GEOCACHING BANNED IN NH

[+Team Dubbin]

 

Did you read the log? He wrote that he logged it because he was standing there while they blew it up. He never opened it and signed it.

 

You're a twisted individual to blame an innocent person and give a pardon to the guilty. You must be carrying a lot of guilt or something.

 

Yes I did read his log and I'm still wondering why he logged it. If he didn't sign the log book then he shouldn't log it. All he's after is the numbers and it has nothing to do with the cache getting blown up.

 

You're a twisted individual to blame an innocent person and give a pardon to the guilty. You must be carrying a lot of guilt or something.

 

Umm you must be the one thats twisted and carrying the guilt since I never tried to turn anything around but yet here you sit and do it.

Just where in the world did you see me trying to blame Jayel57 and say that is wasn't the idiots fault that placed it? 100% of the blame goes on the cache owner.

[Suscrofa]

Breaking news !

In Afghanistan a man has been arrested because police thought he was placing a geocache. They released him once he could prove it was a bomb !

[+Woodlit]

For all the folks that have been saying that placing stupid micros doesn't hurt anyone and it's just how THEY play the game. Here's the wakeup call and this is where geocaching is going if it doesn't get under control. It's not the well hidden caches in the woods that cause these problems. It's the stupid micros hidden under lampposts that get the bomb squad called out.

 

Time to wake up and make some needed changes to the game.

 

I was about to write something similar, so I'll just say ditto.

 

ditto, ditto

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

I was just watching the news and they reported that geocaching has been BANNED in Portsmouth,NH.

This is due to the recent "Mooninite" ads that were mistaken for terrorist activities.

 

They said that anyone caught placing cache in Portsmouth will face FELONY CHARGES!!!

 

Can you believe this?

As of the morning after you wrote this missive, I se no evidence in even the latest news reports that your claims are true. Rather, what I am seeing is that a novice geocacher apparently placed an Altoids tin geocache in or on an electrical panel box located behind a store, and that his device (and also one other geocache located in the same town, a cache located under a route I-95 BRIDGE! ) came to the attention of police. My first reaction when I hear of ANY geocache placed on or near the wall of a store or other place of business -- or, for that matter, under a highway bridge -- is dismay, that this is a really poor choice of hide site. Likewise, my first reaction when I hear of ANY geocache placed in or on or near ANY electrical panel or box is also dismay, as to me, this is a really poor choice of hide site, due to all kinds of dangers, both electrical and social/perceptual.

 

Lastly, this is also one more strike against lame urban cache placed in unwise and illegal spots. Seems that even the police are now needing to lend a hand in removing lame urban caches! The sad thing is that such idiotic placements can help to cause a bad name for geocaching.

Edited February 6, 2007 by Vinny & Sue Team

[+Snoogans]

Can someone please highlight where it says Geocaching is BANNED in NH. That's the part I was looking for. I read it twice and I didn't see it.

 

Otherwise this is just another bad placement story no matter the SIZE of the container.

I don't think it was banned. I think they basically gave out this stern warning:

"It is imperative for those playing these games to understand that this reckless behavior will be prosecuted under the N.H. disorderly conduct statutes and possibly the criminal trespass statues. Placing suspicious items on private property, bridges, electrical panels to businesses etc. creates a condition that causes public alarm. This conduct can be felonious if it causes the evacuation of a building."

 

Will people pay attention to this? I guess we'll find out...

 

 

 

Sorry, that's FAR from reactionary legislation. I think the OP should consider asking a mod to revise the headline of this thread.

[Clan Riffster]

You knew you gave up some of your freedoms when you let Bush create your homeland security super-duper ultra mega terrorist fighting ninja squad.

Wow. Who'd a thunk it was lil' ol' me? And here I sit thinking I was one of the most vocal opponents of this asinine legislation. Thanx for clearing this up. And for the record, it was our Congress who created this law, not George W. All George did was propose it. Perhaps some historical research is in order, eh? Nah, that sounds too much like work.

 

Hopefully, as this story unfolds, and the facts come in, this discussion will drift away from debates regarding size, and focus on poor judgment in choosing a hide location. Perhaps I am naive, but I can't imagine any reviewer approving a hide under an I-95 bridge. I'm wondering if it might've been a hide near a bridge as opposed to one under a bridge? Or maybe the hider fibbed about the actual location? Not sure yet. Time will tell. If we were to collectively create a bandwagon calling for explicit permission required for any hides placed on business property, I'd likely jump on board.

