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

[+Rockin Roddy]

It IS a good point, just don't forget that not all areas are the same! I'm guessing we have a bit more "overzealous" LEOs out this way than most other areas, but I'd also guess (as stated before) that we're not alone.

 

Also, some parks are privately owned and have a different view of "trespassing".

[+Rockin Roddy]

This "experience" you speak of...was there some kind of study done? If so, could you point it out to me?

 

Sorry, but integrity and morals do go hand in hand...and one that would obey even the silly laws would get MY vote as being a person with INTEGRITY! Maybe even one with...wait for it...HIGH MORAL STANDARDS?? OMG...hope I didn't offend anyone there!

[+TrailGators]

It IS a good point, just don't forget that not all areas are the same! I'm guessing we have a bit more "overzealous" LEOs out this way than most other areas, but I'd also guess (as stated before) that we're not alone.

 

Also, some parks are privately owned and have a different view of "trespassing".

That is true too. Some rangers/policemen are cool and some aren't. I think it really boils down to common sense. Edited July 10, 2007 by TrailGators

[+Googling Hrpty Hrrs]

INTEGRITY...isn't that a great word??

 

and THEN

 

I don't get where I questioned ANYONE'S integrity for that matter! As I said, that was a response to the quote in that post, but you can read into it as you want.

 

This gets the "gimme a break" award of the year!

 

Everyone please reread Clan Riffster's posts in this thread. He brings actual experience and perspective to juxtapose some of the irrational and extreme viewpoints presented here.

[+Confucius' Cat]

 

Disobeying a bad law when obeying would create a greater evil is obviously the right thing to do.

 

 

You finally understand what I've been saying. No one here is calling for anarchy, no one is saying break any law you don't like, we're simply distinguishing between legally and morally right.

Been a pleasure Dave.

The funny part is I never said "under NO conditions would it ever be morally right to break a law." That is just how some people chose to interpret it and "put the words in my mouth." It seems too happen a lot on these forums.

 

That "to obey the law is the morally right thing to do" is a general statement. it allows for exceptions even though that is not specifically stated.

 

...Trespassing to find a cache is wrong, legally and morally.....

 

Agreed.

 

But since you like Straw Man so much I had to look it up. Turns out the OP's argument was a straw man argument. The real questions was if we would enter a park after it's posted hours for an FTF. It was tweaked to call that trespassing making it a misrepresentation of the situation and that qualifies as a straw man.

 

If you are going to jump on the latest forum bandwagon and call something a straw man, then it dang well better be one.

 

Lastly: Since we agreed on the answer to the question of Trespassing, and we actually agree on the simple fact that some laws can be unjust and should be ignored...what's the debate?

I actually thought it was about "trespassing (OP's definition being "going into a closed park") to get a FTF."

 

How this got blown up into whether it is right to kill to avoid being killed is flat amazing.

 

late quote added from blackbeard:

He'll have to answer whether he was peeved or not, but you'll find most people of integrity don't like to have it questioned by someone who doesn't really know them. wink.gif

 

Amen to that!

 

But if someone posts a general statement without naming names or in any obvious way pointing to the "person of alleged integrity", then that person taking offence at the statement is really only offended because he/she has chosen to assume that it is his/her personal integrity that is being impugned by the poster.

 

I think that people taking things over-personally is one of the biggest drawbacks of these forums. I really don't understand this phenomenon. Could it be that it is just too easy to take things personally when it is in print in a public place? Or perhaps are we just too sensitive to "false accusations?" I know the latter is a problem I have. It coincides well with your point.

[+Renegade Knight]

...How this got blown up into whether it is right to kill to avoid being killed is flat amazing....

It was a generalization to express a point much more clearly than using other less obviouset examples might allow for.

 

You should have understood that. While we don't always agree, I give you a lot of credit for having common sense. I get the sense that you do know how to be obtuse when you want to be.

[+sbell111]

I just saw where another area has lost the use of their parks! OUCH! Oh, the problems misconceptions can cause!

 

Might take more than a lunch or two to restore use there!!

Actually, it didn't take even one lunch

Phat, that's your responsibility as a cacher! Read the description, look at the attributes and then go after the cache!

 

When you go swimming, do you just blindly enter the ocean? I'd hope not as you MAY encounter rip tides or worse (sharks come to mind)...reading the signs and heeding the flags would be the wise first step!

If I happen to see signs or flags, I'll pay attention to them. Of course, not all beaches are 'managed' in this manner. Either way, I'm responsible for my actions. I'll make all decisions related to same.

 

If you plan to go golfing, do you just head out with your clubs or do you watch the weather and plan accordingly?

Around here, nearly every day is a good day for golfing. I don't need to check the weather report before going because my home was built with windows.

 

Going on a mountain hike...do you just throw on your shoes and head out or do you read all the signs at the trailhead and learn of the hazards that MAY be present?

