safe so I'll go to K-Mart and buy a Glock and throw it in my pack". These people scare me. They act less predictably then a wounded bear. I would never want to have a gun around this type of person because I would not want to shoot them. I would end my sentences with "sir" and avoid them.

quote:Originally posted by TresOkies: quote:This month in "Journal of Trauma" published a study from the Harvard School of Public Health... Paul, with all due respect, this is a load of crap. The authors go into the study knowing what they want to publish and make certain they get the numbers they want. It's a political issue, not a scientific one. Researchers do this all the time with other dangerous items like SUVs, eggs, coffee, and cell phones. I politely disagree. You are right, anyone can take a bunch of numbers, call them statistics, draw up an hypothesis, come to a conclusion. That is where a majority of the crap called "statistics" or "studies" comes from on the internet. That is why we have scientists doing hypothesis driven research. That is what these researchers did. If you do not believe in the scientific method then I can't argue the numbers. But in 1999 (last full report) there were 489 kids in the United States that because they were killed by a firearm will never celebrate their 15th birthday. For unadulterated numbers start here: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/firearms.htm Those numbers aren't crap. They're real numbers, real kids, real coffins (small), real grieving mothers. I grew up around guns, was taught how to use them safely. By the time I was 14 my brothers and I had gone through the 15,000 rounds of 9mm my dad got from I think a Korean war special sale. We had an M1 carbine, 357 Magnum Highway patrolman with varmint scope, 9mm Luger with shoulder stock, 9mm Browning automatic, S&W 38, An assortment of shotguns, 12 and 20g side/side, over and under and pump. Made all our own shotgun shells. An assortment of musket loaders, made are own bullets. Never a mishap. That is an anecdotal story which means nothing. Just stating facts that possibly might prevent someone from purchasing a handgun to feel safer in their state park when actually they might be increasing the chance that their kid will accidentally (or on purpose) get killed with it. The coffee statistics I also agreed with: people over the age of 50 who drink two or more cups of coffee have twice as much sex as non-coffee drinkers. I'm working on my third cup of the day right now. I want to be up to a quart a day by the time I'm fifty.

quote:Originally posted by TresOkies: quote:This month in "Journal of Trauma" published a study from the Harvard School of Public Health... Paul, with all due respect, this is a load of crap. The authors go into the study knowing what they want to publish and make certain they get the numbers they want. It's a political issue, not a scientific one. Researchers do this all the time with other dangerous items like SUVs, eggs, coffee, and cell phones. I politely disagree. You are right, anyone can take a bunch of numbers, call them statistics, draw up an hypothesis, come to a conclusion. That is where a majority of the crap called "statistics" or "studies" comes from on the internet. That is why we have scientists doing hypothesis driven research. That is what these researchers did. If you do not believe in the scientific method then I can't argue the numbers. But in 1999 (last full report) there were 489 kids in the United States that because they were killed by a firearm will never celebrate their 15th birthday. For unadulterated numbers start here: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/firearms.htm Those numbers aren't crap. They're real numbers, real kids, real coffins (small), real grieving mothers. I grew up around guns, was taught how to use them safely. By the time I was 14 my brothers and I had gone through the 15,000 rounds of 9mm my dad got from I think a Korean war special sale. We had an M1 carbine, 357 Magnum Highway patrolman with varmint scope, 9mm Luger with shoulder stock, 9mm Browning automatic, S&W 38, An assortment of shotguns, 12 and 20g side/side, over and under and pump. Made all our own shotgun shells. An assortment of musket loaders, made are own bullets. Never a mishap. That is an anecdotal story which means nothing. Just stating facts that possibly might prevent someone from purchasing a handgun to feel safer in their state park when actually they might be increasing the chance that their kid will accidentally (or on purpose) get killed with it. The coffee statistics I also agreed with: people over the age of 50 who drink two or more cups of coffee have twice as much sex as non-coffee drinkers. I'm working on my third cup of the day right now. I want to be up to a quart a day by the time I'm fifty.

This month in "Journal of Trauma" published a study from the Harvard School of Public Health. If you have a firearm in the house your chidlren 5 to 14 years old are twice as likely to commit suicide and three times more likely to die from firearm homocide. Reverse causation was factored in, "unsafe areas thus more guns thus more fatalities". They looked at poverty, education urbinaization. It all still added up to guns in the house increase accidental death, homicide and suicide of children 5 to 14. There was a tight correlation with states that have high gun ownership with high levels of dead children. Non-firearm suicides and homocides had no correlation. According to Miller (author), "the danger of guns is not that they somehow cause people to act more violently- it is simply that people will be far more succesful at killing themselves or someone else with a gun.

