It's happened again

1.3k · March 20, 2008

theweirdozone

Thanks for your insight into the situation. I guess the lesson is that any cache should not have any military or harmful references on it.

Also we have to remember that even if a cache has geocaching written all over it, if it looks suspecious to the police, they can't assume that it's safe. If that were the case, a real bomber would put a bomb into something and mark it with geocaching.com all over it.

These things happen, my bet is no charges will be filed in the long run. I hope it works out well for you and the cache hider.

38.2k · March 20, 2008

Perhaps the real solution is for cache finders to be a little bit more cautious about who sees them making the find. Lately, there have been too many people posting things like "I hate those kinds of caches so I don't care if someone sees me making the find". So Mrs. Kravitz sees the cacher replacing the cache and another thread like this one is born.
If you place a cache in a high traffic area, searchers are going to draw attention whether they are playing spy, or they walk right up to the cache. The latter will probably draw slightly less attention.
I don't buy into that theory. I'm pretty certain that my actions aren't more noticable when I try to avoid being seen. I do know that if I don't try to avoid being spotted and just walk up and remove and replace the cache regardless of the nearby muggles that I am almost guaranteeing being spotted. Those who see me may or may not take note of my actions, but if I avoid being seen I am guaranteeing that no one will take note of my activity.

I guess that I'm confused because you seem to sometimes believe that stealth is important, but sometimes not. From some of your posts, one would believe that you think it's important for caches that you like, but not for caches that you don't.

There are all kinds of caches ranging from a tiny micro in mid town Manhattan to a large cache in the middle of the wilderness. Your level of "stealth" would depend on the cache you choose to hunt. If you are looking for a cache in a high traffic area, you should try to be careful. If you are looking for a cache in the woods or off the beaten path, you don't have to worry as much about stealth.

I usually avoid these caches. I'm not in this to play a cloak and dagger game. When I do encounter one I just walk up, grab it, sign the log and put it back. I don't care who is looking. If the owner insists on putting the cache where searchers will be seen, that's his choice and I'm not going to agonize over whether I'll be discovered.

Golly, I don't know if I should be honored or creeped out at the idea you have committed so many of my posts to memory and can readily pull them up at a moments notice. Actually if you read the contexts, one was stating my personal method. The other was giving a newbie advice. A simple matter of do as I say, not as I do, because my method isn't the generally accepted method.

March 20, 2008

Article in The Intelligencer / Wheeling News-Register

The cache in question

We do indeed live in paranoid times.

--Larry

I believe the cache in question is actually GC195FQ.

I actually have archived several caches today, because of this event. I have also received alerts others are doing so as well.

This is a big overreaction in my book.

March 20, 2008

This is probably going to sound like a dumb question, but I have seen many of these Decon containers used as a geocache. What was in them originally? What kind of "Decon kit" are they?

March 20, 2008

I support the paranoid times premise. I also do quite a bit of Waymarking in the Denver, Colorado area. I was taking pictures of historic plaques on old buildings in lower Downtown Denver when a Denver Police Officer casually came over to chat. I figured he was checking out what I was doing, so I explained. He told me that they (Police) have to now (if possible) ask what photographers are doing. Homeland Security. He was very polite and I did not feel threatened (that is, cease and desist), but yes, we are living in very paranoid times.

March 20, 2008

I support the paranoid times premise. I also do quite a bit of Waymarking in the Denver, Colorado area. I was taking pictures of historic plaques on old buildings in lower Downtown Denver when a Denver Police Officer casually came over to chat. I figured he was checking out what I was doing, so I explained. He told me that they (Police) have to now (if possible) ask what photographers are doing. Homeland Security. He was very polite and I did not feel threatened (that is, cease and desist), but yes, we are living in very paranoid times.

You have to be kidding me - they are supposed to ask photographers what they are doing? Wow - now every tourist is a suspect...

March 20, 2008

It looks like the hider left the original label on the decon box. If I recall correctly, there is a danger warning about caustic contents on the label.

Removing the label and replacing it with a geocache label may or may not have helped, but it's far better than leaving the original warning label on the container. That's just not smart.

It doesn't take a high level of paranoia for someone to accidentally discover the box, read the warning on it and think it might be something that should be reported.

You have a point. Maybe an unmodified decon container isn't the best choice for an urban cache container.