Again, if I see a sign, I'll LIKELY read it. Maybe. In the middle of the day in a park that I know allows mountain biking, I may not. Either way, I'm responsible for my decisions.

 

Reading the cache description, checking out the attributes and maybe even reading a few of the logs is a good idea, saves you from making a trip out after a missing cache, helps you to know if there are issues with the cache and lets you know what restrictions there might be!

Reading the cache descriptions is a good idea. However, many people don't read them for a number of reasons. Either way, every cacher is responsible for his/her own actions.

[+Rockin Roddy]

Ahhhh...the fine art of stuffing words in one's mouth...you guys really are good at this!

 

You are correct Sbell...this isn't the case everywhere. Here in MI, if you don't like the weather now, wait 5 minutes I'm really glad to see that the crisis has been averted elsewhere, some fine cachers took good care of the situation (which MIGHT have actually been a mis-print...but I'm doubting that backpedal! Sometimes, enough outcry over a wrong does good.)

 

Gee, a simple word like INTEGRITY (I just LOVE shouting that one) got sooo many worked up...what fun! If only all were so sensitive to the "simple" rules!!

 

He'll have to answer whether he was peeved or not, but you'll find most people of integrity don't like to have it questioned by someone who doesn't really know them. wink.gif

 

Amen to that!

 

But if someone posts a general statement without naming names or in any obvious way pointing to the "person of alleged integrity", then that person taking offence at the statement is really only offended because he/she has chosen to assume that it is his/her personal integrity that is being impugned by the poster.

 

I think that people taking things over-personally is one of the biggest drawbacks of these forums. I really don't understand this phenomenon. Could it be that it is just too easy to take things personally when it is in print in a public place? Or perhaps are we just too sensitive to "false accusations?" I know the latter is a problem I have. It coincides well with your point.

 

Isn't that true...I'm sometimes guilty of this myself...but mostly, I like to "play" with y'all, so I MAY through in a curve ball now and again...just to keep the angst level up!

 

He'll have to answer whether he was peeved or not, but you'll find most people of integrity don't like to have it questioned by someone who doesn't really know them. wink.gif

 

Really? What other things do you suppose might irk someone? Maybe other things said in a few posts which were a bit insulting? You feel it's fine to say what you will but get all worked up when it's thrown back at you...odd!

 

This gets the "gimme a break" award of the year!

 

I win a prize? YAY me!! Please send only money at this time! As I said, and said again...read into it as you must (we all know it'll be done).

[Clan Riffster]

<This post shortened by removing all nonsensical content>

Trying to dictate morality for others is always a losing proposition, because morals are entirely subjective. What is considered horrific in one country, can be the status quo in another. This also applies to state boundaries, county lines, city limits, neighborhoods and even individual families.

 

Imagine a law prohibiting the sale of alcohol during certain days or times. Somehow, some self righteous blowhard managed to convince folks that it was OK to sell beer on Tuesday afternoon, but not on Sunday morning. How can the act of purchasing beer change from acceptable to sinister simply because of what a calender says? Purchasing beer in either right, or wrong. The act itself doesn't change. It became a law here because someone convinced others that selling beer during certain times was "immoral".

 

If you wish to preach for 7 pages about breaking laws, I'm OK with that. If you want to pretend that your morals should be applied to someone else, or that you are the sole arbitrator of what is "Right", then I'll have to disagree. I'll gladly compare my personal ethics to yours, anytime you wish. What I won't do is condemn you as immoral, or lacking INTEGRITY, because you fall short of my personal standards.

 

The only true sin is unnecessarily harming another soul. Everything else is invented nonsense created to push a social agenda.

[+Renegade Knight]

If a tree falls in the woods and a goecacher is there to hear it. Is he trespassing?

[+Rockin Roddy]

Depends on the woods RK!

 

7 pages filled solely by me? WOW, I'm good! I think there MAY be others posting besides myself though, like the good post which brought morals into play here...nope, wasn't me. I liked it though.

 

Condemning...who? You still feel that INTEGRITY thing was aimed at YOU? WOW!

 

The "blowhards" you mention when it comes to alcohol on Sundays...that'd be the church! (catholics I believe, but all church bodies had a hand in that)

[+sbell111]

Depends on the woods RK!

 

7 pages filled solely by me? WOW, I'm good! I think there MAY be others posting besides myself though, like the good post which brought morals into play here...nope, wasn't me. I liked it though.

 

Condemning...who? You still feel that INTEGRITY thing was aimed at YOU? WOW!

 

The "blowhards" you mention when it comes to alcohol on Sundays...that'd be the church! (catholics I believe, but all church bodies had a hand in that)

I think it's fair to say that you have worked fairly hard at keeping this thread active and angstful.

[+Cpt.Blackbeard]

Depends on the woods RK!