[+nhgoldens]

We got into geocaching because it gave us a purpose to our hikes in the woods. We love finding new parks and forests that we didn't realize existed. We do the urban micros but prefer the walks and hikes, especially with 2 golden retrievers who definitely want more than to sit in a car while we grab a micro under a lamppost. Obviously, we all need to now think about where we are hiding our caches. A walk in the woods is much better than a stop at a lamppost.

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

Can someone please highlight where it says Geocaching is BANNED in NH. That's the part I was looking for. I read it twice and I didn't see it.

 

Otherwise this is just another bad placement story no matter the SIZE of the container.

I don't think it was banned. I think they basically gave out this stern warning:

"It is imperative for those playing these games to understand that this reckless behavior will be prosecuted under the N.H. disorderly conduct statutes and possibly the criminal trespass statues. Placing suspicious items on private property, bridges, electrical panels to businesses etc. creates a condition that causes public alarm. This conduct can be felonious if it causes the evacuation of a building."

 

Will people pay attention to this? I guess we'll find out...

Sorry, that's FAR from reactionary legislation. I think the OP should consider asking a mod to revise the headline of this thread.

Yes, I agree that the title of this thread is ridiculously alarmist and inane, a perfect exmple of yellow journalism, aka mindless sensationalism. The reality is that this is simply a story about two really bad cache placements that should never have seen the light of day.

 

Strange... I have just been reminded by a geo-colleague that the OP states on their profile page that they are an engineer. Wow! When I spent four years in engineering school back in the seventies, we learned about precision and accuracy, not about how to produce sensationalistic and misleading posts and headlines which are the hallmark of yellow journalism! Guess times have changed!

Edited February 6, 2007 by Vinny & Sue Team

[+NorStar]

http://www.thebostonchannel.com/news/10933834/detail.html

 

This is a web page article on the incident from Channel 5, Boston). I saw the tv report on Channel 5. The web article is definitely toned down compared to the TV article. Though I don't think that the tv article said "banned in NH" either, the tone, especially with the statements from the police, was that 'If we catch you...we will book you.' I was trying to find a video file of the article to point you to, but I didn't see it.

 

Also, Boston had a recent similar scare in the city on a botched advertising campaign involving Turner Broadcasting. While, again, some overreaction may have happened, a similiar theme appears that this group that put up these electronic devices on bridges and other areas did not get permission to put them up. And this group acted indignant to the point of belligerant when they were confronted. I haven't followed the story that closely, but I think that there was a real pipe bomb scare in the Longwood Medical area, so there was a contributing factor. If Boston didn't have that incident, we might not have heard of this NH incident. But, the media is looking for these stories, now. The link to the latest in that story is here: http://www.boston.com/news/necn/New_England/

 

So, GET PERMISSION. If we have to go through a local registration list, so be it. But, for the enforcement folks out there, this game has provided a lot of fun to people and families, and the joy that is generated far outweighs any safety risk factors.

Edited February 6, 2007 by NorStar

[+sbell111]

For all the folks that have been saying that placing stupid micros doesn't hurt anyone and it's just how THEY play the game. Here's the wakeup call and this is where geocaching is going if it doesn't get under control. It's not the well hidden caches in the woods that cause these problems. It's the stupid micros hidden under lampposts that get the bomb squad called out.

 

Time to wake up and make some needed changes to the game.

Really????

 

Have there been alot of news stories about film cans being blown up by the bomb squad and I've just missed them?

[Mr.Yuck]

INFLAMATORY HEADLINE CAUSES GEOCACHING FORUM TO CRASH!

 

I agree. Oh and I agree with what Ready or Not and Briansnat said. Oh, and

[+drat19]

Lastly, this is also one more strike against lame urban cache placed in unwise and illegal spots. Seems that even the police are now needing to lend a hand in removing lame urban caches! The sad thing is that such idiotic placements can help to cause a bad name for geocaching.

Well said, thank you!!

[Mr.Yuck]

I'm surprised so many parking lot micros get published. Starbucks, Walmart, Cracker Barrel... these are all private property.

 

It's the "look the other way, and assume permission" policy, of course. Except Cracker Barrel; those are A-OK with the corporate office.

 

In my area, they've taken to putting them in the parking lots of private businesses in industrial parks. With dozens of happy finders, as you would imagine.

