Jump to content

Thank Goodness it Wasn't A GeoCache!


Zoptrop
Followers 2

Recommended Posts

I didn't read through all of the 100 posts here but the comment thank goodness it wasn't a geocache is very correct. I am aware of an incident that luckily didn't get any media play. In Chicago a cacher was placing a cache on a mailbox at a federal center and was found doing so. The cacher then was required to take federal agents to each of his geocaches, remove them and then was questioned by autorities for several hours. Who in this day and age would place a geocache on a mailbox on federal property?

Link to comment

CNN covered it for hours on end, is still covering it... I wonder how much they made selling commercial time by keeping millions of scared or curious eyeballs glued to TV screens?

Isn't CNN part of the same parent company? I think this worked out better for Time-Warner than if it never happened. Even if they pay the cost of the Boston police in this incident. Where else could the get all this publicity for just $750,000 and an apology?

Link to comment

All I have to say is that these guys are definetly not ready to be defeated. They are taking it all with a grain of salt and turning the stiff reporters on their heads. Eventually some reporters are getting the idea, but overall a humorous video.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zx2ytr2Oyv4

 

At the end of that clip the newscaster mentions a "twenty-five hundred cache bond". That's a pretty strong bond

Link to comment

Distilled version from Boston news:

Two stoner art-school grads got a contract to place "intallment art" advertizements. They have no clue about sign laws. The hiring ad company uses spray paint at times and "street prophets" on soap boxes blah, blah, blah to be hip, trendy, cutting edge, whatever, to create a product "buzz". Turner Co was dumb to hire Inference Inc, who in turn was stupid enough not to clue the bozos in about basic legalities / common sense / responsible behavior while playing "guerilla marketing".

Botton line, Turner / Inference should pony up the $$$. I would hope Turner Co would start shoveling $$$ ASAP and toss some free ads for the Boston Arts Council (maybe marketing 101 for stoner artists too).

...

 

I'm sure there is a standard fine for placing signs wrongly. Somewhat less than the stupid figure the city is throwing around.

Link to comment

CNN covered it for hours on end, is still covering it... I wonder how much they made selling commercial time by keeping millions of scared or curious eyeballs glued to TV screens?

Isn't CNN part of the same parent company? I think this worked out better for Time-Warner than if it never happened. Even if they pay the cost of the Boston police in this incident. Where else could the get all this publicity for just $750,000 and an apology?

Indeed. And when I said it was idiotic advertising above, I meant the original idea of meaningless light fixtures all over, not the incredible coverage they're getting now. I'm not bold enough to declare it all intentional, I refuse to believe anyone would be that stupid, or so willing to risk serious consequences.

Link to comment

...and I'm willing to bet a wayward briefcase is just a wayward briefcase. Ask the Israelis which would get more attention from the authorities.

 

When's the last time anyone saw a bomb that was marked with the equivalent of glowing neon?

 

It appears there's enough "dumb" to go around for everyone involved.

Link to comment

with the same thought that BOMBS don't look like bombs...why would anyone NOT perceive a threat from that item that looks out of place??? MAYBE because they THOUGHT it could be a bomb!!!

 

A cacher should know as much as anyone...hiding something in plain sight is the best method!!

 

Here's an idea. Let's put cameras inside everyone's houses so we always know what people are doing. Then we'll make people report each week on how they spent all their time. That way, we'd always know when someone is planning any kind of crime -- not just terrorism, maybe even robberies too.

 

Then we'll make all the buildings and yards and cars and houses all look the same, so it will be easy to spot anything that's out of place. No one can put anything where it doesn't belong. This will have the added benefit of making everything look tidy and preventing litter.

 

All art will be approved by a committee, to make sure it is safe for our minds, and to make sure there are no bombs in it. Any new ways of doing things will also be approved by a committee.

 

Then we will all be safe and sound, and we'll only be able to die of car accidents and hamburger fat, the way it was meant to be -- heck, if we have cameras everywhere, we could even ban hamburgers and force people to eat organic salad so everyone will live to 100.

 

It won't be a very interesting life, but we will maximize lifespan and orderliness. Lots of security (for everyone that falls well within the norm), and no freedom. Better?