 

7 pages filled solely by me? WOW, I'm good! I think there MAY be others posting besides myself though, like the good post which brought morals into play here...nope, wasn't me. I liked it though.

 

Condemning...who? You still feel that INTEGRITY thing was aimed at YOU? WOW!

 

The "blowhards" you mention when it comes to alcohol on Sundays...that'd be the church! (catholics I believe, but all church bodies had a hand in that)

I think it's fair to say that you have worked fairly hard at keeping this thread active and angstful.

 

He has indeed, everytime it starts to die he comes in with another angst filled post.

He'll post one level headed post, then an over the top post, then back again. He's fast losing his credibility with his "yanking".

[4wheelin_fool]

It IS a good point, just don't forget that not all areas are the same! I'm guessing we have a bit more "overzealous" LEOs out this way than most other areas, but I'd also guess (as stated before) that we're not alone.

 

Also, some parks are privately owned and have a different view of "trespassing".

That is true too. Some rangers/policemen are cool and some aren't. I think it really boils down to common sense.

 

Some managers really dont mind if geocachers go in after posted hours. Most are worried about other types of activity - such as the people who dig up sensitive plants and sell them (such as ginseng), or kids who have raging bonfires and beer parties, or people who are digging up the place with a metal detector, ect. They may go in there after hours because they know they may be less likely to be caught.

 

Some may say that they personally dont mind if geocachers go in after hours, but have their hands tied to allow them and not others. Of course every area if different. And I can't speak for all of them.

 

However, I will say that putting in the logs that you went in after hours, or climbed a fence, ect, is just plain wrong and may leave a bad impression on anyone who reads it and is not familiar with the area. The geocaching pages can be viewed by anyone surfing the web.

 

Imagine the guy who drives into a small town every morning well above the posted speed limit. He may drive past the same police officer every day and the cop may choose to do nothing for various reasons. Now imagine the same guy walking into the local diner every morning and very loudly making jokes about how he speeds past Barney Fife every day and gets away with it.. .

Edited July 11, 2007 by 4wheelin_fool

[+Rockin Roddy]

Depends on the woods RK!

 

7 pages filled solely by me? WOW, I'm good! I think there MAY be others posting besides myself though, like the good post which brought morals into play here...nope, wasn't me. I liked it though.

 

Condemning...who? You still feel that INTEGRITY thing was aimed at YOU? WOW!

 

The "blowhards" you mention when it comes to alcohol on Sundays...that'd be the church! (catholics I believe, but all church bodies had a hand in that)

I think it's fair to say that you have worked fairly hard at keeping this thread active and angstful.

 

He has indeed, everytime it starts to die he comes in with another angst filled post.

He'll post one level headed post, then an over the top post, then back again. He's fast losing his credibility with his "yanking".

 

Is this one of my level-headed posts?

 

There's nothing over the top with that post, it's all true and proper. Think I'm wrong about the church (that MUST be what you consider the over-the-top part)? I have seen how the church put the kabosh on more than one bar here. Not because there was a church in the area either...because they thought they MIGHT put a church in the area (still haven't to this day, that was about 10 years ago). We've also had our share of the run-arounds with a church which wanted to open it's doors about a 1/2 mile down the road (they did open a few years ago).

 

They feel very entitled and have lots of clout! Why do you suppose it's only on Sundays until noon!

[+Renegade Knight]

...There's nothing over the top with that post, it's all true and proper. Think I'm wrong about the church (that MUST be what you consider the over-the-top part)? I have seen how the church put the kabosh on more than one bar here. Not because there was a church in the area either...because they thought they MIGHT put a church in the area (still haven't to this day, that was about 10 years ago). We've also had our share of the run-arounds with a church which wanted to open it's doors about a 1/2 mile down the road (they did open a few years ago).

 

They feel very entitled and have lots of clout! Why do you suppose it's only on Sundays until noon!

 

Ok Now I've got a church story for you. One of our trails is walking and biking only. The trail head has limited parking. 3 or 4 vehicles for a busy trail. The nearby church has ample parking. The sign cast in Bronze said, "Visitors Welcome" The sign they posted by the trail head said "Church Patron Parking Only". Not very neighor like. I posted about that in my log for one of the caches up the trail. Next time I went they had removed their sign and now people use that parking lot and keep the trail parking confined to one corner. It happens to be the furthest from the church so, it's all good. I doubt my log had anything to do with it. But I suspect the irony was pointed out to them and they decided to be good neighbors.

[+Cpt.Blackbeard]

Depends on the woods RK!

 

7 pages filled solely by me? WOW, I'm good! I think there MAY be others posting besides myself though, like the good post which brought morals into play here...nope, wasn't me. I liked it though.

 

Condemning...who? You still feel that INTEGRITY thing was aimed at YOU? WOW!

