Jump to content

bomb squad called, no boom!


Firespinner
Followers 2

Recommended Posts

Well, it happened near me this time. My husband works in Urbana about 20 minutes north of our place. We were watching the morning news and heard the soundbite "Bomb scare in Urbana!"

 

Of course we were stunned....its such a small little po-dink town and nothing much ever happens there. On commerical, I started giggling and told him it was probably a geocache.

 

I was right.....

 

http://www.springfieldnewssun.com/n/conten...s123008geo.html

Link to comment

Kind of curiuos that the last statement in the article says,

 

"Urbana police will present the information to a prosecutor, possibly today, to determine if any charges should be filed."

 

From what I understand, some geocachers are being held responsible for the expenses when this happens. It is quite costly for the bomb squad and police (in this case both Urbana AND Enon) to respond.

 

I know that the rules state you must have permission for a hide. I wonder if this cacher had gotten permission from Tim Hortons? I think if they did and the manager didn't tell the employees, the cacher shoudln't be responsible. If the cacher didn't get permission, they might be in trouble. Here's hoping it all turns out well.

Link to comment

Kind of curiuos that the last statement in the article says,

 

"Urbana police will present the information to a prosecutor, possibly today, to determine if any charges should be filed."

 

From what I understand, some geocachers are being held responsible for the expenses when this happens. It is quite costly for the bomb squad and police (in this case both Urbana AND Enon) to respond.

 

I know that the rules state you must have permission for a hide. I wonder if this cacher had gotten permission from Tim Hortons? I think if they did and the manager didn't tell the employees, the cacher shoudln't be responsible. If the cacher didn't get permission, they might be in trouble. Here's hoping it all turns out well.

Permission doesn't seem to come into play at any level with this one. Just suspicions and suspcious activity.

Link to comment

I also can't imagine how something the size of a film canister could prompt the evacuation of 2 stores. I don't know anything about explosives, but something that small could only have a very local impact if it were real I would think.

 

Depends on the explosive really, although parts of C4 explosive look very similar to 35mm film canisters.

Link to comment

Kind of curiuos that the last statement in the article says,

 

"Urbana police will present the information to a prosecutor, possibly today, to determine if any charges should be filed."

 

From what I understand, some geocachers are being held responsible for the expenses when this happens. It is quite costly for the bomb squad and police (in this case both Urbana AND Enon) to respond.

 

I know that the rules state you must have permission for a hide. I wonder if this cacher had gotten permission from Tim Hortons? I think if they did and the manager didn't tell the employees, the cacher shoudln't be responsible. If the cacher didn't get permission, they might be in trouble. Here's hoping it all turns out well.

Permission doesn't seem to come into play at any level with this one. Just suspicions and suspcious activity.

 

Actually, I think it does. The 'suspicious activity' was noted and reported by employees at Tim Hortons. If Tim Hortons had been asked for permission (I'm not sure they weren't ....I'm just musing here) the employees may have known what was going on and thus not called authorities.

 

Obviously, asking permission doesn't prevent customers from seeing and reporting activities....but it would cut down on the likelyhood of employees mistaking the activity and reporting it.

Link to comment

Right-oh Bad Duck. A year ago I saw someone go after a LPC in a park here in houston and I thought it was some sort of drug dead drop or something.

 

...

 

Then of course my natural curiousity bade me to go see and i opened it up and found a log. I was like "oh, it must be some sort of school game." and i put it back.

Link to comment

Lets leave the criminal charges question aside for a moment.

 

What about Tim Horton's, Save-A-Lot, and Odd Lots. They could sue for lost revenue. That could be a tough nut to crack if you had to pay that off.

 

Man, three of my favorite places in the whole world shut down! :anitongue: Well, I always say, nothing good ever came out of lifting up a lamp post skirt in a parking lot. :laughing:

Link to comment

From the article:

 

The man drove off when officers arrived. Police found 35-mm film canisters with a metal plate and electrical tape in the post, Lingrell said, and considered it suspicious-looking.

 

Drove off when the police arrived? Unidentified canister (canisters, the article uses the plural) where it doesn't belong? Metal plate? Electrical tape? No (or inadequate) permission?

 

How many more things do you need to make something scream 'suspicious!'?

 

I love micros, don't get me wrong, but if you hide and hunt LPCs without regard to adequate permission you have to expect this kind of incident.

 

Maybe the finder never saw the cops coming, but if he did then sticking around to explain what he was up to would have resolved the whole thing.