This month in "Journal of Trauma" published a study from the Harvard School of Public Health. If you have a firearm in the house your chidlren 5 to 14 years old are twice as likely to commit suicide and three times more likely to die from firearm homocide. Reverse causation was factored in, "unsafe areas thus more guns thus more fatalities". They looked at poverty, education urbinaization. It all still added up to guns in the house increase accidental death, homicide and suicide of children 5 to 14. There was a tight correlation with states that have high gun ownership with high levels of dead children. Non-firearm suicides and homocides had no correlation. According to Miller (author), "the danger of guns is not that they somehow cause people to act more violently- it is simply that people will be far more succesful at killing themselves or someone else with a gun.

quote:Originally posted by apersson850: With a program like G7ToWin, the track log can be edited and reloaded into the GPS, so that's hardly any evidence that can't be tampered with. Anders The murderer: goes to the cache the day before, downloads track to computer and changes each track data point to the next day. Chage PC date to next day, save, then reload into GPS. Looks good. The detective: has Garmin download all files from GPS. Finds everything corroberates alibi. But wait. The GPS has recorded the exact time and date of the file upload into the GPS! Since the GPS cannot be told the wrong date this makes the detective download an image of the murderers PC. Suspicious files which are unerased send the murderer to jail along with DNA evidence left on the candlestick which was used to whack the uncle. (Presuming the murderer can't afford OJ's lawyers).

On MacOSX if you hold the command key down while clicking "post reply" it will pop open a new window and seems to skip over the bug.

I will be out to nail another one of your caches. Unfortunately it will likely be August 2003 before I do another Utah cache. 7 Sailors is going down.

Prime, you're right, that is a great description of the type of cache vandalism that will be cut down on. It won't cut down on the truly vindictive vandal who will pay the fee to be an a-hole. A few months experience will tell if it does any good. BDave. In the beginning frenzy I think a MOcache is going to get thrashed with hits like yours. My curiosity made me go hunting and stumbled on your cache and fractals beautiful graphic. Again, only the experience of a few months will tell whether the log is going to be worth anything.

quote:Originally posted by TheRealDesertRat: There is a large group of geocachers in my community. If one of us was to join, then we would all have access to the MOC's correct.? -The Real DesertRat Jeremy doesn't need to answer this, the answer is obvious. Of course you can. In the same spirit you can copy great software that someone has taken a long time to write. You can post it on a web site. But guess what? The person or company that wrote the software goes out of business. The great software is no more. In the case of the MOC's would it be called cheating or stealing? Or just not agreeing with the whole MOC thing so why not hand them out. Your call on that one.

How can we get so emotional about hiding tupperware in the woods? My therapist doesn't understand. Hmmm, can I copy and paste him?

How can we get so emotional about hiding tupperware in the woods? My therapist doesn't understand. Hmmm, can I copy and paste him?

Rule 3, Section 21, Article 2: (in part),any intentional forward movement of his arm starts a forward pass, even if the player loses possession of the ball as he is attempting to tuck it back toward his body. Boy, that's a dumb rule. Boo-hoo. I pretty much stopped watching football twenty years ago because a fumble stopped being a fumble and "forward motion" became part of the game. No, if you were able to pick up Johnny Unitas and place him and the ball in your end zone that meant your team got some points. But I digress. Yeah, dumb rule. Change it and while you are at it hang that kid who caught that "home run" at Yankee stadium up by the thumbs. Oh and wait, call interference on the catcher by Chris Chambliss in the 1975 World Series. Pudge Fisk will thank you. [Warning, post is heavily laden with sarcasm].

You didin't mean to say defecate, did you? Someone pooped in a cache?

Would you pay for an ad-free superbowl? It is part of the game, and it does not really bother me. Well you would have got me on that one except for this past superbowl. Usually I had no real interest in the game and I would be watching the ads marveling at each million dollar minute. Whether in awe at the cinematography/plot or the total waste of $1mil. But this year, hell froze over and the New England Patriots won the Superbowl. I would have paid big time to watch every second of it without commercials. I'm purchasing the DVD of the entire season this week. And I'm not really a football fan. Now the Red Sox ... Can hell freeze over twice in one year? Don't put that underwear on Ebay yet Satan.

Jeremy, If you change it to "Jeremy's Kids" I am _so_ outta here. (Sheesh where is that little puking emoticon when you need it). It was stated that up until now when you posted you were treated equally but now a "geocacher" will not carry the weight of a "charter member". Nonsense. Forum posters were never treated equally. If you made interesting points with content, people listened. If you posted, "gotta know what party _they_ belonged to ..." or other pointless drivel then people don't. A name on the left is not going to change anything. A hamster won't be turned into a prince or a toad because they are a "charter member".

quote:Originally posted by harrkev:

Crossville Tennessee USA How did you do that? Mine is all filled out

Crossville Tennessee USA How did you do that? Mine is all filled out