 

The "blowhards" you mention when it comes to alcohol on Sundays...that'd be the church! (catholics I believe, but all church bodies had a hand in that)

I think it's fair to say that you have worked fairly hard at keeping this thread active and angstful.

 

He has indeed, everytime it starts to die he comes in with another angst filled post.

He'll post one level headed post, then an over the top post, then back again. He's fast losing his credibility with his "yanking".

 

Is this one of my level-headed posts?

 

There's nothing over the top with that post, it's all true and proper. Think I'm wrong about the church (that MUST be what you consider the over-the-top part)? I have seen how the church put the kabosh on more than one bar here. Not because there was a church in the area either...because they thought they MIGHT put a church in the area (still haven't to this day, that was about 10 years ago). We've also had our share of the run-arounds with a church which wanted to open it's doors about a 1/2 mile down the road (they did open a few years ago).

 

They feel very entitled and have lots of clout! Why do you suppose it's only on Sundays until noon!

 

Nope, I wasn't picking on your church post, or any one post all, more like the entire page, you'll make one good post, then the next your acting all defensive, then you finally post and admit you just like to stir the pot, yank peoples chains, etc.

That may be fun for you but it destroys your credibilty, if I know you made one post just to get a reaction I can't believe any of your posts, which means your opinion on the subject is now meaningless.

At leasy RK got to post a great little story though.

[+TrailGators]

At leasy RK got to post a great little story though.

That was a nice little story. It beats reading a bunch of arguing...

[+Confucius' Cat]

Some managers really dont mind if geocachers go in after posted hours.

<severe snippage>

Following applies to Blackbeard's posts reference breaking traffic laws also:

 

Some "laws" give specific people the authority to grant special permission to "break the rules." If you are given special permission by someone who would ordinarily be considered to have the authority to grant same (such as a park ranger or police officer), you are NOT breaking the rules (or law) nor is their any moral offence in exercising one's special permission. Granted the "person of authority" could be exceeding their bounds, but especially if the person granting the permission is the same person that would likely be prosecuting the offense, it is of little practical difference.

 

So this brings up a question, just by reading the offending FTF log, do you know for a fact that the offending FTFr DID NOT have special permission?

 

I have special access to several radio towers located in state parks. I am therefore allowed to enter the parks at any time day or night. I would consider it wrong to enter the park on the pretense of working on the tower when i have no reason to do so and instead used my special privilege to find a cache. But I would have no moral qualms about hunting a cache near the site IF I had a service call there anyway, even though the park is closed.

 

Splitting hairs? Yeah, probably.

 

When someone is given a special trust, it is important not to violate it. That is a good general principle in the caching business. Placing and hunting a cache is a "special trust." If we want to continue to have open access to parks and such, we would be well advised to abide by the rules they set out for us.

 

The alternative to abiding by land manager rules is to "go underground," Do we really want the game to go in that direction? Do we want to be FORCED into going underground because we are barred from all the good areas? Personally i think it is too late to go underground- we are too big and too well known. if we are to survive, we need to guard our reputation with land managers.

 

i would not dream of forcing "my morality" on anyone else. (well except maybe for the "thou shalt not kill" and "thou shalt not steal part") But it isn't really MY morality anyway, I neither wrote it nor climbed up on the mountain to carry it down... but I digress.

 

IMO, modern society has rejected all semblance of firm moral standards and traded the "rock" of traditional Judeo-Christian ethics for the "quicksand" of moral relativism and every man does what is right in his own eyes.

 

NAACP buried the "N" word yesterday. The U.S. buried the "M" word (morals) about the time people decided "freedom OF religion" meant "freedom FROM religion."

 

So I guess if I asked do we have a "moral obligation" to our sport to facilitate its preservation, i would be met by the objection that "my morals are not necessarily (the reader's) morals" and are therefore do not apply to anyone but myself.

 

So perhaps the question is better stated, wouldn't it be best for the sport if participants were to obey the rules set forth by the people who maintain the land we use for our hides?"

[Clan Riffster]

IMO, modern society has rejected all semblance of firm moral standards and traded the "rock" of traditional Judeo-Christian ethics for the "quicksand" of moral relativism and every man does what is right in his own eyes

Back to morals again, eh? Let's look at those upstanding Judeo-Christian ethics:

 

Women who are not virgins when they wed should be stoned to death. (Deuteronomy 22:21)

A child that hits his parent(s) must be killed. (Leviticus 20:9)

A stubborn and rebellious son should be stoned to death (Deuteronomy 21:18-21)

It is a good practice to sell your daughter into slavery. (Exodus 21:7)

Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones. (Psalm 137:9)

People who work on the Sabbath should be put to death. (Exodus 35:2)

Suffer not a woman to teach nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. (1 Timothy 2:12-15)

<Like that would go over in my house>

Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live. (Exodus 22:18)