--Larry

I have to say Larry, if you thought you were in for a thread full of "we live in paranoid times" replies, I'll bet you're actually in for a thread of "people should remove military markings and not hide caches in full view of peoples houses" responses.

The irony of geoaching is that the game was born shortly after 9/11. So the game has never seen "unparanoid times"

It is amazing how ridiculous some people are in thinking that this country is actually protecting itself from terrorists. We have what we think is tight security at airports, yet all they pose is a terrible inconvience for the 99% of us who just want to get to another destination. 99% of all of the imported cargo is left uninspected. We have had more AMERICAN CITIZENS over the past 30 years committ terrosit acts than middle easterners.

As I have said in another thread, instead of knee jerk, paranoid, err on the side of caution reactions, perhpas if our local law enforcement teams practice paitent responsiveness, than we wouldnt have to live in a culture of fear.

1k · March 20, 2008

The chanel7 news story the next day

http://www.boomboxradio.net/boombox/Player...leId=78696_wtrf

I guess after some research they were intrestred in the game we play so I called them to see if they would like to talk with me and or a few cachers about caching and they told me that they recived a quite a few emails and all of them were positive. They said they were intrested and I invited them to stop at an event friday night and talk with a few cachers if they would like to do an other story about geocaching.

March 20, 2008

I think charges are warranted because the person chose to ignore the rules of geocaching.

Obviously this needs to be put on a T-shirt, pronto!!

20.7k · March 20, 2008

Perhaps the real solution is for cache finders to be a little bit more cautious about who sees them making the find. Lately, there have been too many people posting things like "I hate those kinds of caches so I don't care if someone sees me making the find". So Mrs. Kravitz sees the cacher replacing the cache and another thread like this one is born.
If you place a cache in a high traffic area, searchers are going to draw attention whether they are playing spy, or they walk right up to the cache. The latter will probably draw slightly less attention.
I don't buy into that theory. I'm pretty certain that my actions aren't more noticable when I try to avoid being seen. I do know that if I don't try to avoid being spotted and just walk up and remove and replace the cache regardless of the nearby muggles that I am almost guaranteeing being spotted. Those who see me may or may not take note of my actions, but if I avoid being seen I am guaranteeing that no one will take note of my activity.

I guess that I'm confused because you seem to sometimes believe that stealth is important, but sometimes not. From some of your posts, one would believe that you think it's important for caches that you like, but not for caches that you don't.

There are all kinds of caches ranging from a tiny micro in mid town Manhattan to a large cache in the middle of the wilderness. Your level of "stealth" would depend on the cache you choose to hunt. If you are looking for a cache in a high traffic area, you should try to be careful. If you are looking for a cache in the woods or off the beaten path, you don't have to worry as much about stealth.

I usually avoid these caches. I'm not in this to play a cloak and dagger game. When I do encounter one I just walk up, grab it, sign the log and put it back. I don't care who is looking. If the owner insists on putting the cache where searchers will be seen, that's his choice and I'm not going to agonize over whether I'll be discovered.

Golly, I don't know if I should be honored or creeped out at the idea you have committed so many of my posts to memory and can readily pull them up at a moments notice.

You're welcome to be creeped out, if you wish. The simple fact is that you made the second comment while the first thread was still active, so the incongruity was apparent.

Actually if you read the contexts, one was stating my personal method. The other was giving a newbie advice. A simple matter of do as I say, not as I do, because my method isn't the generally accepted method.

Both comments were made in the getting started area in threads started by newbies. Therefore, both of your posts were your personal advice to newbies. Edited March 20, 2008 by sbell111

20.7k · March 20, 2008

This is probably going to sound like a dumb question, but I have seen many of these Decon containers used as a geocache. What was in them originally? What kind of "Decon kit" are they?

They have wipes in them that are to be used to decontaminate your skin in the event of exposure to a chemical agent.

20.7k · March 20, 2008

The irony of geoaching is that the game was born shortly after 9/11. So the game has never seen "unparanoid times" ...

That's not actually true.

20.7k · March 20, 2008

I think charges are warranted because the person chose to ignore the rules of geocaching.

Obviously this needs to be put on a T-shirt, pronto!!

Perhaps you could print the rules of geocaching on it, also (whatever they are).

March 20, 2008

I guess after some research they were intrestred in the game we play so I called them to see if they would like to talk with me and or a few cachers about caching and they told me that they recived a quite a few emails and all of them were positive. They said they were intrested and I invited them to stop at an event friday night and talk with a few cachers if they would like to do an other story about geocaching.