 

I haven't seen anywhere that cachers actually had to pay for this kind of nonsense, but maybe if they do then cachers will start

A) Taking permission seriously

and

2) Hiding caches where geocachers aren't so noticed by muggles!

Edited by TheAlabamaRambler
Link to comment

Right-oh Bad Duck. A year ago I saw someone go after a LPC in a park here in houston and I thought it was some sort of drug dead drop or something.

 

 

So would a LEO. I was replacing a cache in a little nook under a stone bench in a really nice overlook park and started to walk back to my car when I saw that a LEO had just pulled into the parking area. He waved me over and the first thing he asked was "What were you hiding over there?" After telling him about the hobby he said the reason that he stopped me was that it looked like I might be hiding drugs.

 

There scary thing about this episode is that it's probably no different than thousands of other LPC caches hidden in the parking lot of a small business without permission and was not properly labeled. As a precaution to prevent future incidents I recommended that owners of any other caches which meet that criteria remove and archive them as soon as possible.

Link to comment
From the article:
The man drove off when officers arrived. Police found 35-mm film canisters with a metal plate and electrical tape in the post, Lingrell said, and considered it suspicious-looking.
Drove off when the police arrived? Unidentified canister (canisters, the article uses the plural) where it doesn't belong? Metal plate? Electrical tape? No (or inadequate) permission?

 

How many more things do you need to make something scream 'suspicious!'?

It actually just sounds like inaccurate reporting, to me.

 

First, I have no doubt that the cacher drove off. Why wouldn't he? If the police made no attempt to stop him, there was no reason for him not to drive away.

 

Second, From the logs, I have no reason to believe that this wasn't an ordinary, everyday, standard film-can LPC. No multiple canisters and no metal plates or electrical tape that weren't already in place when the cache was hidden.

I love micros, don't get me wrong, but if you hide and hunt LPCs without regard to adequate permission you have to expect this kind of incident.
Facts not in evidence. Nothing in the cache page or logs gives compelling reason to believe that permission was not obtained. The only thing we actually know is that some employee at Tim Hortons wasn't aware of the cache.
Maybe the finder never saw the cops coming, but if he did then sticking around to explain what he was up to would have resolved the whole thing.
I suspect that seeing a cop pull into a Tim Hortons is not something that would give me pause. Why would we expect any cacher to automatically assume that he'd been busted? Personally, if the LEO doesn't wave me over or hit his lights, I'm going to go on my way.
I haven't seen anywhere that cachers actually had to pay for this kind of nonsense, but maybe if they do then cachers will start

A) Taking permission seriously

and

2) Hiding caches where geocachers aren't so noticed by muggles!

The real lesson to be learned is that cache seekers should make a greater attempt at not being spotted by muggles.
Link to comment

Right-oh Bad Duck. A year ago I saw someone go after a LPC in a park here in houston and I thought it was some sort of drug dead drop or something.

 

 

There scary thing about this episode is that it's probably no different than thousands of other LPC caches hidden in the parking lot of a small business without permission and was not properly labeled.

I have to weigh in on this.

 

1) I’m willing to bet that 99% of the Walmart caches do not have permission to be there. Even if they do, the chances that the person that granted permission would step forward would be rare once the police showed up. The person in the store that granted permission is not going to stick there neck out to the Corporate Office (which has ultimate permission granting) when the cache created a ‘reportable incident’ to the main office. I don’t think the corporate officers would grant permission.

2) (getting ready to be shot over this) The parking lots of stores are considered public access areas because by their nature they are inviting the public to them. Parking areas (in New York State) are not considered private property but the store AND surrounding grounds are. Parking lots for any business (even a manufacturing facility) fall into this category if they don’t have a ‘restricted access’ or ‘employees and authorized visitors only’ sign at the entrance. Thus, if you don’t break a New York State traffic or Penal law, you can do whatever you want in them.

Link to comment
From the article:
The man drove off when officers arrived. Police found 35-mm film canisters with a metal plate and electrical tape in the post, Lingrell said, and considered it suspicious-looking.
Drove off when the police arrived? Unidentified canister (canisters, the article uses the plural) where it doesn't belong? Metal plate? Electrical tape? No (or inadequate) permission?

 

How many more things do you need to make something scream 'suspicious!'?

It actually just sounds like inaccurate reporting, to me.

 

First, I have no doubt that the cacher drove off. Why wouldn't he? If the police made no attempt to stop him, there was no reason for him not to drive away.