A child born out of wedlock should be publicly exposed by the church. (Deuteronomy 23:2)

Death for homosexuals (Leviticus 20:13; Romans 1:27,32)

Take all the heads of the people and hang them up before the Lord against the sun. (Numbers 25:8)

And this is the thing that ye shall do, ye shall utterly destroy every male, and every woman that hath lain by man. (Judges 5:30)

But of the cities of these people, which the Lord thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth. (Deuteronomy 20:16)

Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and a**. (1 Samuel 15:3)

God instructed Moses to order 3 million people to stone to death one man who had upset Him. (Numbers 15:35,36)

If you are sick or if you commit a sin, it is because you are infested with demons. (Mk. 1:21-34, 2:6-9)

 

They called David “a man after God’s own heart,” and yet didn’t he lead an enemy’s troops against his own countrymen? Didn’t he plunder the country on every side? He was a liar to avoid justice. But worst of all he was a butcher of people as he tortured and slaughtered thousands of men, women, and children, forcing them through burning brick ovens. Using saws and axes he tore them to pieces. He murdered a faithful soldier after raping his wife.

 

Consider Abraham who married his sister and seduced his wife’s handmaid. Abraham’s nephew, Lot, had two daughters. When Lot’s wife was turned into a pillar of salt, his daughters got him drunk and "slept" with him. They both got pregnant and their sons were the progenitors of two nations, the Moabites and the Ammonites. Jacob won God’s love by deceiving his father, cheating his uncle, robbing his brother, practicing bigamy with two of his cousins, and committing fornication with two of his housemaids. David was a drunken polygamist who had a harem of wives and mistresses known as concubines and danced half-naked before the maids of his household. This well-known religious icon also abducted and ravished the wife of a faithful soldier. Why, even Moses made orphans of 32 thousand innocent girls, and turned 16 thousand of them over the brutal lusts of a savage soldiery.

 

Careful what "rock" you get your morals from. Compared to those rather rigid "values", I'd feel a lot safer with folks who simply did what they thought was right. There is a huge difference between laws and morals, and violating the laws of the land doesn't automatically make someone immoral, any more than following those aforementioned Judeo-Christian values makes a person moral. Morality comes from within.

[+Confucius' Cat]

Notwithstanding all the out of context quotes referring to historical times and "rules" that have been superseded by later revelations, the "rock" I was referring to is still valid.

 

I was of course referring to the moral code commonly known as "the 10 commandments" (Exodus 20:1-17). (written on STONE tablets - "rock" ) (well, I thought the reference would be obvious)

 

I'll bet your job would be easier if people obeyed them.

 

Which of these would you prefer that we all reject in favour of "every man for himself?"

Edited July 11, 2007 by Confucius' Cat

[+Confucius' Cat]

I'd feel a lot safer with folks who simply did what they thought was right. There is a huge difference between laws and morals, and violating the laws of the land doesn't automatically make someone immoral, any more than following those aforementioned Judeo-Christian values makes a person moral. Morality comes from within.

 

looking at it again, I see your point.

 

The present result of people doing "what is right" (in their eyes) is murder,rape, robbery, incest, child molestation, drug use and dealing, drunk driving, divorce and domestic battles, stealing, speeding, street racing, and criminal skate boarding (especially in closed parks!).

 

So if people were to follow a "God given standard" of morality, you would be unemployed.

 

I see how the status quo makes you feel "safer", at least economically. Until of course someone feels it is "right" to steal your pension- after all the Bible said "rob from the rich and give to the poor" didn't it?

 

Oops! My bad, dat was dem Democrats.

[+Rockin Roddy]

Ohhh....don't get me wrong Cpt, I do believe the laws should be followed (yep, even the "silly" laws) and proper channels should be worked to achieve one's goal of change. The whole moral thing has become a bit much though, I'd not argue that too much as it does seem to stir up some rather negative reactions (Clan sure put some work into trying to defend against the moral argument...nice work. As Linda would say...got too much time on your hands?). But morals and INTEGRITY do come into play here a bit!

 

I stand by much of what was said (by me at least), but some of my points were a bit ...well..."over-the-top" as you mentioned. After 8 pages of hearing the same argument for trespass, how many rebuttals can one really add that isn't just repeating? In the end, no minds will be changed! You guys say I just go on and on, yet you keep coming with with the same dribble that you first started with...got anything new to add? And am I the only one that has gone over the top in all this? HARDLY!

 

I had a change of heart on a few of the finer issues, but the real argument is whether a cache is worth breaking a law for...to which I still say NO! There are some instances when it might be OK to break those laws (say if someone's life depended upon it), but never simply for a GAME! Other than an emergency, the answer for me is still stay out of the parks when closed!

 

Some feel it's their born right to use a park that they don't own, have no real rights to except someone made it a "park for the people". It's no leap for them to say that any laws, rules or guidelines restricting their use is contrary to what the park was intended.

