To trespass or not to....that is the question!

[+Renegade Knight]

As stated before, rationalize as you must if it makes you sleep better at night (oh, wait...you're out breaking the LAW at night). To say this thread has done more harm than the actual breaking of the law is the most ridiculous comment so far! But it was worth a laugh or two!...

 

A couple of nights ago just after dusk. A dozen or so good citizens of my town were using their local park. Playing, walking, and otherwise enjoying the park. The very reason it was built.

 

While they were in fact breaking park rules, or potentially the law. They were using the park for the exact purpose for which it was built. It's a sad commentary on life when the good citizens must live in mortal fear of breaking a park rule while the riff raff for whom it's really inteded ignore the law with impunity.

 

Thanks to this thread I'm now opposed to one more stupid law that has crept onto the books. If someone can show me how these laws have made the world a better place. I'll change my mind.

[+Snake & Rooster]

As stated before, rationalize as you must if it makes you sleep better at night (oh, wait...you're out breaking the LAW at night). To say this thread has done more harm than the actual breaking of the law is the most ridiculous comment so far! But it was worth a laugh or two!...

 

A couple of nights ago just after dusk. A dozen or so good citizens of my town were using their local park. Playing, walking, and otherwise enjoying the park. The very reason it was built.

 

While they were in fact breaking park rules, or potentially the law. They were using the park for the exact purpose for which it was built. It's a sad commentary on life when the good citizens must live in mortal fear of breaking a park rule while the riff raff for whom it's really inteded ignore the law with impunity.

 

Thanks to this thread I'm now opposed to one more stupid law that has crept onto the books. If someone can show me how these laws have made the world a better place. I'll change my mind.

 

 

Here, here! Most people (though not all) are evidently capable of exercising some common sense in these matters.

 

I was out this morning around 6:00 picking up a new cache in a local park. The park officially opens at 8:00 and closes at dusk. In my brief foray into the park, I saw a half dozen people walking their dogs and getting some exercise. They, and I, chose to come early because the temperature in the summer often reaches above 100°. If you don't go early, you don't go at all.

 

Were these people (and I) breaking the park rules? Yes.

Are they evil people? No, just hardworking taxpayers who fund that park.

Who were they harming?

Would it be better to wait until the park officially "opens" but too hot to enjoy? Maybe we should simply close the parks for the summer. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense.

 

From reading this thread, I've learned something. Common sense, really isn't that common. Thank you for that bit of wisdom.

Edited July 2, 2007 by Snake & Rooster

[+Criminal]

Rules aren't laws and vice versa??

Are you intentionally obtuse or merely thick? Can you point out where I said that?

 

You have no authority to enforce any law, speed limits, park hours, racial equality, whatever. Why is it that some people hide a cache and get these delusions of grandeur? Where in the guidelines does it say that a cache owner is empowered to enforce local laws or rules?

 

Take your sniveling back to MIGO, you’re not going to find any sympathy from me. What a joke.

[+TrailGators]

Most of the parks around here are open from sunrise to sunset. I'm pretty sure that people walking their dogs at sunrise won't get hassled by 99% of the rangers. Common sense applies there too.

[+Rockin Roddy]

Yes, it would be great if we could use the parks whenever we want. Like what some could potentially do here, a few bad eggs ruined it for everyone else! One good way to help with this is to work with the locals and show that we ARE good for the parks (safety as crime would be less if park used more, cleanliness as we tend to CITO on occasion etc). Showing that we are responsible can be ruined by a few bad actions, is a cache really worth the risk?

 

Who knows, maybe some day in the near future, we WILL be able to cache as we please when we please! I'm working with my local park to see if we can't get a night cache in place for everyone to enjoy (going to be rough because of the insurance issues...no it's NOT just because of the riff-raff, money comes into play as well).

 

S&R...instead of complaining here where no one has any kind of power to make change, you should take your thoughts to your local PTB and ask for a change.

 

The Daily Telegram from Adrian MI ran a great story about caching in the "Life in Style" section today, if anyone is interested to try to find the link (I can't right now as I need to get up at 5 am to mow the greens). A full page story about caching!

Edited July 2, 2007 by Rockin Roddy

[+Too Tall John]

Ah, but that assumes they would see me in the park.

 

One should never assume.

That statement assumes the [property owner/manager/person of general authority/however you want to put it] will never look at logs for the cache and see that someone is breaking the [rules/guidelines/laws/general wishes/whatever] set forth for that property.