 

Second, From the logs, I have no reason to believe that this wasn't an ordinary, everyday, standard film-can LPC. No multiple canisters and no metal plates or electrical tape that weren't already in place when the cache was hidden.

I love micros, don't get me wrong, but if you hide and hunt LPCs without regard to adequate permission you have to expect this kind of incident.
Facts not in evidence. Nothing in the cache page or logs gives compelling reason to believe that permission was not obtained. The only thing we actually know is that some employee at Tim Hortons wasn't aware of the cache.
Maybe the finder never saw the cops coming, but if he did then sticking around to explain what he was up to would have resolved the whole thing.
I suspect that seeing a cop pull into a Tim Hortons is not something that would give me pause. Why would we expect any cacher to automatically assume that he'd been busted? Personally, if the LEO doesn't wave me over or hit his lights, I'm going to go on my way.
I haven't seen anywhere that cachers actually had to pay for this kind of nonsense, but maybe if they do then cachers will start

A) Taking permission seriously

and

2) Hiding caches where geocachers aren't so noticed by muggles!

The real lesson to be learned is that cache seekers should make a greater attempt at not being spotted by muggles.

 

Nah, that's a two way street there! I will take all care I can to find a cache, but when it's hidden where anyone and everyone nearby can see me even if I'm being careful, then maybe re-thinking the location is best! If you still feel the need to use that locations, you should expect ts might happen and be willing to take the fallout if any should come!

Link to comment

Right-oh Bad Duck. A year ago I saw someone go after a LPC in a park here in houston and I thought it was some sort of drug dead drop or something.

 

 

There scary thing about this episode is that it's probably no different than thousands of other LPC caches hidden in the parking lot of a small business without permission and was not properly labeled.

I have to weigh in on this.

 

1) I’m willing to bet that 99% of the Walmart caches do not have permission to be there. Even if they do, the chances that the person that granted permission would step forward would be rare once the police showed up. The person in the store that granted permission is not going to stick there neck out to the Corporate Office (which has ultimate permission granting) when the cache created a ‘reportable incident’ to the main office. I don’t think the corporate officers would grant permission.

2) (getting ready to be shot over this) The parking lots of stores are considered public access areas because by their nature they are inviting the public to them. Parking areas (in New York State) are not considered private property but the store AND surrounding grounds are. Parking lots for any business (even a manufacturing facility) fall into this category if they don’t have a ‘restricted access’ or ‘employees and authorized visitors only’ sign at the entrance. Thus, if you don’t break a New York State traffic or Penal law, you can do whatever you want in them.

 

Around here, signs tell of the property's ownership. Some will say "for (company name here) use only" or "customers of (such and such) only". Not a lot of parking lots are considered public domain here, I don't think!

Link to comment

On my Soapbox

 

Everyone Bit**es about needing permits well this is a reason. This is the third bomb scare I remember in the last 2 (or so) years in the southern Ohio area. Tim Hortons is not public property, it is PRIVATE property for public use just like Walmart, Home Depot, City Parks, County Parks, State Parks, etc... It is the responsibility of the land owner / manager to insure their property is safe for public use. The easy thing to do is ask permission so we don't have future situations like this one. If this continues Geocaching.com may have to require written permission before approvers can approve new caches.

 

Off my Soapbox

 

Everyone have a Happy New Year!

Link to comment

Right-oh Bad Duck. A year ago I saw someone go after a LPC in a park here in houston and I thought it was some sort of drug dead drop or something.

 

 

There scary thing about this episode is that it's probably no different than thousands of other LPC caches hidden in the parking lot of a small business without permission and was not properly labeled.

I have to weigh in on this.

 

2) (getting ready to be shot over this) The parking lots of stores are considered public access areas because by their nature they are inviting the public to them. Parking areas (in New York State) are not considered private property but the store AND surrounding grounds are. Parking lots for any business (even a manufacturing facility) fall into this category if they don’t have a ‘restricted access’ or ‘employees and authorized visitors only’ sign at the entrance. Thus, if you don’t break a New York State traffic or Penal law, you can do whatever you want in them.

 

Well, I'd never shoot a fellow New Yorker. :D Even though I do now have a machine gun. I need to get rid of that festive holiday forum title. It's from Diehard, by the way. But I'd like to see a statute, and your explanation for what certainly sounds like an "personal interpretation". The majority of active geocachers seem to think it's OK to do whatever they want in parking lots (i.e. play geocaching). I'll not be joining them anytime soon though, thanks. ;)

Link to comment

Right-oh Bad Duck. A year ago I saw someone go after a LPC in a park here in houston and I thought it was some sort of drug dead drop or something.