 

That IS a stretch for me.

 

When someone is given a special trust, it is important not to violate it. That is a good general principle in the caching business. Placing and hunting a cache is a "special trust." If we want to continue to have open access to parks and such, we would be well advised to abide by the rules they set out for us.

 

The alternative to abiding by land manager rules is to "go underground," Do we really want the game to go in that direction? Do we want to be FORCED into going underground because we are barred from all the good areas? Personally i think it is too late to go underground- we are too big and too well known. if we are to survive, we need to guard our reputation with land managers.

 

Here Here CC...what I've been saying all along! How would anyone feel if the lands they hunt suddenly were taken from them because a rogue hunter decided to not obey the landowner and hunt anywhere (as opposed to hunting where told)...much the same, just replace where with when!

Edited July 11, 2007 by Rockin Roddy

[+sbell111]

Notwithstanding all the out of context quotes referring to historical times and "rules" that have been superseded by later revelations, the "rock" I was referring to is still valid.

 

I was of course referring to the moral code commonly known as "the 10 commandments" (Exodus 20:1-17). (written on STONE tablets - "rock" ) (well, I thought the reference would be obvious)

 

I'll bet your job would be easier if people obeyed them.

 

Which of these would you prefer that we all reject in favour of "every man for himself?"

Thou shall not enter the park after 9pm???

[+sbell111]

... I see how the status quo makes you feel "safer", at least economically. Until of course someone feels it is "right" to steal your pension- after all the Bible said "rob from the rich and give to the poor" didn't it?

 

Oops! My bad, dat was dem Democrats.

I thought that was this guy:

Edited July 11, 2007 by sbell111

[+"we two want to play too"]

 

Depends on the woods RK!

 

The "blowhards" you mention when it comes to alcohol on Sundays...that'd be the church! (catholics I believe, but all church bodies had a hand in that)

 

... Think I'm wrong about the church ... I have seen how the church put the kabosh on more than one bar here.

...They feel very entitled and have lots of clout! Why do you suppose it's only on Sundays until noon!

 

Totally OT: The church may have initially had something to do with it, but not any more. Pretty sure that one is now state law. When I lived a couple of townships over, I learned that there were only 3 liquor licenses made available to that township. One was owned by the local party store. The local church bought and maintains the other two. But, the west side of our state still has a lot of the old 'blue laws' on the books. Unless you want to shop at Wal-Mart or Meijer, good luck 'cause everything else is closed on Sunday.

 

Clan Riffster...I currently own the King James version of the Bible. I am shopping for a newer, more accurate version. Hubby says mine is awful and difficult to read, I have no problems with it but then, I don't have any trouble reading Shakespeare either. He tells me accuracy is important in proper study and I listen to him because I am but a grasshopper. Curious, what version are you reading from? Not judging, curious 'cause it scares me just a bit.

 

Roddy: I have thoroughly enjoyed several of your caches and as a fellow member of MIGO I appreciate the work you have done. I have been following this thread from the beginning. You are absolutely right. We should follow the rules/guidelines/suggestions/a word to the wise, etc. HOWEVER, as adults, we occasionally make judgement calls. Even after reading this thread, I broke this very rule in order to get a FTF.

 

Because you had brought up the issue, it was in my thoughts as we planned our trip to the other side of the state. We arrived, as planned, 30 minutes after sunrise. Unfortunately, the public park did not open for another 2 1/2 hours! We debated, and then followed a local dogwalker into the park. FYI, we didn't choose to break the rules because it was a FTF, we did so because of the drive. We were already there and clearly there was a local precedent.

 

At some point I should mention our individual stances on "the rules". This means ANY rules, not just Geocaching. Scott and I are the original odd couple when it comes to this sort of thing. He is Oscar, I'm Felix. You all would not believe the amount of carp I have had to take from uttering the phrase "but that is against the ______". He usually bullies me into following but every now and again I dig in and just plant my arse in the car and wait. While I'm waiting I mentaly debate whether or not I would help if he got himself into a situation. (ever wonder what your wife thinks about?)

 

I also wanted to add that sometimes trespassing is done in ignorance. As seasoned as we thought we were last fall, we did some questionable things. Of particular interest.... several of your caches. I haven't gone and looked the cache pages back up because I am sure that by now you have made sure that they clearly specify hours. I did go through several files of old paperwork in order to find my old printout. I'm NOT saying the info wasn't on the cache page. I AM saying that when we did the copy/paste/print, no info about hours was on our sheet. Notice I am taking responsibility. While the info may or may not have been on the page becomes irrelevant when I tell you that we saw the posted hours when we got to the park. We arrived about 15 minutes after it closed.