Maybe something positive can come out of all this afterall. It's good to see that they are "researching" geocaching, and are interested in actually talking to cachers, rather than gleaning bits of information from second hand sources that may not be as familiar with the activity. If law inforcement becomes familiar with geocaching, (and if cachers remove military markings from caches ), I think a lot of future misunderstandings may be averted.

38.2k · March 20, 2008

The chanel7 news story the next day

http://www.boomboxradio.net/boombox/Player...leId=78696_wtrf

I guess after some research they were intrestred in the game we play so I called them to see if they would like to talk with me and or a few cachers about caching and they told me that they recived a quite a few emails and all of them were positive. They said they were intrested and I invited them to stop at an event friday night and talk with a few cachers if they would like to do an other story about geocaching.

Hey they're reading this thread!

8.9k · March 20, 2008

The irony of geoaching is that the game was born shortly after 9/11. So the game has never seen "unparanoid times" ...
That's not actually true.

Yeah...off by a few years there!!

March 20, 2008

Comparing "over there" to here isn't a reasonable comparison.

We're burying Taylor McDavid tomorrow, a hometown guy, one of five killed after they got out of their Humvee for a foot patrol last week and an IED was remotely detonated.

Wasn't in a guardrail (IEDs never are), it was buried in the road bed.

It hadn't been there for over a year, with the location published on the internet.

It wasn't in a decon container, that's too small for the work of an IED.

It hadn't been visited 40+ times, opened, closed, replaced, 40+ times.

No comparison.

This is just a case of an overly suspicious citizen and an uninformed police dept.

Now, had it been a package buried in the road last night, the dirt or pavement still disturbed, in the traffic flow of the local military units or near a common gathering place of local officials, or next to where the President would be visiting in the next day or so, that would be a different matter. But, that's not what this was.

This all amounts to much ado about nothing.

An IED could very well be hidden in or on a guardrail... they may not do it that way in Iraq but it doesn't take any imagination at all to see one being placed on a guardrail anywhere, especially since one of the usual objectives of IEDs is to spew shrapnel in order to cause the most widespread injury.

An IED could possibly be contained in a decon container. Anything homemade that blows up is an IED... even a molotov cocktail is considered an IED.

Without going on the internet and looking at geocaching.com and knowing the exact coordinates how could a police officer who gets a report of a suspicious package know that that particular package has been visited 40+ times and that it had been there for over a year? If a package turns out to be a bomb that kills a group of school children crossing the bridge and causes a massive sewage leak at the nearby treatment facility, do you think the public is going to accept "Well, we didn't want to alarm anyone so we decided to look on the internet to see if it was a game. Turns out it wasn't, but we didn't know that in time."

So basically we go with the status quo - it is still ok to be ingnorant of a subject and allow that to rule how we go about or day rather than go do 5 moinutes of research and realize something is not related to terrorism. That mindset is just absolutley amazing to me. Terrorism is not defined by flying planes into buildings or setting IED's on raodside, that is just part of it. The bigger part of terrorism is creating a climate of fear over civilian populations. We allow our fear to drive our policies when most of the time, it is unfounded and harmless. I am sorry, I still do not beleive that we should treat everything we see with a cloud of suspicion, instead we should examine the situation and 99% of the time, you will realize that things are not what they seem. There was a movie years back that I cannot remember the name of it or who acted in it, but it was about this kid who spent his summer on the lawn of a neighbor who he was in love with. He observed all of the other neighbors. One of the neighbors was a man who acted very suspicious where nobody saw his wife. He would only come out at night carrying bag fulls of dirt and bringing in bags of other material. Later on in the movie, he corners the kid and his friend and forces them into the house. In there they see a swimming pool where the downstairs used to be. He had been building it for his wife, who loved to swim but was dying of cancer and she could not leave the house.

The point being, regardless of 9/11, we should not allow our fears and perceptions dictate how we respond. If we just use a little common sense and ask questions, we will find that most situations are completely harmless.

March 20, 2008

This is probably going to sound like a dumb question, but I have seen many of these Decon containers used as a geocache. What was in them originally? What kind of "Decon kit" are they?

They have wipes in them that are to be used to decontaminate your skin in the event of exposure to a chemical agent.