Edited February 6, 2007 by TheWhiteUrkel

[+flask]

 

Shutup. Over 3000 of our citizens were killed by people that still would like us dead. Reason enough to be paranoid? Take your political crap somewhere else.

 

seems to me this is discourteous as it gets.

 

there is no disputing that we have allowed our civil liberties to be abridged. there is some argument over whether it is warranted. civil libertarians (who come from both the left and right wings) will tell you that any people who voluntarily give up their liberties don't deserve to have them.

 

it is not right for us to ask upstanding men and women to defend rights we ourselve will give up due to a scare. all the people who have died so far cannot be grouped into one ideological set. those killed in the original attacks were for the most part a simple cross-section of population and it is therefore inappropriate for us to decide on the basis of their dying that this or that thing is the correct political view.

 

decisions can and should be made using our best judjment and best information.

 

to call today's climate a police state is perhaps a bit of unfortunate hyperbole (it has been pointed out that there would be no mistaking this as a real police state when viewed side-by-side with one), but civil liberties are at a low point. those of us who love civil liberties have good cause to be alarmed.

 

it does not, however, benefit us to run around shouting that the sky is falling. we must speak deliberately and act with caution. the OP does us no service by making hotheaded comments about our police state and a subsequent poster does no service by telling people to shut up. "these people died so you have no right to speak" simply doesn't follow.

 

what does follow is better work on cache placement and awareness of local climate. whether or not i like it, i live in today's more suspicious climate. i have to think about how my caching behavior might change caches in general. i have to think about how i will respond to the police the next time they speak to me.

 

i recommend being polite.

[Suscrofa]

I'm surprised so many parking lot micros get published. Starbucks, Walmart, Cracker Barrel... these are all private property.

 

It's the "look the other way, and assume permission" policy, of course. Except Cracker Barrel; those are A-OK with the corporate office.

 

As Geocaching can bring them some customers why not give that as an argument ?

 

True, rules must be set to avoid the obvious like caches in some critical places, avoid what could be mistaken for a bomb etc...

True, geocachers need to exercise some common sense but may be officials should do too no ?

 

The purpose of terrorism is not to inflict a lot of damage but to induce terror, chaos and why not reduce civil liberties. Looks like it is working !

 

A special thank to the press too that usualy "blows that out of proportion" !

 

Seems we are less paranoid this side of the pond and believe me, we are more at risk.

Edited February 6, 2007 by Suscrofa

[+Snoogans]

 

Shutup. Over 3000 of our citizens were killed by people that still would like us dead. Reason enough to be paranoid? Take your political crap somewhere else.

 

seems to me this is discourteous as it gets.

 

there is no disputing that we have allowed our civil liberties to be abridged. there is some argument over whether it is warranted. civil libertarians (who come from both the left and right wings) will tell you that any people who voluntarily give up their liberties don't deserve to have them.

 

it is not right for us to ask upstanding men and women to defend rights we ourselve will give up due to a scare. all the people who have died so far cannot be grouped into one ideological set. those killed in the original attacks were for the most part a simple cross-section of population and it is therefore inappropriate for us to decide on the basis of their dying that this or that thing is the correct political view.

 

decisions can and should be made using our best judjment and best information.

 

to call today's climate a police state is perhaps a bit of unfortunate hyperbole (it has been pointed out that there would be no mistaking this as a real police state when viewed side-by-side with one), but civil liberties are at a low point. those of us who love civil liberties have good cause to be alarmed.

 

it does not, however, benefit us to run around shouting that the sky is falling. we must speak deliberately and act with caution. the OP does us no service by making hotheaded comments about our police state and a subsequent poster does no service by telling people to shut up. "these people died so you have no right to speak" simply doesn't follow.

 

what does follow is better work on cache placement and awareness of local climate. whether or not i like it, i live in today's more suspicious climate. i have to think about how my caching behavior might change caches in general. i have to think about how i will respond to the police the next time they speak to me.

 

i recommend being polite.

 

 

Where the heck is the clapping hands emoticon?

 

 

See, sometimes brevity doesn't work well for me. I tried to say all that by shouting "Doody & Everyone outta the pool!" You said it much better than I did. RK keeps tellin' me I'm too obscure.