One should never assume.

[+Googling Hrpty Hrrs]

As stated before, rationalize as you must if it makes you sleep better at night (oh, wait...you're out breaking the LAW at night). To say this thread has done more harm than the actual breaking of the law is the most ridiculous comment so far! But it was worth a laugh or two!...

 

A couple of nights ago just after dusk. A dozen or so good citizens of my town were using their local park. Playing, walking, and otherwise enjoying the park. The very reason it was built.

 

While they were in fact breaking park rules, or potentially the law. They were using the park for the exact purpose for which it was built. It's a sad commentary on life when the good citizens must live in mortal fear of breaking a park rule while the riff raff for whom it's really inteded ignore the law with impunity.

 

Thanks to this thread I'm now opposed to one more stupid law that has crept onto the books. If someone can show me how these laws have made the world a better place. I'll change my mind.

 

 

Here, here! Most people (though not all) are evidently capable of exercising some common sense in these matters.

 

I was out this morning around 6:00 picking up a new cache in a local park. The park officially opens at 8:00 and closes at dusk. In my brief foray into the park, I saw a half dozen people walking their dogs and getting some exercise. They, and I, chose to come early because the temperature in the summer often reaches above 100°. If you don't go early, you don't go at all.

 

Were these people (and I) breaking the park rules? Yes.

Are they evil people? No, just hardworking taxpayers who fund that park.

Who were they harming?

Would it be better to wait until the park officially "opens" but too hot to enjoy? Maybe we should simply close the parks for the summer. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense.

 

From reading this thread, I've learned something. Common sense, really isn't that common. Thank you for that bit of wisdom.

 

You've both described all the parks in my area. There's a park that I walked through every morning during junior high on my way to school, along with many other school kids. We were all breaking the law.

 

There's a lot of grey areas in this conversation, and I've yet to see one single example of how geocaching has been endangered in even one single park due to being in a park 30 minutes after or before a park opens/closes. (which is the case for the cache find in question that began this topic)

 

The demonization of good citizens that I've seen in this thread is sad and inappropriate.

[+flask]

i have some caches out in some places that have posted hours. if i hear that cachers are coming in outside of posted hours, i will archive the caches. it's a courtesy to the landowner.

 

i see here some folks who seem to have a libertarian and to hell with law bent, and i'm actually kind of toasty with that.

 

what alarms me is the blithely cheerful amorality that's going under the guise of sanity. these folks are giddy with self-approbation and they need to be spoken to sternly. (the rest of you can look it up when you get home...)

[Clan Riffster]

You have no authority to enforce any law

$0.02 from someone who does have the authority to enforce the law;

Cops are people, and, contrary to Roddy's posts, most people have a pretty fair grasp of common sense. Here in Seminole County Florida, our ordinances are written with the intent to empower us, the deputies. I can actually make a physical arrest on someone I find in a closed park. Would I do so? No, I would not. Parks are paid for by the citizens, and exist for the enjoyment of the citizens. I, and the deputies I work with, prefer to reserve our arrest powers for those who are victimizing others, and not waste the time & money of otherwise honest folks who are simply trying to enjoy nature when they can.

 

Roddy, you've ranted & raved for 4 pages, about a situation that caused no harm to anyone. Let it go. If an adult chooses to violate a particular rule, ordinance or law, they assume the risks inherent with that choice. I work hand in hand with the park managers and forestry supervisors, and I can assure you, they already know that, on occasion, people enter their areas at times other than those posted. When I first started this career in '82, bright & eager, and would point out these indiscretions to them, the answer was always the same; "What were they doing?". If the answer involved no harm to other citizens or their park, they shrugged their shoulders and said, "Don't worry about it".

 

Bottom line? Criminal trespass, (pun intended ), is typically not a good idea, and might result in consequences to the offender.

There is no need for you to get your kilt wadded up about it. It will not end this game we all love.

You're getting yourself worked up over a very minor thing. Is it really worth it?

 

Edit to add: Sorry, that should've read "5" pages.

Edited July 2, 2007 by Clan Riffster

[+Googling Hrpty Hrrs]

You have no authority to enforce any law

$0.02 from someone who does have the authority to enforce the law;

Cops are people, and, contrary to Roddy's posts, most people have a pretty fair grasp of common sense. Here in Seminole County Florida, our ordinances are written with the intent to empower us, the deputies. I can actually make a physical arrest on someone I find in a closed park. Would I do so? No, I would not. Parks are paid for by the citizens, and exist for the enjoyment of the citizens. I, and the deputies I work with, prefer to reserve our arrest powers for those who are victimizing others, and not waste the time & money of otherwise honest folks who are simply trying to enjoy nature when they can.