 

Luna

 

Anyone ever seen "Equilibrium"???

 

:(

 

--MGb

Link to comment

A cop's perspective:

Here's the Florida statute regarding placing hoax bombs;

790.165 Planting of "hoax bomb" prohibited; penalties.--

 

(1) For the purposes of this section, "hoax bomb" means any device or object that by its design, construction, content, or characteristics appears to be, or to contain, or is represented to be or to contain, a destructive device or explosive as defined in this chapter, but is, in fact, an inoperative facsimile or imitation of such a destructive device or explosive, or contains no destructive device or explosive as was represented.

 

(2) Any person who, without lawful authority, manufactures, possesses, sells, delivers, sends, mails, displays, uses, threatens to use, attempts to use, or conspires to use, or who makes readily accessible to others, a hoax bomb commits a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

 

Had this occurred in Florida, the fidiots might have been charged with littering, but they certainly would not have been charged with planting a hoax bomb, since that is not what they did. Law enforcement must focus on the actual crime committed, and not waste time and/or resources pandering to a public that is scared of its own shadow.

Link to comment

Here's an idea. Let's put cameras inside everyone's houses so we always know what people are doing. Then we'll make people report each week on how they spent all their time. That way, we'd always know when someone is planning any kind of crime -- not just terrorism, maybe even robberies too.

 

Then we'll make all the buildings and yards and cars and houses all look the same, so it will be easy to spot anything that's out of place. No one can put anything where it doesn't belong. This will have the added benefit of making everything look tidy and preventing litter.

 

All art will be approved by a committee, to make sure it is safe for our minds, and to make sure there are no bombs in it. Any new ways of doing things will also be approved by a committee.

 

Then we will all be safe and sound, and we'll only be able to die of car accidents and hamburger fat, the way it was meant to be -- heck, if we have cameras everywhere, we could even ban hamburgers and force people to eat organic salad so everyone will live to 100.

 

It won't be a very interesting life, but we will maximize lifespan and orderliness. Lots of security (for everyone that falls well within the norm), and no freedom. Better?

 

1984 anyone?

 

Seriously, though... How many people would even look twice if, rather than lights, wires, and batteries (god forbid!), the people who placed the "things" (for lack of a better word...) used bumper stickers, instead?

 

Honestly, I think that movies that portray bombs as having wires sticking out, flashing lights, etc should be banned more than anything else... It doesn't take an idiot to figure out that bomb creators would at least make some attempt to make their explosives blend in with the environment, not stick out like a sore thumb (or finger :( )

 

There's a line between "vigilant" and "over-reacting."

 

It scares me when people that have no clue what the **** they're talking about get put in charge of things... Honestly, I think I'm more scared of how much Boston overreacted than of the possibility of the litebrites actually being a terrorist device.

 

Just my $0.02

 

Happy Caching!

Jeff

Link to comment

I guess that's why we should adhere to the rules of geocaching...and use common sense!!! I for one wouldn't place one on or near a bridge, around an airport (as I have seen mention in the forums recently) or even at a bus terminal or train station!! Not at a city hall, police station, fire station...I think you get my point!!

 

And I truly doubt they went for permission to place these around there...why would there have been this reaction if they had??? And really, do you think permission would have been granted for such locations???

In the past week, I had the pleasure of working with a hider of a cache that was between a bank and a city hall/police department building. I cited the guideline about government buildings, and the cache owner produced a signed permission letter from the police chief and the mayor. So, don't generalize. Permission cures a lot of problems. In this case, had the marketing firm advised the city of what they were doing, the outcome may well have been different.

 

I guess that's why we should adhere to the rules of geocaching...and use common sense!!! ...

Three thoughts:
  1. The placers of these devices were not geocachers. Therefore, they are not bound by the guidelines.

Right, but remember, we are discussing this example in the context of geocaching. Otherwise I would have moved the thread to the off-topic forum shortly after it started.

Link to comment

[... In this case, had the marketing firm advised the city of what they were doing, the outcome may well have been different.

In fact the advertisers called the City and the Homeland Security folks early in the event.

 

There's some rather amazing video clips showing response management totally disregarding this information on YouTube - I can't link to it because it contains foul language, but it isn't hard to find.