[+GerbilMafia]

For all the folks that have been saying that placing stupid micros doesn't hurt anyone and it's just how THEY play the game. Here's the wakeup call and this is where geocaching is going if it doesn't get under control. It's not the well hidden caches in the woods that cause these problems. It's the stupid micros hidden under lampposts that get the bomb squad called out.

 

Time to wake up and make some needed changes to the game.

 

I aggree completely

 

This is going to keep on happening if people don't start using some commen sense. Must we have lame micro's every 500 feet? The NUMBER seekers will be the downfall of this game. We even have a "Stealth Required" attribute, seriously folks start ignoring these stupid park and grabs and start promting quality instead of quantity.

[+cimawr]

I'm surprised so many parking lot micros get published. Starbucks, Walmart, Cracker Barrel... these are all private property.

 

Yes and no. As has been discussed ad infinitum ad nauseum, there is a difference between "private property" in the sense of private residences, farms, etc. and "private property" which is legally open to the public, such as stores and parks.

 

In any case, "parking lot micros" are, IMO, irrelevant to the incident in NH; the article clearly states that the cacher "attached an object TO ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT". The fact that it was "a box wrapped in duct tape" undoubtedly added to the suspicion...

[+geognerd]

OK, I found this article from the Union Leader newspaper saying the cacher who placed the electrical box cache is wanted for questioning by the police. The cacher was interviewed by the paper. And nowhere did it say geocaching was banned in NH. I wonder if they're going to realise this cacher is apparently the same one who placed the I-95 bridge cache referenced earlier.

 

Personally I am sick of people thinking it's their God-given right to place caches wherever they please, ignorant or disrespectful of property owners' rights, cacher safety, and public safety.

Edited February 6, 2007 by geognerd

[+Cardinal Red]

Did you read the log? He wrote that he logged it because he was standing there while they blew it up. He never opened it and signed it.

 

Then he didn't find it. Bogus log.

[+Moose Mob]

This thread is temporarily closed while we sift through the mess. It will be back in a moment.

 

Edit: for those who haven't noticed, we are back on now.

 

So... is geocaching now illegal in New Hampshire or not?

Edited February 6, 2007 by Moose Mob

[Mr.Yuck]

I'm surprised so many parking lot micros get published. Starbucks, Walmart, Cracker Barrel... these are all private property.

 

Yes and no. As has been discussed ad infinitum ad nauseum, there is a difference between "private property" in the sense of private residences, farms, etc. and "private property" which is legally open to the public, such as stores and parks.

 

Well, the people who argue it's ok to place a cache in a retail parking lot because it's open to the public can do it until they're blue in the face. Fact is they are 100% wrong. Permission is required for these caches, it's just "assumed". (Although almost never obtained).

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

This just in.....

 

I DNF'd a cache last night and thought nothing of it. Just found out that the thing was blown up by the bomb squad today (was just published yesterday). Apparently the thing was made to look like a pipe bomb. Was placed by a user with 1 hide, no finds (the one hide being this piece of crap).

 

Here's the cache for those interested

 

That's all we need is geocaching getting a bad name here in Portland also. What are we to do to stop this?

I don't know what's worse - that it looked like a bomb or that someone logged "Thank you for taking me to this beautiful place!"!!

 

Was it the nearby factory, road or houses that made it so attractive?

[+cimawr]

Hopefully, as this story unfolds, and the facts come in, this discussion will drift away from debates regarding size, and focus on poor judgment in choosing a hide location.

 

Would be nice, wouldn't it?

 

Which I'm one of those who feels that placing caches on certain electrical equipment is a Really Bad Idea. Panel boxes behind stores, poles with circuit boxes or meters, etc., are really poor choices IMO.

 

Perhaps I am naive, but I can't imagine any reviewer approving a hide under an I-95 bridge. I'm wondering if it might've been a hide near a bridge as opposed to one under a bridge?

 

It would depend on exactly what's meant by "under a bridge". If the bridge is large and/or high, crosses a wooded area, open fields, or the like, and the cache is in a publically acessible area well below it, that's one thing.

If the cache is actually attached to the bridge's structure, or is in an area where the public really shouldn't be, that's another.

 

I've done a cache which was placed - and is often found - by parking on the shoulder of a fairly major road just beside a bridge, climbing the guardrail, and then going under the bridge (which requires clambering over the boulders which are under the bridge to prevent erosion of the ground) to reach a wooded patch on the other side of the road. The actual cache location IS on the edge of a wildlife area which is legal to hike/walk/fish in, but not to hunt in.