 

Roddy, you've ranted & raved for 4 pages, about a situation that caused no harm to anyone. Let it go. If an adult chooses to violate a particular rule, ordinance or law, they assume the risks inherent with that choice. I work hand in hand with the park managers and forestry supervisors, and I can assure you, they already know that, on occasion, people enter their areas at times other than those posted. When I first started this career in '82, bright & eager, and would point out these indiscretions to them, the answer was always the same; "What were they doing?". If the answer involved no harm to other citizens or their park, they shrugged their shoulders and said, "Don't worry about it".

 

Bottom line? Criminal trespass, (pun intended ), is typically not a good idea, and might result in consequences to the offender.

There is no need for you to get your kilt wadded up about it. It will not end this game we all love.

You're getting yourself worked up over a very minor thing. Is it really worth it?

 

Edit to add: Sorry, that should've read "5" pages.

 

That post was written under the guise of sanity. And I like it.

[+mtn-man]

Bottom line? Criminal trespass, (pun intended ), is typically not a good idea, and might result in consequences to the offender.

There is no need for you to get your kilt wadded up about it. It will not end this game we all love.

You're getting yourself worked up over a very minor thing. Is it really worth it?

Very worked up. Why I asked that it be taken to email.

 

Great post.

[+gh patriot]

A couple of nights ago just after dusk. A dozen or so good citizens of my town were using their local park. Playing, walking, and otherwise enjoying the park. The very reason it was built.

 

While they were in fact breaking park rules, or potentially the law. They were using the park for the exact purpose for which it was built. It's a sad commentary on life when the good citizens must live in mortal fear of breaking a park rule while the riff raff for whom it's really inteded ignore the law with impunity.

 

Thanks to this thread I'm now opposed to one more stupid law that has crept onto the books. If someone can show me how these laws have made the world a better place. I'll change my mind.

 

Amen

[+simpjkee]

wether the rules are good or not, you're darn straight I'll break them if I KNOW I will get away with it. If there is a risk of chance that I will get caught then I'll walk away and leave the getting caught for the teenagers smokin weed.

[CoyoteRed]

What say you? Are FTFs a reason to break the law?

Nope.

I'm going to add that if I were so inclined to do so I'd not admit to it or advocate it in a public forum.

 

I think it's already been mentioned that certain folks who may want to build a case against allowing geocaching for whatever reason can, and have in the past, surfed the forums to gather ammunition. Granted, unscrupulous folks will take text out of context, but I'm not inclined to provide direct quotes of law breaking or the advocation of same.

 

That's not to say my above answer is simply PC. I really am disinclined to go against property owner wishes. It doesn't matter if it's the law or a simple request.

[+Rockin Roddy]

Hey, I agree. It IS a rather minor offense, one that normally wouldn't cause any harm at all. There are circumstances that could change that and I HAVE seen this first hand. I was almost thrown right back out of one of our parks for just this problem!

 

A few weeks after I placed several caches in Hidden Lake Gardens, an eager cacher took it upon himself to enter after hours. Now, since the land manager lives at the park, they knew someone was in the park...and caught them. Not a bad thing? Hardly! The offenders got off easily (just "get the hell out"), but I was raked over the coals. This wasn't for an FTF BTW. Hey, I hadn't even thought about the problems of after hours, I had led a group in a day or three before that (but to a very remote location where you entered from the cemetery off the main road in front)...man what a surprise when I got the chewing for the offender that got caught. Won't be going in after hours again!

 

I was able to get the caches to stay, but it took some talking and a whole lot of convincing that there are only a few overly anxious cachers around. Their reason for the outrage?? INSURANCE! Someone getting hurt there after hours could easily sue the park (and might even win knowing our courts here) and just fighting any suit is going to cost something (and would really be the end of caching in that park). The park can't afford to insure night time useage.

 

NOW, the S.P. just down the road happens to KNOW the fine folks running the other park, they talk on a regular basis. I actually used the "I got permission at Hayes" to place hides at HLG (as soon as the park manager heard that, he was for it). I was soon contacted by the S.P. crew as well (funny how a small incident can blow right up). They were pretty upset by it all as well and took a lot of re-assuring that all would be fine (their reason...INSURANCE...and they're sticklers for lawfulness). I had to show them how to find the logs as well as have every cache mapped out for them and a bunch of other hoop jumping was performed.