 

 

There scary thing about this episode is that it's probably no different than thousands of other LPC caches hidden in the parking lot of a small business without permission and was not properly labeled.

I have to weigh in on this.

 

2) (getting ready to be shot over this) The parking lots of stores are considered public access areas because by their nature they are inviting the public to them. Parking areas (in New York State) are not considered private property but the store AND surrounding grounds are. Parking lots for any business (even a manufacturing facility) fall into this category if they don’t have a ‘restricted access’ or ‘employees and authorized visitors only’ sign at the entrance. Thus, if you don’t break a New York State traffic or Penal law, you can do whatever you want in them.

 

Well, I'd never shoot a fellow New Yorker. :D Even though I do now have a machine gun. I need to get rid of that festive holiday forum title. It's from Diehard, by the way. But I'd like to see a statute, and your explanation for what certainly sounds like an "personal interpretation". The majority of active geocachers seem to think it's OK to do whatever they want in parking lots (i.e. play geocaching). I'll not be joining them anytime soon though, thanks. ;)

 

Here here!! I'm with you on this! I'll not be placing caches or even playing frisbee (as some feel so comfortable doing) in any parking lots, that's what parks are for!

Link to comment

Tim Hortons is not public property, it is PRIVATE property for public use just like Walmart, Home Depot, City Parks, County Parks, State Parks, etc...

Actually, I think, it is private property for customer access to do business at that location. That does not make it public use for geocaching.

 

AR I agree with your statement but dont forget the second part of my statement "It is the responsibility of the land owner / manager to insure their property is safe for public use."

Link to comment

Tim Hortons is not public property, it is PRIVATE property for public use just like Walmart, Home Depot, City Parks, County Parks, State Parks, etc...

Actually, I think, it is private property for customer access to do business at that location. That does not make it public use for geocaching.

 

AR I agree with your statement but dont forget the second part of my statement "It is the responsibility of the land owner / manager to insure their property is safe for public use."

I didn't ignore it, it's just a seperate issue. Safety is a requirement no matter what. If LPCs carried any real level of danger the trial lawyers would have won enough liability lawsuits to have caused a "Danger, Shock Hazard" warning label to be attached to every post! ;)

 

But that, again, is another issue... I just wanted to clarify (my understanding) of "public use", which is "public access to do business with the owner". Any other use requires their permission. I think. :D

Link to comment

You know, this kind of stupid stuff makes me think. I have come up with an idea. The problem arises when law enforcement has not idea what a geocache is and does not know the website exists.

 

Suppose geocaching.com makes a program for geocachers in their area to go to every ones local police station and let them know geocaching exists, and show them the web site, and it can be kept track of on geocaching.com what stations have been notified.

 

This way if they get a call about a suspicious container maybe they will check geocaching.com for the area and see if the suspicious container in question is listed on the site before the call in the bomb squad.

 

Now I have something to say about the size of the container and explosives. I don't even think a film canister full of a very high explosive like centex would even take out the lamp post. The mythbusters tackled the james bond myth about exploding pens. even in a gigantic ridiculous sized pen couldn't obliterate a foam manikin. The normal sized pen full of centex did almost nothing.

 

If some one could get their hands on c4 or centex, I am sure they would use a better container then a film canister. So logically it would most likely be black powder in the canister, as well a film canister would not create a very good explosion.

Link to comment

Ok here is the deal. Just like any LPC I grabbed the cache, signed it, and replaced it. After replacing the cache I spent maybe 5 minutes checking other caches in the area that I wanted to do. Seeing that the other nearby caches said from Dawn to Dusk I chose to head home.

 

For anyone to even suggest that I saw the police entering the area and driving away on purpose is ridiculous. If I had known I had caused some concern I would have immediately spoken to the police. I never saw the police, and since I was in no rush to get away after placing the suspicious package Tim Horton's had time to write my license plate down.

 

I was interviewed by the Urbana Detective and was called on Monday being told there would be no charges filed against me...

 

I was guilty of just being NON-stealthy and catching the attention of someone there--nothng else-- and I sure did not INTENTLY drive away from a potential crime scene.

 

That is all. No more responses from me!!!!!