Me, I chose to hike nearly a mile in, from legal parking at one of the fishing areas, via a route which requires some bushwhacking as well as crossing a stream....

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

I'm surprised so many parking lot micros get published. Starbucks, Walmart, Cracker Barrel... these are all private property.

 

Yes and no. As has been discussed ad infinitum ad nauseum, there is a difference between "private property" in the sense of private residences, farms, etc. and "private property" which is legally open to the public, such as stores and parks.

 

Well, the people who argue it's ok to place a cache in a retail parking lot because it's open to the public can do it until they're blue in the face. Fact is they are 100% wrong. Permission is required for these caches, it's just "assumed". (Although almost never obtained).

People tend to only accept half of the phrase, the half that suits them.

 

The phrase in full would read something like "Private property such as parking lots, retail space and commercial buildings may be open to the public for the purpose of conducting business at that location

 

We do not have permission to do anything in a WallyWorld parking lot BUT shop, work at or provide services to WallyWorld.

[+sbell111]

This thread has gobbled up so many topics that it is all but impossible to grasp what it's actually about.

 

As near as I can tell, it's about a small cache that was hidden on some equipment and was removed by the authorities.

 

I don't think that it's about micros, Boston, Oregon, the fabled I-95 bridge cache, GWB, WMD, secret police, logging a find, pipe bombs, Wal-Mart, attributes, the muppets, trout fishing, tangrams, or scrabble.

Edited February 6, 2007 by sbell111

[+Moose Mob]

This thread needs to get back on track.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Now.

[Mr.Yuck]

This thread is temporarily closed while we sift through the mess. It will be back in a moment.

 

Edit: for those who haven't noticed, we are back on now.

 

So... is geocaching now illegal in New Hampshire or not?

 

No, of course not. So maybe a change in the thread title is in order?

 

I'd consider discussion of the particuliar cache behind the Supermarket to be the real topic. I could be wrong though.

Edited February 6, 2007 by TheWhiteUrkel

[+Maingray]

Seems to me that the local geocaching org needs to open up a line of communcation with the law enforcement on a local scale. Get them involved, and hear their 2c.

[+cimawr]

 

I don't think that it's about micros, Boston, Oregon, the fabled I-95 bridge cache,

 

Actually, it appears that the I-95 bridge cache was placed by the same person... and per the question of where the bridge cache mentioned at the beginning of the thread was, I found this story linked in the "bomb cache" thread (bold emphasis added by yours truly):

 

 

PORTSMOUTH, N.H. (AP) - Police aren't fans of a pastime involving a high tech navigation device.

 

The department is sending out a message against GPS scavenger hunts after two reports of suspicious packages turned out to be prizes left for game participants.

 

The most recent incident was Sunday, when Portsmouth police were called to a supermarket to examine a suspicious package stuck to an outdoor electrical panel. The metallic case duct taped to the panel turned out to be a prize for players in a GPS scavenger hunt.

 

In November, police responded to a similar call when someone spotted a suspicious package stuck to the base of the Piscataqua River bridge.

 

Police say attaching suspicious items to private property, bridges, electrical panels causes public alarm and can be punished as trespassing, disorderly conduct and worse if a building is forced to evacuate

[+sbell111]

Actually, it appears that the I-95 bridge cache was placed by the same person... and per the question of where the bridge cache mentioned at the beginning of the thread was, ...

I'm not so sure. The cache page purported to be for that 'bridge cache' showed the cache to be some distance from the bridge. This leads me to believe that either that wasn't the cache referenced in the news story or that it was wrongly reported in the news.

... Police say attaching suspicious items to private property, bridges, electrical panels causes public alarm and can be punished as trespassing, disorderly conduct and worse if a building is forced to evacuate

Anyone can be charged for anything, but I suspect that they would have difficulty convicting for anything 'worse', simply because they chose to evacuate a building. It kind of gets us back to the similar discussion in the Lite-Brite thread.

[vermontcathy]

All I can say is, thank god I live in Vermont, where there seems to be more of the "nice hike in the woods" type of caches than Wally world parking lot caches.

[+cimawr]

Actually, it appears that the I-95 bridge cache was placed by the same person... and per the question of where the bridge cache mentioned at the beginning of the thread was, ...