 

This all happened just before MiGO reached their deal with the S.P.s to allow our hides w/o fees. Now wouldn't it have been peachy if this little act ruined EVERYTHING I (and MiGO) had worked for?

 

You think it may be a little thing, but in the end it could be very bad. (and no, cops weren't involved...THANKFULLY since our finest aren't quite of the same mindset as the Clan is...and have a little more time on their hands)!

 

So...none of this really had much to do about any FTFs, that question came from the topic at the MiGO forums, I just asked it to see what the answers would be from the majority. I AM a bit passionate, sorry about that, but to have someone give several excuses and then just blatently flaunt their lawlessness really bit my rear.

 

OH, and I was happy to see the majority would obey the law (or rules or requests...whatever)...but was discouraged by the answers of some!

Edited July 2, 2007 by Rockin Roddy

[+sbell111]

Where you are missing the point is that once the rule has been made, it then becomes morally wrong to knowingly and intentionally violate it, notwithstanding that it is "malum prohibitum" and thus could be changed at the whim of the regulatory agency. ...

It's morally wrong to violate any rule once it has been made? Not only do I strongly disagree with this argument, I doubt that you agree with it.

[+sbell111]

Sorry all!

 

back on topic...breaking any law for any cache is bad for our sport. PLEASE play your own way, but by the law as well! Losing our parks would really put a damper to our fun!

Edited July 2, 2007 by sbell111

[+sbell111]

Rules aren't laws and vice versa??

Are you intentionally obtuse or merely thick? Can you point out where I said that? ...

I think he was further twisting one of my posts.

[+Mule Ears]

Where you are missing the point is that once the rule has been made, it then becomes morally wrong to knowingly and intentionally violate it, notwithstanding that it is "malum prohibitum" and thus could be changed at the whim of the regulatory agency. ...

It's morally wrong to violate any rule once it has been made? Not only do I strongly disagree with this argument, I doubt that you agree with it.

 

In addition to being plain wrong, it's a self-anihilating argument. If it were true, it would work like this: Before something is prohibited, it's wrong because it's prohibited (except that it's not). Once it is prohibited, it is wrong in itself.

 

Morally wrong to ever violate any law? Rosa Parks.

 

Have you noticed that the presumptive "moral high ground" in this argument is held by those who have used the basest debating techniques? Misrepresentation and slander are their staples. I mildly point out that the law itself draws distinctions between types of infraction, and RR (or someone using his account) retorts that this is mere rationalization to let me sleep at night--except that I don't sleep 'cause I'm out breaking laws. I believe that's an accurate paraphrase. RR doesn't know me, doesn't know my personal history, nothing except what he sees here and perhaps on my GC profile and cache logs. But he's comfortable slandering me. His supporters haven't been as bad, except for general crabbiness.

[+mtn-man]

Not directed at anyone in general, but getting it ready for the topic as a whole...

 

[+sbell111]

Not directed at anyone in general, but getting it ready for the topic as a whole...

 

We need some more ladies in the topic.

[+Rockin Roddy]

While mostly, that comment was directed to ALL that would break the law and not directly at you Mule Ears, I do appologize. I did get heated by the repeat comments of what ifs and never saws and so forth, sorry. You, BTW were not pointing out distinctions, you "mildly" said that my posting the topic would hurt caching more than the act itself!

 

I still stand by my comments. To think this topic will do more damage than the act itself is comical! If I were a park official and read through this, I'd see a majority of cachers WILL obey the law and that's good for cachers as a whole! Now, a few cachers trespassing after hours would erode our relationship with our parks pretty fast (around here at least, could be different elsewhere).

[+Cpt.Blackbeard]

I've only read the last couple of pages but I will say that many laws are only in place to cover someones back in case of trouble.

A case in point was Indiana's fireworks law. For many years it was illegal to launch fireworks at home and yet every year people would do it and nobody was every arrested, even though I'm sure the cops would have no trouble tracking down who was shooting off all the "flares".

The law was only there so that, if you did blow yourself up or set a home on fire, they could use it against you at that time.

Another example would be Arizonas law requiring drug dealers to pay taxes on their drug profits.