Link to comment

Ok here is the deal. Just like any LPC I grabbed the cache, signed it, and replaced it. After replacing the cache I spent maybe 5 minutes checking other caches in the area that I wanted to do. Seeing that the other nearby caches said from Dawn to Dusk I chose to head home.

 

For anyone to even suggest that I saw the police entering the area and driving away on purpose is ridiculous. If I had known I had caused some concern I would have immediately spoken to the police. I never saw the police, and since I was in no rush to get away after placing the suspicious package Tim Horton's had time to write my license plate down.

 

I was interviewed by the Urbana Detective and was called on Monday being told there would be no charges filed against me...

 

I was guilty of just being NON-stealthy and catching the attention of someone there--nothng else-- and I sure did not INTENTLY drive away from a potential crime scene.

 

That is all. No more responses from me!!!!!

 

Don't worry, most of us understand tis completely!

Link to comment

Ok here is the deal. Just like any LPC I grabbed the cache, signed it, and replaced it. After replacing the cache I spent maybe 5 minutes checking other caches in the area that I wanted to do. Seeing that the other nearby caches said from Dawn to Dusk I chose to head home.

 

For anyone to even suggest that I saw the police entering the area and driving away on purpose is ridiculous. If I had known I had caused some concern I would have immediately spoken to the police. I never saw the police, and since I was in no rush to get away after placing the suspicious package Tim Horton's had time to write my license plate down.

 

I was interviewed by the Urbana Detective and was called on Monday being told there would be no charges filed against me...

 

I was guilty of just being NON-stealthy and catching the attention of someone there--nothng else-- and I sure did not INTENTLY drive away from a potential crime scene.

 

That is all. No more responses from me!!!!!

 

Well, I hope you're still reading. I see one post that talks about you driving off, but I'd think it's more a statement of fact than an accusation of you doing it on purpose to avoid the Police. In other words, you placed a suspicious package under the skirt, and "drove off", be it immediately, or after 5 minutes. :rolleyes:

Link to comment

You know, this kind of stupid stuff makes me think. I have come up with an idea. The problem arises when law enforcement has not idea what a geocache is and does not know the website exists....

 

All the problems stem from the dips who make bombs and blow things up. Then we got bomb squads to deal with the bombs when they are found. After that we got false alarms because we have a better safe than sorry mentality. All is good thus far. It's when we start trumping up charges for going about our daily lives doing the things we always do that leads to the creation of the next problem. Punishing the innocent for the sake of what? Being annoyed that a real bomb wasn't found?

 

To answer your idea. Once a call is made protocal takes over. Protocal is based on "safety first" meaning if there is any doubt whatsoever they will play it safe. There was a case were the cacher who had found the cache earlier (and theri visit was what was reported that created the responce) came back. Saw the police went up and said. "Hey, that's just a cache, I'll open it for you and show you!" They were told "no" and then the police destroyed the cache. That cache was placed with permission to boot.

 

The only time I've heard a cacher actually do some good was when the cacher was the officer responding and they had already found the cache.

Link to comment

...I was interviewed by the Urbana Detective and was called on Monday being told there would be no charges filed against me...

...

 

You going about your life is not 'causing a concern'. It takes the active participation of others to make a judgment that the normal stuff you were doing was suspicouse and worth investigating. Apparently "no charges being filed against you" is there way to say. "Sorry for wasting your time".

 

They should have said. "We got a call, and your behavior fit a profile (all cachers fit several of the items folks are supposed to look for insofar as suspicous behavor) and were investigated. We found nothing as you likely expected, thank you for your patience".

Link to comment

Kind of curiuos that the last statement in the article says,

 

"Urbana police will present the information to a prosecutor, possibly today, to determine if any charges should be filed."

 

From what I understand, some geocachers are being held responsible for the expenses when this happens. It is quite costly for the bomb squad and police (in this case both Urbana AND Enon) to respond....

 

It's also costly to have them just sitting around.

 

Mostly "holding geocachers responsble" is political scapegoating. Politicians forget the reason they authrized the squad wasn't to hold the citizens they are protecting resposnible ever time the machine they created is wound up and turned loose. It's to respond to the real bombs placed that actually need a squad. They created the false alarm by the very fact of trying to be pro-active about a bomb and save lives.

It's a small price to pay, but as they try to criminalize all the things that could create a false alarm just to avoid them they will only succede in taking away freedomes we all like. Like traveling with luggage. owning flashlights, exotic foods, and even whoopie cusions.