I'm not so sure. The cache page purported to be for that 'bridge cache' showed the cache to be some distance from the bridge. This leads me to believe that either that wasn't the cache referenced in the news story or that it was wrongly reported in the news

 

I had gathered it was the same cache from comments by others, but now know that the NH bridge cache placed by the individual who placed the subject-of-this-thread cache was not on an I-95 bridge; I looked at his profile & located the map for his bridge cache, which shows it on a smaller road. He has, btw, archived all of his caches.

 

 

.

... Police say attaching suspicious items to private property, bridges, electrical panels causes public alarm and can be punished as trespassing, disorderly conduct and worse if a building is forced to evacuate

Anyone can be charged for anything, but I suspect that they would have difficulty convicting for anything 'worse', simply becausethey chose to evacuate a building. It kind of gets us back to the similar discussion in the Lite-Brite thread.

 

Haven't read the Lite-Brite thread yet... will have to go edumacate myself. And I agree that making criminal charges stick wouldn't be as easy as placing the charges; however, there is quite a bit of precedent for holding those responsible liable for financial damages.

For example, IIRC, the "disappearing bride" was found to be liable for the public expense of the police searches etc., and Turner Broadcasting is coughing up a million or so to cover the public expenses incurred by the city of Boston.

[+drat19]

Am I the only one who finds it interesting how prescient this thread turned out to be...opened up on Sat 1/27 before all this stuff occurred?

[+gh patriot]

Breaking news !

In Afghanistan a man has been arrested because police thought he was placing a geocache. They released him once he could prove it was a bomb !

[+Renegade Knight]

I'm surprised so many parking lot micros get published. Starbucks, Walmart, Cracker Barrel... these are all private property.

 

They are also places of public accomodation. Your invitation to be there is presumed. Else you could not shop without presenting your written and explicit invitation.

[+Renegade Knight]

...Police say attaching suspicious items to private property, bridges, electrical panels causes public alarm and can be punished as trespassing, disorderly conduct and worse if a building is forced to evacuate

 

There are enough laws on the books to charge a lot of good citizens at any time should anyone choose to abuse the system.

 

The decision to force the evacuation of the building is not made by someone who leaves something 'suspicious' others decide what to do. I've had some training and the training goes like this.

 

"These are suspicious activities that you should report".

"Do not think for yourself. Report everything let others who are full time trained professionals decide"

 

Even with my training It's beyond my ability to judge if a cache is a drug stash, dead drop for a spy, geocache or a clear and present danger. That's what I've been told, and so be it.

 

However that's also my defense if they decide that I forced the evacuation of a building. "Sorry, I just placed a cache, it's beyond my ability or control to determine the response. When a trained professional makes the determination that's their sole judgment and sole responsibility and while I do not which to see them prosecuted for doing their job nor do I want to pay for their sole determination that my harmless cache required the shut down and evacuation of metropolis".

 

It would take a lot of money for a lawyer to say that for me. I'll contribute to anyone's legal fund if they choose to fight one of these types of crappy charges.

Edited February 6, 2007 by Renegade Knight

[+Bad_CRC]

check out my new cache containers.

 

They are part of a multi stage cache, I put about 5 of these cache containers under various bridges in NH.

 

 

 

 

*****IMPORTANT note, this is a joke, please don't arrest me and call me a terrist. I've never even been to NH.****

[+Seamus McRowdy]

THE TERRORIST ARE COMING!!! THE TERROROST ARE COMING!!!! AND THEY HAVE 35MM FILM CANISTERS!!!! SWEET BABY JESUS, WHY??!!!

 

I'm sick of hearing about the "Post 9/11" mindset. The idiotic response to the Aqua Teen Hunger force scare is an embarassment to the nation. Terrorists where probably high fiving each other when this news report came out. And now, we have to worry about this harmless hobby? What a pile of poo. If you wonder why we haven't been struck with another terror attack, it's because they already won. Americans are terrorized, and running around with their heads on fire, calling bomb squads to blow up light brights that are obviously advertising.

I'm truly disgusted with the spinelessness of Americans these days. I just hope this gutless drivel, and overreacting doesn't effect my newfound hobby.

 

Defeat terrorists. Stop being terrified.

[chuckr30]

How about a new Geocache rule? No caches placed within 50 feet of a building.

 

Parking lots are a PRIVILIGE and they are private property. If the owner chooses to do so he can press trespassing charges on geocachers or anyone else causing problems.