See, that's what I thought they were (and what everything I could find on the net said they were) but I thought "why would something you're supposed to wipe on yourself be caustic and hazardous?" so I looked further and found that the skin decon kits are in pouches, and the equipment decon kits are in the boxes. The safer skin ones must either be not as effective or way more expensive.

March 20, 2008

The M258A1 decon kit, the one that comes in the familiar plastic box used for small caches, doesn't contain anything particularly dangerous. See this link for a list of the contents. Most decontamination procedures have traditionally been done with generic kinds of cleaners and disinfectants, like chlorine bleach, detergent, and caustic soda (similar to drain cleaner but potassium hydroxide instead of sodium hydroxide).

My exposure to nuclear-biological-chemical training is about 25 years out of date. However, Googling around indicates that it hasn't changed fundamentally since then. Despite having some knowledge, probably more than a non-veteran cop would have, I couldn't have told you off the top of my head whether the M258A1 box originally contained tame, dilute chemicals for use on the skin, or concentrated stuff for use on equipment.

In the absence of definite information, the cop decided to take the warning label seriously. To his credit, he was open to new information and canceled the bomb-squad rollout once he saw that the box was harmless.

Do we have an update as to whether the 'incitement' charges against the cacher have been dropped?

20.7k · March 20, 2008

This is probably going to sound like a dumb question, but I have seen many of these Decon containers used as a geocache. What was in them originally? What kind of "Decon kit" are they?

They have wipes in them that are to be used to decontaminate your skin in the event of exposure to a chemical agent.

See, that's what I thought they were (and what everything I could find on the net said they were) but I thought "why would something you're supposed to wipe on yourself be caustic and hazardous?" so I looked further and found that the skin decon kits are in pouches, and the equipment decon kits are in the boxes. The safer skin ones must either be not as effective or way more expensive.

They are both the same thing. The decon container contains half a dozen packets of wipes. The wipes are used to decontaminate the skin, but are also used in an emergency to decontaminate items such as your mask, gloves, and weapon. The warning is present on the box because the mipes are treated with irritating chemicals (such as ammonia, if I remember correctly).

Edited March 20, 2008 by sbell111

March 20, 2008

This is probably going to sound like a dumb question, but I have seen many of these Decon containers used as a geocache. What was in them originally? What kind of "Decon kit" are they?

They have wipes in them that are to be used to decontaminate your skin in the event of exposure to a chemical agent.

See, that's what I thought they were (and what everything I could find on the net said they were) but I thought "why would something you're supposed to wipe on yourself be caustic and hazardous?" so I looked further and found that the skin decon kits are in pouches, and the equipment decon kits are in the boxes. The safer skin ones must either be not as effective or way more expensive.

They are both the same thing. The decon container contains half a dozen packets of wipes. The wipes are used to decontaminate the skin, but are also used in an emergency to decontaminate items such as your mask, gloves, and weapon. The warning is present on the box because the mipes are treated with irritating chemicals (such as ammonia, if I remember correctly).

Personally, I think we are in a rat hole debating about the container type itself. If you read the article, it said a person living near the cache site saw a man place the container there (whether it was the cache owner or the finder putting it back). Chances are, the person didn't go down to look at it to determine what type of container it was or what was written on it or even asking the person what they were doing. Most likely, the person acted out of fear, called the police and that was that. What kind of container it was is neither here nor there. We should stick to the meaning of yet another knee jerk reaction by the public on this topic.

March 20, 2008

Personally, I think we are in a rat hole debating about the container type itself. If you read the article, it said a person living near the cache site saw a man place the container there (whether it was the cache owner or the finder putting it back). Chances are, the person didn't go down to look at it to determine what type of container it was or what was written on it or even asking the person what they were doing. Most likely, the person acted out of fear, called the police and that was that. What kind of container it was is neither here nor there. We should stick to the meaning of yet another knee jerk reaction by the public on this topic.

If you were unaware of Geocaching and observed an adult hiding a small container behind a guardrail (or wherever), what would you think? What could you think? People get nervous about unusual activity for which they can't imagine an innocent explanation.

It's not a wild overreaction to call the cops when you see something suspicious. I imagine the witness calling the police station saying, "It's probably nothing, but I just saw someone doing the strangest thing..."

I agree with you that the original contents of a decon box is beside the point. The labeling is relevant, because it influenced the cop's handling of the situation from that point onward.