 

The best is some HS dude saying something to the effect of 'yes, they have called us and explained, but we have no reason to accept that and are blindly going forward with this farce'.

 

Permission wouldn't help in the face of that kind of thinking. :unsure:

Link to comment

Distilled version from Boston news:

Two stoner art-school grads got a contract to place "intallment art" advertizements. They have no clue about sign laws. The hiring ad company uses spray paint at times and "street prophets" on soap boxes blah, blah, blah to be hip, trendy, cutting edge, whatever, to create a product "buzz". Turner Co was dumb to hire Inference Inc, who in turn was stupid enough not to clue the bozos in about basic legalities / common sense / responsible behavior while playing "guerilla marketing".

Botton line, Turner / Inference should pony up the $$$. I would hope Turner Co would start shoveling $$$ ASAP and toss some free ads for the Boston Arts Council (maybe marketing 101 for stoner artists too).

 

As a side note, only one was placed where the target market might "get it"... I don't see too many people arguing here from the area. I doubt you have ever been stuck in Boston when traffic is shut down or had the pleasure of sitting on the T for a couple hours. If I was stuck on 93, I'd be P-O'd, and just as upset with some of the Bevis & Butthead Generation's replies I've seen on some news forums.

 

Well, they did create quite a buzz. Now the entire country knows about that cartoon where before I doubt 1 percent would be able to tell you about it. I think the Boston authorities went waaay overboard with this. But if you have ever heard their Mayor talk, you'd know he's not the brightest LED on the device. All the overreacting in Boston was, IMHO, just him showboating for the rest of the world, like he's trying to say "look how seriously we take the threat of terrorism". Not that it shouldn't be taken seriously, but someone in authority should be able to tell the difference between an LED attached to a couple of Duracells and an actual explosive device.

 

P.S. I bet you'd be shocked to find that not all art students are "stoners". And I've met a lot of people that shocked me to find out they were stoners.

Link to comment

how does that disclaimer go .... past performance is not a garauntee of future results

 

Hopefully terrorists aren't listening and picking up on the idea that if thier bombs are blinky and cutesy they can sit in plain site for days on end. How many times had mutiple planes been simultaneously highjacked and flown into skyscapers prior to 9/11? Did we all stand around saying 'Oh you wacky guys! You got us on that one. We're coming after ya but before we do we have to say kudos on your originality'

 

Its fine to sit with the perfect vision of hindsight and proclaim the harmlessness of intent. There's a lot of discussion of intent, however I see intent very clearly. These signs were intentionally placed in high traffic areas which, by no coincidence, are also terrorist targets. The problem is thier ignorance caught up with them but that is suppossed to be excused because it wasn't thier intent?

 

Whether the terrorists have won because we've let the govt usurp our rights to violate local ordinances for the purpose of ecclectic advertising may be debatable however I more concerned about letting them know we're still asleep at the wheel.

Edited by IGJoe
Link to comment
how does that disclaimer go .... past performance is not a garauntee of future results

 

Hopefully terrorists aren't listening and picking up on the idea that if thier bombs are blinky and cutesy they can sit in plain site for days on end. How many times had mutiple planes been simultaneously highjacked and flown into skyscapers prior to 9/11? Did we all stand around saying 'Oh you wacky guys! You got us on that one. We're coming after ya but before we do we have to say kudos on your originality'

 

Its fine to sit with the perfect vision of hindsight and proclaim the harmlessness of intent. There's a lot of discussion of intent, however I see intent very clearly. These signs were intentionally placed in high traffic areas which, by no coincidence, are also terrorist targets. The problem is thier ignorance caught up with them but that is suppossed to be excused because it wasn't thier intent?

 

Whether the terrorists have won because we've let the govt usurp our rights to violate local ordinances for the purpose of ecclectic advertising may be debatable however I more concerned about letting them know we're still asleep at the wheel.

Honestly, I'm not sure where you were going with your post.