[+Quest Master]

This has been a busy week for my List of Bomb Scares and Other Fun Stuff

 

I got the one behind the grocery store.

 

Does anybody have a waypoint or link to the alleged cache hidden under the Piscataqua River Bridge (I-95) that caused a scare on November 11?

[+Blue Power Ranger]

please don't arrest me and call me a terrist.

 

I wouldn't dream of it.

[+Bill & Tammy]

With 357,304+ active caches published on this site alone there are bound to be a few bonehead caches, probably quite a few. The reviewers do a good job keeping a handle on things but just by sheer numbers not every cache is going to 100% strictly in accordance with guidelines, whatever is put into place. Besides, over-regulating would tend to squelch hide creativity and that is what keeps this hobby viable and interesting.

 

A stupid and thoughtless hide combined with a reactionary and uninformed accidental discovery of a cache will lead to trouble every time. We can lessen the occurrence with education but we can't prevent it completely. I think on the whole as a hobby we are less of a threat to the public safety than the majority of outdoor activities.

[Zoptrop]

Hmm... I think any future caches I place will be in clear containers - I noticed that on the "mayhem" page none of the exploded ones were see-through.

 

I very purposefully didn't post a link to the dolphin incident this past week (a dolphin in a Florida marine park was playing with a toy in the pool and someone called the bomb squad). The "bomb" as they called it was a "glass jar with a black substance in it, wrapped by a white substance" (?).

[Mr.Yuck]

This has been a busy week for my List of Bomb Scares and Other Fun Stuff

 

I got the one behind the grocery store.

 

Does anybody have a waypoint or link to the alleged cache hidden under the Piscataqua River Bridge (I-95) that caused a scare on November 11?

 

I don't. And note that this cache placer didn't place his first cache until December, 2006, so it has been inaccurately reported in these forums that he was the owner of that one as well. He has however, geocided.

[+sbell111]

Hmm... I think any future caches I place will be in clear containers - I noticed that on the "mayhem" page none of the exploded ones were see-through. ...

That is not correct.

[+TrailGators]

With 357,304+ active caches published on this site alone there are bound to be a few bonehead caches, probably quite a few. The reviewers do a good job keeping a handle on things but just by sheer numbers not every cache is going to 100% strictly in accordance with guidelines, whatever is put into place. Besides, over-regulating would tend to squelch hide creativity and that is what keeps this hobby viable and interesting.

 

A stupid and thoughtless hide combined with a reactionary and uninformed accidental discovery of a cache will lead to trouble every time. We can lessen the occurrence with education but we can't prevent it completely. I think on the whole as a hobby we are less of a threat to the public safety than the majority of outdoor activities.

I agree with you but I also think that this issue is getting a lot more frequent these days. I do think that some steps could be taken to help the situation. Groundspeak could require a time period before any new cacher was allowed to place a cache. I think this makes sense because it allows the noob time to fully understand the guidelines. It also tells Groundspeak that this person looks like they are going to stick around. Just a thought....

[+sbell111]

The number of caches continues to grow. Of course this is going to result in an increase in the number of caches found by muggles and reported to the authorities.

 

This is not evidence of anything other than the fact that there are more caches (in total) out there.

[+TMAACA]

It looks like they are investigating this as a crime

 

The careful wording of the police statement:

"While we continue to investigate these incidents, we want those that are involved in these games to understand these are not innocent games of play and are causing public alarm."

 

Seems to minimally lay the groundwork for the possibility of future misdemeanor prosecutions (see the very last line on this page).

 

Not sure where the claims of felony prosecution are coming from but hey, I'm not a lawyer...

[+Snoogans]

The number of caches continues to grow. Of course this is going to result in an increase in the number of caches found by muggles and reported to the authorities.

 

This is not evidence of anything other than the fact that there are more caches (in total) out there.

 

 

Actually, I think it IS evidence of something.

 

 

As these negative issues as well as positive press and word of mouth increase in frequency we take more and more steps downhill toward the Geocaching Mainstream Event Horizon.

 

 

What happens when we get there, and I truly believe we will, is largly going to depend upon proactive planning right NOW, but that's all pretty much for Jeremy and the rest of the lackeys to decide upon. This isn't a democracy.

 

 

If I were them, I'd be entertaining offers from qualified buyers......But that's just my take the money and run mentality and just an opinion.... Who knows what will really happen when/if geocaching goes mainstream....

Edited February 6, 2007 by Snoogans