 

I can sit here in all honesty and tell you (remember, I'm Felix) that we had no problem with parking on the side of the road and walking in. We just figured, hey can't park in there because they want to close the gates. I mean it's a park. Do parks ever really close?

 

When you started this thread I knew which parks you were refering to. I also realized in retrospect that the one was most definitely a private park and not a public park. I'm experienced enough now to know the difference. As I sit here I cannot explain to you, or anyone, why that makes a difference to me but I know deep down that it does.

 

It didn't occur to me until Sunday that I had done this on your caches. If I have made your work more difficult in any way then I most humbly and sincerely apologize.

 

Edited to add back in the stuff that disappeared when I went outside for a moment. Freakin' 'puter.

Edited July 11, 2007 by "we two want to play too"

[+Rockin Roddy]

Yes WTWTPT...those caches are in a private park that really DOES get upset about caching in their park (or ANY activity for that matter) after hours! Their reason is because of the insurance. You probably didn't see set hours for that park as the hours CHANGE during the seasons, but as a rule it closes about an hour before sundown! I THINK I have that in the description and the "not 24 hrs" attribute as well. I have yet to go change anyhting or even look, but will!

 

I'm now out hunting for you, I can't believe how much work you have burdened me with! (OBVIOUSLY joking here!!) Don't sweat it, I've pretty much worked through everything with them (they did appreciate this thread though as it was seen as an enlightenment to what could be a problem in our area). Great that they are more than happy to work with us cachers, just don't bend the rules as they would have to re-evaluate the situation.

 

HOWEVER, they WILL prosecute ANYONE (yep, even me) caught on grounds after hours. It's the insurance for them, they can't risk having something happen when they have no coverage! It seems a bit odd to me though, they do have a few night events (which I think are mostly aimed at their alumnist...it's run by MSU). This is one of the reasons I archived the caches near the roads though, too tempting for some to enter that way (I saw several do just that when those caches were first published).

 

I too was in that park after hours at first, we had been using that park for YEARS mountain biking, had permission from the main cheese to be there any time, day or night (we rode mostly at night as I work all day). Somewhere along the line, there was a change in management, and all privileges went out the window. I hadn't known this until I called and told Steve (coordinator) that my Jeep was the one their workers had seen parked outside the gates (since I am a season pass holder, I thought all would be fine). Steve filled me in on the changes and why...and I have passed those on here a few times.

 

THANKS though, I appreciate your telling me! Thanks also for the kind words! We'll be placing more caches soon (as soon as I get some time to get out and place that is), will be looking forward to having you visit them! I've since passed off placement rights in that park to another local team, we'll be hosting a Geocaching 101 event there and I wanted some new caches placed for it (and just don't have the time).

 

I don't know if religious groups are behind the law any more or not. Once passed, it'll be a tough one to change though, and I wouldn't doubt the church would jump right in if a change were asked for!

 

That's what came to mind when I saw that comment too sbell...good one!

[+"we two want to play too"]

BTW, anyone out there ever mention finding a really nice diamond ring?

 

I seem to have missplaced my wedding ring while on that trip...

[Clan Riffster]

Curious, what version are you reading from?

I have more than one. The most dog eared is my King James. When I read a bit of scripture that I don't quite grasp, I'll break out my New American Standard and my New World Translation. If the scripture is in Old Testament, I'll try comparing it to my English copy of the Tanakh, (which claims to be the most modern translation from the original text). I also have the Book of Mormon, the Essence of Tibetan Buddhism by Lama Thubten Yeshe, an English version of the Holy Qur'an and an Arabic version of Hajj & U'mra Supplications, (which I can't read, but looks good on my shelf), and a couple other not so traditional texts.

Edited July 11, 2007 by Clan Riffster

[+Rockin Roddy]

Sorry WTWTPT..no rings mentioned at any of our caches! Was it in Hidden Lake Gardens...or don't know for certain? I feel bad about that! When I go out to maintain the hides I'll have alook around, but it's probably long gone by now!

[+"we two want to play too"]

Sorry WTWTPT..no rings mentioned at any of our caches! Was it in Hidden Lake Gardens...or don't know for certain? I feel bad about that! When I go out to maintain the hides I'll have alook around, but it's probably long gone by now!

 

I don't recall which caches anymore. Good thing I made a bookmark list...

[+Rockin Roddy]

Just saw today that some guys were ticketed for being in a park nearby after hours. I didn't read the whole story, but it looks like they were riding bikes in a closed park.

[+Cpt.Blackbeard]

Probably stole the bikes to.

[+Rockin Roddy]

No...even our LEos aren't that crooked!

[+gh patriot]

No...even our LEos aren't that crooked!

 

sure

[+Rockin Roddy]

I guess I don't understand the last few posts...are you guys really questioning our LEOs? I mean, first you say that these guys are even-handed, fair and honest people who mostly are out to help the masses (wouldn't bother someone for just going into a park after hours), now you question whether they are honest or not??