 

'We're still asleep at the wheel' - How do you figure? The officials in Boston presumed that the items were bad and took all appropriate steps to protect the public. Officials in other areas identified the items for what they were and simply removed them. Is it your position that all of the involved cities should have reacted exactly as Boston did? If that is your position, where does it end? Should the bomb squad be called out to blow up every piece of litter? Should every private vehicle be forbidden from approaching a city center? They could be full of explosives, after all.

 

There has to be a point that we are willing to assume that the mundane items around us are, indeed, mundane. Otherwise, we will all be forced to stay in our homes, huddled in fear.

Link to comment

If you're really unclear on my point I'll clarify:

 

The sign makers were irresponsible

LEO acted appropriately

Ignoring things just because it doesn't match previous terror attempts and profiles is negligent

 

I hope that helps. If you were simply trying to bait me into an arguement of slippery slopes, I'm not biting.

Link to comment

If you're really unclear on my point I'll clarify:

 

The sign makers were irresponsible

LEO acted appropriately

Ignoring things just because it doesn't match previous terror attempts and profiles is negligent

 

I hope that helps. If you were simply trying to bait me into an arguement of slippery slopes, I'm not biting.

So basically you agree with just about everyone who posted before.

Link to comment

...The sign makers were irresponsible

LEO acted appropriately

Ignoring things just because it doesn't match previous terror attempts and profiles is negligent....

 

If they did call before they did their publicity stunt, they were more responsible than some. LEO acted appropriatly in Seattle (no big deal) and Boston (very big deal). You are correct that you should remain vigulant.

 

We all pretty much agree on what you said here. Reading your prior post though I'm not sure what your larger point is? Arresting and prosecuting the Boston guys is ok?, letting the Seattle guys off the hook is ok?

Link to comment

If you're really unclear on my point I'll clarify:

 

The sign makers were irresponsible

LEO acted appropriately

Ignoring things just because it doesn't match previous terror attempts and profiles is negligent

 

I hope that helps. If you were simply trying to bait me into an arguement of slippery slopes, I'm not biting.

So basically you agree with just about everyone who posted before.

 

Really? :laughing: This is the 3rd page of thread where people are agreeing with each other? Thats truly amazing and possbily a first on the Groundspeak forums.

 

I presume its ok for me to state my 'basic agreement with just about everyone' since we are on the 3rd page and over 130 posts. Everyone else has been agreeing so I hope its ok I do as well :laughing:

 

Is it, is that OK?

Link to comment

...The sign makers were irresponsible

LEO acted appropriately

Ignoring things just because it doesn't match previous terror attempts and profiles is negligent....

 

If they did call before they did their publicity stunt, they were more responsible than some. LEO acted appropriatly in Seattle (no big deal) and Boston (very big deal). You are correct that you should remain vigulant.

 

We all pretty much agree on what you said here. Reading your prior post though I'm not sure what your larger point is? Arresting and prosecuting the Boston guys is ok?, letting the Seattle guys off the hook is ok?

 

My mistake was thinking this thread was about the incident in Boston thus I was speaking of what happened in Boston. So yes, the Boston artists were irresponsible and the Boston LEO acted appropriately. I'm glad to read the Boston LEO did not dismiss a potential threat simply because it didn't conform the way we think terrorist should behave.

 

Since you asked about what I think of prosecuting I'll tell you. The artists who put up the signs should be prosecuted for any laws they violated. Boston will have a hard time making a bomb hoax stick in court but I'm sure they've violated more laws than simple littering.

Edited by IGJoe
Link to comment

...Since you asked about what I think of prosecuting I'll tell you. The artists who put up the signs should be prosecuted for any laws they violated. Boston will have a hard time making a bomb hoax stick in court but I'm sure they've violated more laws than simple littering.

 

There are rules for putting up signs/billboards/advertisements/political carp in the public right away. The same rules the politicians who are clammoring for blood most likely broke to get elected to their office. (Some politicians excuse political ads from these laws. :laughing: )

 

It would be fair to prosecute them all and fine them the 200 bucks or whatever that particular fine is. This is something that they should have seen doing in.

 

Someone brought up "creating a disturbance" but since Seattle and Boston did things differently they could make a good argument that the disturbance was created by the responce and that the responce was beyond their control (which it was).