They know they won't pay it, because as soon as they do they'll be arrested for selling illegal drugs. But by not paying the tax they can be charged with tax evasion when they are caught later on.

Not all laws on the books are expected to be followed by everyone, and not every rule should be followed by everyone. Each person must make that decision on a case by case basis and be prepared to live with any possible fallout from it.

[+Rockin Roddy]

That may very well be the case in most areas Cpt. The area I live in seems a bit different than many, but I'd guess ours isn't the only that is this way. The problem may truly fly under the radar for most larger city settings, but might be a problem elsewhere where the LEO have more time on their hands (and less serious crime).

 

I do know that around here, they would take trespassing seriously, and the land owners CERTAINLY take the trespass problem seriously.

[+Cpt.Blackbeard]

I'm not going to despute that Roddy, but that is why I state that each case must be evaluated on it's own.

I don't think there is one right answer for every situation, but I do know someone will eventually choose wrong.

[+Rockin Roddy]

Sounds about right Cpt. good point!

[+gh patriot]

[+Rockin Roddy]

Glad to hear all went well with your surgery GH...

[+gh patriot]

Glad to hear all went well with your surgery GH...

 

Thanks. They tell me that in six months I have to have another to replace the ear bones with fake ones. Then as good as new!

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

A topic on the MiGO forums about this has been going with most favoring one side. What about YOU??

 

A cache is placed in a park that is CLEARLY marked with closing hours (listing mentions this as well). The cache gets published after dark (closing hours) and is waiting for it's FTF! Would you be LEGAL and wait until morning to go after it, or would you break the law, go against the rules of that cache and go after it right then?

 

To further that, would you consider any after hours FTFs tainted? Since no one should be there after hours, does the find count? Should the find be deleted if the owner knows about the after hours search?

 

This is a big concern for me as I'm worried what an after hours hunt would do to my relations with the S.P I am working with to place hides. One side is campground, only campers can hunt after dark there, but the beach, picnic and boat launch areas are on the other side of the road and they watch for trespassers after hours there! If a few rogue cachers were caught, the park MAY ask for the removal of the hides!

 

What say you? Are FTFs a reason to break the law?

I have never knowingly trespassed in order to hide or find a geocache, and I pay quite a bit of due care and attention to that potential issue when geocaching. As for the question about entering the park during closed hours when it is clearly marked that such is forbidden, no, I would not do that.

[+Confucius' Cat]

Where you are missing the point is that once the rule has been made, it then becomes morally wrong to knowingly and intentionally violate it, notwithstanding that it is "malum prohibitum" and thus could be changed at the whim of the regulatory agency. ...

It's morally wrong to violate any rule once it has been made? Not only do I strongly disagree with this argument, I doubt that you agree with it.

 

In addition to being plain wrong, it's a self-anihilating argument. If it were true, it would work like this: Before something is prohibited, it's wrong because it's prohibited (except that it's not). Once it is prohibited, it is wrong in itself.

 

Morally wrong to ever violate any law? Rosa Parks.

 

<snip>

This thread is getting tiring, but I will post one more time...

 

I totally do not understand the "before something is prohibited..." statement. Something is wrong before it is prohibited because it is prohibited? *head explodes*

 

Rosa Parks:

 

Sir, I submit that you are "calling the kettle black."

You call "your opponents" for dubious debate techniques and then in the same post you introduce the "straw man."

 

The CONTEXT of this discussion is "trespassing to get a FTF."

 

I have said it is morally wrong to break a law or rule, in the CONTEXT of a silly game played with lamp post skirts and McDonald's toys (though seldom in the same cache )

 

That that is even arguable says a LOT about the state of morality in our society.. i.e. it doesn't exist.

 

So to address the hallowed straw man: I WOULD go into a closed park to rescue a damsel in distress. I WOULD go into a closed park to chase a ten dollar bill that blew out of my hand. In fact I WOULD go into a park after hours to rescue a drowning duck.

 

But to go into a closed park for no other reason than to play a GAME, NO. Morally wrong.

[+gh patriot]

Morally... wow.

Edited July 4, 2007 by gh patriot

[+Rockin Roddy]

Yes, the Rosa Parks comment was a bit funny!

 

I believe CC is telling us that if we can't follow a simple law (or even a park regulation...hey, even a request) just for a cache, what morals do we really have? Were we NOT raised better?