 

I told you from the get go that these LEOs around here are out to make a buck any way they can (quotas, ticketing for after hours park usage etc)...but even our LEOs aren't thieves (as GH seems to be suggesting, Cpt would rather believe that those two were thieves themselves instead of honest young adults out riding their bikes). Comical guys....

 

I offered up some evidence of our parks being closed after hours and you then attack the LEOs? Just as you questioned me for suggesting the LEOs are different here...hmmmmm....MAKE UP YOUR MINDS ALREADY!!!

 

Those that say they'd go into a park after hours wouldn't get my vote as being the most trustworthy, so maybe those that do this shouldn't be judgemental of others' moral fabric?? I'd trust our police force over those that think they need to break a law just for a game (and I know what the LEOs here are like...tell you anything about how I percieve those who'd do the lawbreaking???)

[+sbell111]

Hurray. This thread's back.

Edited July 25, 2007 by sbell111

[+Rockin Roddy]

I thought the same thing sbell...here we go again!!

[Clan Riffster]

Happy happy, joy joy..... Perhaps we can stretch this nonsense to 9 pages...

[+Renegade Knight]

My daughters have taken to going across the street to the park after it's dark. It's cool enough by then to enjoy being out side.

 

So far they have only been booted once by a police officer. Ironicly that was the same night I pointed out that the park closes at dusk. However I don't mine them being there. I can step outside and yell. Worse case they don't hear me because of all the other kids in the park.

[+Rockin Roddy]

10 more post and we will have!

 

edit: make that 9 more posts!

Edited July 25, 2007 by Rockin Roddy

[+Cpt.Blackbeard]

Geez Louis Roddy, don't take it so seriously, it was a joke, two dangerous tresspassers were caught riding through a park after dark, they must be up to no good, probably stole the bikes they were on as well.

 

I visited my sister in Coatesville a few years back and decided to walk downtown a couple of blocks away to buy a pop. THeyt warned me that I shouldn't do it because there is a curfew in town and the Sherrif might see me. THat made me laugh, sorry, but curfews are for children, not adults looking for a pop machine. I took the walk and bought my drink without incident, but if the sherriff had stopped by to hassle me I guarantee he wouldn't have heard what he wanted to hear. I would have stayed friendly, but I would have stood my ground doing it.

I can't speak for you, but I have a very small tolerance for BS, and hassleing people who are doing no harm is BS, and I don't care who you are.

[+Rockin Roddy]

OK Cpt, whatever you say! But then, I'm sure those guys really felt much like you do! They probably figured they too were above those silly laws which are sooo much BS.

 

I'm guessing they're a bit poorer for their troubles!

 

edit for spelling as usual!

Edited July 26, 2007 by Rockin Roddy

[+Cpt.Blackbeard]

That's why I live in the country, you city slickers can have your ignorant nonsense, out here I'm living the good life with none of the worries that seem to keep you up nights. Personally I'd rather be right than safe.

[+Rockin Roddy]

FYI...not even a stop light on our main four corners, nothing but farmland behind me...I'd consider this VERY small townish! Soooo quiet, I sleep very well at night!

 

It's the city nearby I'm speaking of...you DO have cities nearby down that way, don't you? You probably also have county and state LEOs, don't you??

 

edit to add: the point you seem to be missing is this IS a small community, our LEOs have more time than crime around here, so they LOOK for reasons to mess with you!

Edited July 26, 2007 by Rockin Roddy

[+Cpt.Blackbeard]

FYI...not even a stop light on our main four corners, nothing but farmland behind me...I'd consider this VERY small townish! Soooo quiet, I sleep very well at night!

 

It's the city nearby I'm speaking of...you DO have cities nearby down that way, don't you? You probably also have county and state LEOs, don't you??

Four corners, sounds like a town to me. I have farmland behind me, beside me, in front of me and under me.

Coatesville though, population is probaly still in three digits, the idea that a town that small would enforce a curfew, ludicrus.

 

Oh yea, our cops are way to smart to waste their time ticketting people for riding bicycles, walking down a path, etc. They save the tickets for the law breakers, not the innocent.

 

(How many more posts do we need now? )

[+Rockin Roddy]

Yep...innocent alright. These guys couldn't obey a simple law much like some in this thread. But then, some just don't get that we can't choose our laws, they are made for us by others. I wish I had that power, but short of voting for our PTB, I guess I'll be the good citizen!

 

When you have a cure for the overprotective PTB, give me a yell! And no, I can't just pick up and move to the sticks either...we own a business here!

 

3 posts!

Edited July 26, 2007 by Rockin Roddy

[+Trucker Lee]

I forget!! What was the question, anyway?

[+Quiggle]

Another thread going nowhere. Thanks to those that participated in the discussion.

 

Closing this one down.