 

There are enough laws on the books to where a good attorney can harrass these folks for a long time and cost them a heck of a lot of time and money. But that's also true if all you are doing in minding your own business and someone with power doesn't like you.

Edited by Renegade Knight
Link to comment

I was wondering...

 

If the City of Boston makes Turner pay for the response (~$750,000), what happens to that money?

 

Let's say they've budgeted $50 million for the bomb squad, etc for the year. Now they have $50,750,000 coming in for those services. What happens to the extra $?

I read an article on this just a few minutes ago. Apparently, Turner and the marketing firm are paying $2M.

As part of the settlement, $1 million will be used to reimburse the agencies and $1 million will be used to fund homeland security and other programs.

 

Mayor Thomas Menino said more than $484,590 of the total will go to the city of Boston, reported CBS Station WBZ-TV. Somerville will get $69,113 and Cambridge will be reimbursed $24,794. $691,126 will go to the State Police and $630,396 to the MBTA. The Coast Guard will be paid $46,136, reported WBZ.

Link to comment

I was wondering...

 

If the City of Boston makes Turner pay for the response (~$750,000), what happens to that money?

 

Let's say they've budgeted $50 million for the bomb squad, etc for the year. Now they have $50,750,000 coming in for those services. What happens to the extra $?

I read an article on this just a few minutes ago. Apparently, Turner and the marketing firm are paying $2M.

As part of the settlement, $1 million will be used to reimburse the agencies and $1 million will be used to fund homeland security and other programs.

 

Mayor Thomas Menino said more than $484,590 of the total will go to the city of Boston, reported CBS Station WBZ-TV. Somerville will get $69,113 and Cambridge will be reimbursed $24,794. $691,126 will go to the State Police and $630,396 to the MBTA. The Coast Guard will be paid $46,136, reported WBZ.

 

If they are paid money they are not due, isn't that a bribe? I'd hate to think that this will become a precident.

Link to comment

I was wondering...

 

If the City of Boston makes Turner pay for the response (~$750,000), what happens to that money?

 

Let's say they've budgeted $50 million for the bomb squad, etc for the year. Now they have $50,750,000 coming in for those services. What happens to the extra $?

I read an article on this just a few minutes ago. Apparently, Turner and the marketing firm are paying $2M.

As part of the settlement, $1 million will be used to reimburse the agencies and $1 million will be used to fund homeland security and other programs.

 

Mayor Thomas Menino said more than $484,590 of the total will go to the city of Boston, reported CBS Station WBZ-TV. Somerville will get $69,113 and Cambridge will be reimbursed $24,794. $691,126 will go to the State Police and $630,396 to the MBTA. The Coast Guard will be paid $46,136, reported WBZ.

 

So does that mean Bostonian will pay lower taxes?

Link to comment

So does that mean Bostonian will pay lower taxes?

No, that means that they will impanel study and budget groups, hire experts on how to spend that money, fight over it in court for years, and raise your taxes to pay for all that!

 

Does this all have the feel of play money? Can anyone say with a straight face what it cost for that response? They have no clue what it actually cost.

 

The Cartoon Network could not have bought better advertising, nor this city worse.

Link to comment
If they are paid money they are not due, isn't that a bribe? I'd hate to think that this will become a precident.
Just think of it as the most effective marketing campaign in history, for a mere $2M.

 

I was thinking the same thing. How much was a Superbowl ad again? They've had advertising every day for the week preceeding the Superbowl.

Link to comment
If they are paid money they are not due, isn't that a bribe? I'd hate to think that this will become a precident.
Just think of it as the most effective marketing campaign in history, for a mere $2M.

 

I was thinking the same thing. How much was a Superbowl ad again? They've had advertising every day for the week preceeding the Superbowl.

 

I just came across 2.6 Million as a figure for a superbowl ad. Sbell111 hit the nail on the head. Cheap advertising.

Link to comment
If they are paid money they are not due, isn't that a bribe? I'd hate to think that this will become a precident.
Just think of it as the most effective marketing campaign in history, for a mere $2M.

Heck, it was probably Ted Turner that called in the original Boston complaint after seeing that no one was reacting to his Light Brights. :laughing:

Link to comment

how does that disclaimer go .... past performance is not a garauntee of future results

 

Hopefully terrorists aren't listening and picking up on the idea that if thier bombs are blinky and cutesy they can sit in plain site for days on end.