 

This is my thoughts as well! Has been all along. We just had a rash of what ifs and I didn't see the signs and I will again or even the funny what if it's the only way that cache would be fun thrown in to confuse and give merit to their views...makes one's head spin! As said before, rationalize as you will.

 

But, this thread has probably already caused more trouble for us than helped......HAHAHAHA!

[+sbell111]

...This is my thoughts as well! Has been all along. We just had a rash of what ifs and I didn't see the signs and I will again or even the funny what if it's the only way that cache would be fun thrown in to confuse and give merit to their views...makes one's head spin! As said before, rationalize as you will.

If you didn't want to fully discuss the issue, why did you create the thread?

But, this thread has probably already caused more trouble for us than helped......HAHAHAHA!

This comment helped us realize what your true motivations were. Thanks for making it clear. Edited July 5, 2007 by sbell111

[+Renegade Knight]

....But to go into a closed park for no other reason than to play a GAME, NO. Morally wrong.

 

Closing a park where it's not needed to solve a larger problem. Morally Wrong.

Keeping closure rules in place when the larger problem is no longer appliciable. Morally Wrong.

Impinging on freedoms just because it simplifies your job to say "No". Morally Wrong.

 

When you bring up morals, you bring up that morals and law do not always line up.

 

Back to my park. Last night the locals parked used the park during the 4th of July Celebrations in my neighborhoon. Freaking, morally challenged, park hours abusing heathens. Why I'll bet their kids were out after curfew to boot.

[+Renegade Knight]

...The CONTEXT of this discussion is "trespassing to get a FTF."...

 

Tuesday I was on a site visit and found a local PRIVATE park that was clearly posted.

Open 8am to 10pm. Closed 10pm to 8am. No Trespassing when closed.

 

Public parks, I'm not so sure that it's trespassing that's the issue as it is entering when the park is closed. RR probably added that bit about trespassing because that's his view of the situation.

 

The real question was "would you enter a park after hours for a FTF".

When you change it to "would you trespass for a FTF" the answer is a bit more clear. More of us would say "no".

[Clan Riffster]

Closing a park where it's not needed to solve a larger problem. Morally Wrong.

Keeping closure rules in place when the larger problem is no longer appliciable. Morally Wrong.

Impinging on freedoms just because it simplifies your job to say "No". Morally Wrong.

Brilliant! Might I add another?

Allowing your "gubment" to infringe on your rights without due cause. Morally Wrong.

[+Rockin Roddy]

You know sbell, you seem completely lost! I BELIEVE that was a poke at someone who MADE that claim...maybe you missed something? And I don't mind discussing the topic, just not having the same comment shot back every couple posts. You read the OP, did you not understand the YOU KNOW part? And the "I would again" comment was just an endorsement of an illegal act which has no merit at all.

 

What would the difference be from illegally entering a park after hours and trespassing after hours? The question is on the first page if you didn't understand it...it was a bit more than you quoted. CC IS correct as the CONTEXT of this discussion IS trespassing...but for ANY cache.

 

You must misunderstand me RK...I totally agree that we SHOULD be able to use our parks as we wish when we wish. I disagree with the "do as you please and be d@mned with the law" mentality though! Change comes from working through the proper channels NOT breaking the law and then claiming your rights were abused for having to. You want your parks back? Try lobbying your local governments for change.

[+flask]

there are the big moral truths, and the little ones. i think this issue is mostly about little morals, but people who exercise little morals can usually counted on to have care for the big ones.

 

i usually don't like to bring my work into it, but i send more kids to the office over gum chewing than any other offense. why? because i assume that kids might forget to throw out their gum when they come to my room. when i spot gum, i make the general announcement that anyone with gum should throw it away. i always give a few moments for them to make the adjustment. some kids feel picked -on if you call them down for gum chewing in front of the class.

 

about five mintues later anyone who's still chewing gum goes to the office.

 

at that point it's not about the gum. at that point it's about disobedience and dishonesty. it is a big infraction? no. but it does show character, and it is an opportunity for me to make that point. if i can't trust you to throw out your gum when asked, i cannot trust you when you say you're going to get a drink, or that you left your hat upstairs and want to be dismissed a few seconds early to go get it, blah, blah, blah.

 

so i expect a person of integrity to follow the posted rules while playing a game.

[+Driver Carries Cache]

The demonization of good citizens that I've seen in this thread is sad and inappropriate.

 

Good citizens follow the rules, even when no one is watching.