2.3k · March 21, 2008

The warning on the top of the container is so you do not get it in your eye, wound or mouth. The label on the front of the container describes its use on hands, neck and ears. So, it is for skin, not openings in skin. Probably better to remove the labels, but using this container cannot be seen as purposely "inciting" a panic.

March 21, 2008

Interesting that the news station is reading the forums... :unsure:

I would definitely had sanded off/removed the warning label. Any sort of warning label mentioning caustic materials or anything saying "caution" or "warning" is always grounds for someone to freak out over it. Painting or attaching the Geocaching sticker label would have been a good thing to do as well.

I like to think outside the realm of geocaching when I'm looking to hide a cache, or just out looking for one. If it looks like I'm going to attract unwanted attention, I think it over. If its not worth the attention, I'll pick a different spot to hide it.

It's too bad that this incident became so large, but a little bit more preparation on the CO's part might have saved a lot of trouble.

March 21, 2008

The decon container contains half a dozen packets of wipes. The wipes are used to decontaminate the skin, but are also used in an emergency to decontaminate items such as your mask, gloves, and weapon.

Gee........ I'd think DE-Contamination would be a GOOD thing. They ought to like that. But, they got all worked up.

Now, if the box had said CONTAMINATED, well, that would be a horse of a different color.

Maybe the officer couldn't read. It happens.

March 22, 2008

If you were unaware of Geocaching and observed an adult hiding a small container behind a guardrail (or wherever), what would you think?

That someone wants to hide something in a guardrail?

Not really the huge terrorist target.......a guardrail.

8.3k · March 22, 2008

The irony of geoaching is that the game was born shortly after 9/11. So the game has never seen "unparanoid times" ...
That's not actually true.

Yeah...off by a few years there!!

More like a year. SA was turned off midnight May 1, 2000.

Jim

10.2k · March 22, 2008

This is probably going to sound like a dumb question, but I have seen many of these Decon containers used as a geocache. What was in them originally? What kind of "Decon kit" are they?

They have wipes in them that are to be used to decontaminate your skin in the event of exposure to a chemical agent.

See, that's what I thought they were (and what everything I could find on the net said they were) but I thought "why would something you're supposed to wipe on yourself be caustic and hazardous?" so I looked further and found that the skin decon kits are in pouches, and the equipment decon kits are in the boxes. The safer skin ones must either be not as effective or way more expensive.

They are both the same thing. The decon container contains half a dozen packets of wipes. The wipes are used to decontaminate the skin, but are also used in an emergency to decontaminate items such as your mask, gloves, and weapon. The warning is present on the box because the mipes are treated with irritating chemicals (such as ammonia, if I remember correctly).

22 yr. Army guy here. Yes, there are 6 wipes in a decon kit, three sets of a #1, and a #2. The whole box fits (just barely) in a pouch on the protective mask. For Training purposes, these 6 sealed packets are just alcohol wipes. One of them (I think it's the #2) has a pill inside to crush to activate a chemical reaction, and the training ones have a "fake pill"

I don't have the details on the real ones, but I imagine they're quite nasty, chemically wise. They obviously don't kill a human, if just used to wipe off exposed skin and the inside of the protective mask. I guess the warnings are for like a silica packet, I wouldn't eat the stuff. :huh:

March 23, 2008

Article in The Intelligencer / Wheeling News-Register

The cache in question

We do indeed live in paranoid times.

--Larry

OK - I bought a number of these - great small cache container...

My solution...

Original Container... http://www.4shared.com/file/41681447/d053b0f9/IMG_0118.html

Imprinted Top & Wording --- http://www.4shared.com/file/41681501/5c9ebaff/IMG_0121.html

Applying the appropriate label --- http://www.4shared.com/file/41681513/ab8bea92/IMG_0123.html

Working on the Imprinted Lid ---- http://www.4shared.com/file/41681530/b4d9aa/IMG_0124.html

Final Result ---- http://www.4shared.com/file/41681549/3629f7c9/IMG_0126.html

Hope this helps...

voyageurs60 (Dan)

March 23, 2008

Buy the way - those of you who do not like the urban hides - do not forget to paint/modify the ammo cans we like to find in the woods...

All geocaching containers should be clearly marked and not indicate anything of concern - "AMMUNITION"...

voyageurs60 (Dan)

It's happened again

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Join the conversation