The point isn't that it has never been done before. It's that it would be an incredibly stupid MO if you wanted to actually accomplish an explosion without having your device found first. If a blinky cutesy thing shows up on an overpass, the police should investigate. They should not shut down half a city and alert the media until the threat is assessed.

How many times had mutiple planes been simultaneously highjacked and flown into skyscapers prior to 9/11? Did we all stand around saying 'Oh you wacky guys! You got us on that one. We're coming after ya but before we do we have to say kudos on your originality'

No, it was never done before. It had been predicted as a possible scenario (if the people in our government who are paid to protect us didn't outthink the writers of "The Lone Gunmen", then God help us all). Appropriate measures to prevent such an attack were not sufficiently in place. They still are not.

 

Its fine to sit with the perfect vision of hindsight and proclaim the harmlessness of intent. There's a lot of discussion of intent, however I see intent very clearly. These signs were intentionally placed in high traffic areas which, by no coincidence, are also terrorist targets. The problem is thier ignorance caught up with them but that is suppossed to be excused because it wasn't thier intent?

Your implication in bold is that they thought, "Let's put these ads near terrorist targets". If I'm on that jury, they're walking. Some of them were near potential terrorist targets (not actual targets that we know of, mind you). I haven't heard whether all 38 in Boston were. Many people who don't know about geocaching would say the exact same thing about many caches, even ones placed with permission.

 

Whether the terrorists have won because we've let the govt usurp our rights to violate local ordinances for the purpose of ecclectic advertising may be debatable however I more concerned about letting them know we're still asleep at the wheel.

No one said they had a right to violate local ordinances. They should be fined for littering, trespassing, or whatever actual laws they broke. I'm dumbfounded that there are people living in America who want people prosecuted for things that are not illegal. Asleep at the wheel? More like driving 30mph in the center lane, slamming on the brakes for every leaf that blows across the road and sending everyone else into the ditch, all the while ignorant of the speeding tanker trunk coming up from behind.

 

On your three points in another post, I agree with two. I do not believe the Boston LEOs reacted appropriately. LEOs in NYC and the other half dozen cities these were placed in, did.

Edited by Dinoprophet
Link to comment

Why sbell...would the park be a terrorist target???COME ON people....these guys chose to intentionally place these items in some very bad locations...they may not have intended the reaction, but then, they should have been smart enough to know not to place them in terrorist target locations!!

 

APPLES to BOWLING BALLS...

 

and yes...a felony! There isn't much difference than if they'd have placed them in an airport...hey guys, you CAN go to jail for just SAYING bomb there!!

 

A park could very well be a terrorist target, depending on the aim of the terrorists, how many people use the park, and/or what activities (such as parades or sports events) are scheduled to be held there. I believe you're forgetting - or are unaware - that the term refers to creating terror and confusion by killing civilians, not necessarily to damaging public structures/property, causing major disruption, or killing huge numbers of people.

 

see: Terrorism

Link to comment

the post you added with the statute says it all...not what you boldened...the b section!!! ANY DEVICE that would cause a person REASONABLY to believe that such device is an "infernal machine"!!! BINGO!!

 

edit: how'd that smiley get there??

 

The smiley happens when somebody attempts to use normal outline structure in a post by typing A or a, right parenthesis; B or b, right parenthesis, and so forth. Unfortunately, capital B, right parenthesis is the code for that particular smiley :) - same as colon, right parenthesis creates :P, semi-colon, right parentheis creates :unsure:, and so forth ... and the forum's software automagically (and very annoyingly) edits lowercase b, right parentheses, replacing the lowercase with an uppercase and creating the smiley, because it ASSumes you meant to type the smiley.

 

The only way to circumvent it is to put a space in between your letter and the parenthesis, like so: b ) - or use numbers: 1), 2) rather than a), :), c) - that last was typed as all lowercase letters, but it'll show up on the forum with the smiley.

 

Too bad there's not a way to turn smileys off; even when I use them, I prefer the text form.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 2
×
×
  • Create New...