 

DCC

[+Cpt.Blackbeard]

The demonization of good citizens that I've seen in this thread is sad and inappropriate.

 

Good citizens follow the rules, even when no one is watching.

 

DCC

 

Like the good citizens who founded this country obeyed every rule the King of England made.

[+flask]

 

Good citizens follow the rules, even when no one is watching.

 

DCC

 

that's the only time it matters.

[+Too Tall John]

The demonization of good citizens that I've seen in this thread is sad and inappropriate.

Good citizens follow the rules, even when no one is watching.

 

DCC

Like the good citizens who founded this country obeyed every rule the King of England made.

Did I miss something, or are we still talking about geocaching? The founding fathers disobeyed the king of England because their rights were being systematically taken away. This discussion is about breaking the law to play a game. Cpt.B, it appears you are comparing apples to hand grenades.

[Clan Riffster]

Perhaps a bit of non-gubment edumacation is in order? A "Right", (as defined here), is a privilege protected by law. The founding fathers of the United States had no "rights" being taken away, since, at that time, they did not have a "right" to practice any religion not sanctioned by their government, nor did they have a "right" to withhold taxes to their sovereign. At some point, these folks decided that the existing laws were unjust, and took measures against them, committing acts of high treason against the Crown.

 

The applicable reference here is that, if you feel a law is unjust, how can you consider not following that law to be immoral?

[+Rockin Roddy]

I believe we ARE comparing apples to hand grenades! You compare revolting against an entire governmental body to not liking a simple law about the use of our parks?

[+sbell111]

I believe we ARE comparing apples to hand grenades! You compare revolting against an entire governmental body to not liking a simple law about the use of our parks?

And you are trying to pare your argument down so finely that no one can disagree with you. You are then demonizing those that suggest that the entire universe of possibilities doesn't fit nicely into your preconceived box. Edited July 6, 2007 by sbell111

[+geomann1]

I believe we ARE comparing apples to hand grenades! You compare revolting against an entire governmental body to not liking a simple law about the use of our parks?

And you are trying to pare your argument down so finely that no one can disagree with you. You are then demonizing those that suggest that the entire universe of possibilities doesn't fit nicely into your preconceived box.

 

I've altered my opinion on this one. As a matter of principle I feel that I as a US citizen have a right to be on public land so long as I am not causing harm, as it belongs to all citizens. In this particular case I would probably consider current practices at the park. If the park hours were strictly enforced, then I would respect them, simply because why risk the hassle of legal problems over something trivial. Just because I feel I have the right to do something, there are times when exercising that right is not the smart course of action. However, as is often the case with these matters the rules are in fact not enforced and people regularly use parks after posted hours, in which case I would go ahead.

 

There is no moral requirement to obey unjust laws.

[+Renegade Knight]

The demonization of good citizens that I've seen in this thread is sad and inappropriate.

 

Good citizens do the right thing, even when no one is watching.

 

DCC

Fixed.

[+Renegade Knight]

...What would the difference be from illegally entering a park after hours and trespassing after hours? The question is on the first page if you didn't understand it...it was a bit more than you quoted. CC IS correct as the CONTEXT of this discussion IS trespassing...but for ANY cache. ...

 

Crimes have degrees of seriousness. That's the difference between being in a park after dusk and being on Public Land thats posted No Trespassing. Both are laws. Both enforcable, but a world apart for what they are and how seriouse they are.

 

A cache I'd like to place is were the Big Lost River goes underground. Before caching I went on a quest to find that magic point. I was blocked by two things. It's either on Private farm ground (and I was a bit too shy to ask permission at that point) or it's past their land and onto Idaho National Environmental & Engineering Laboratory lands. Those lands are posted "No Tresspassing" and patrolled by armed guards.

 

The point being, it's one thing to be in a park after dusk and another thing to be looking for the Big Lost river sink on INEEL lands even though both are worthy places to be.

 

Trespass to be FTF (or merely find a cache). No. Stretch the meaning of dusk? Probably. Not even see the sign because it's dark? Possible.

[+Renegade Knight]

...A "Right", (as defined here), is a privilege protected by law. ...

 

Along the way I've realized the truth of this. The more rights everone has the less freedom we all have.

Specificlly because of what you say. Rights are given, protected, and enforced by law. This in turn places legal obligations on us all. Take my right to a trial by jury. It obligates us all for jury duty. Every right creates obligations on us all. Freedom is so much simpler, and yet for a lot of people such a hard pill to swallow.