Link to comment

 

I was interviewed by the Urbana Detective and was called on Monday being told there would be no charges filed against me...

 

 

Whew! I am glad. I never though they could possibly press charges against you. IF anything, the hider (if not gaining permission) could be charged with littering or inducing panic (maybe) but it would still be unfair.

 

I think the news article was pretty obvious that you didn't speed away from cops. Anyone coming up with that has been letting their imaginations run away and watching too much Law and Order. lol.

 

I'm glad you aren't going to be in trouble. :-)

Link to comment

Kind of curiuos that the last statement in the article says,

 

"Urbana police will present the information to a prosecutor, possibly today, to determine if any charges should be filed."

 

From what I understand, some geocachers are being held responsible for the expenses when this happens. It is quite costly for the bomb squad and police (in this case both Urbana AND Enon) to respond....

 

It's also costly to have them just sitting around.

 

Mostly "holding geocachers responsble" is political scapegoating. Politicians forget the reason they authrized the squad wasn't to hold the citizens they are protecting resposnible ever time the machine they created is wound up and turned loose. It's to respond to the real bombs placed that actually need a squad. They created the false alarm by the very fact of trying to be pro-active about a bomb and save lives.

It's a small price to pay, but as they try to criminalize all the things that could create a false alarm just to avoid them they will only succede in taking away freedomes we all like. Like traveling with luggage. owning flashlights, exotic foods, and even whoopie cusions.

 

I totally agree. I wasn't saying I agree with holding them responsible. If it came across that way, I'm glad I got the chance to correct it here.

 

I should also correct that I've heard that they are trying to hold the "geocache HIDERS" responsible, not the person spotted finding the cache. I realize now that my first statement was worded wrong.

 

I was impressed that with the finders help and cooperation, the police were educated on this and did NOT blow the cache up. I've heard of stories were they blow it up anyway even after being told what it is.

 

heck....lets look on the bright side.....Urbana is a small town in which things very rarely happen, this was good practice for the cops. :-)

Link to comment

Kind of curiuos that the last statement in the article says,

 

"Urbana police will present the information to a prosecutor, possibly today, to determine if any charges should be filed."

 

From what I understand, some geocachers are being held responsible for the expenses when this happens. It is quite costly for the bomb squad and police (in this case both Urbana AND Enon) to respond....

 

It's also costly to have them just sitting around.

 

Mostly "holding geocachers responsble" is political scapegoating. Politicians forget the reason they authrized the squad wasn't to hold the citizens they are protecting resposnible ever time the machine they created is wound up and turned loose. It's to respond to the real bombs placed that actually need a squad. They created the false alarm by the very fact of trying to be pro-active about a bomb and save lives.

It's a small price to pay, but as they try to criminalize all the things that could create a false alarm just to avoid them they will only succede in taking away freedomes we all like. Like traveling with luggage. owning flashlights, exotic foods, and even whoopie cusions.

 

I totally agree. I wasn't saying I agree with holding them responsible. If it came across that way, I'm glad I got the chance to correct it here.

 

I should also correct that I've heard that they are trying to hold the "geocache HIDERS" responsible, not the person spotted finding the cache. I realize now that my first statement was worded wrong.

 

I was impressed that with the finders help and cooperation, the police were educated on this and did NOT blow the cache up. I've heard of stories were they blow it up anyway even after being told what it is.

 

heck....lets look on the bright side.....Urbana is a small town in which things very rarely happen, this was good practice for the cops. :-)

 

Hey, no problem. This topic in general is one of my bigger rant producing things. One of the balances that authorties have to contend with is when the threat itself causes a panic, a terrorist (or garden variety wack job) only needs to make a call to create havok. No real bomb needed.

 

It just rubs me wrong when politico's want to take away the very things they are trying to protect because of what? It's inconvenient to do their job? It just means the wack jobs and terrorists have started to gain ground in the causing problems with minimal effort department. Why place a bomb when you can just report a cache and bring down the whip, create a panic, and punish the innocent?

 

One case study I saw was an amusment park. They had just fied a wack job of an employee (wack job is the word of the day). Next day they get a bomb threat. They had to decide "shut down the park and search evwhere" or "leave the park open because the odds are there is no bomb" The risks are major disruption over nothing, or being wrong and risking lives needlessly. It's a tough balance. They chose to leave the park open. There was no bomb, the hunch that it was the disgruntled emploee paid off. That was all of the top of my head. The thing was they didn't punish the innocent. The guy who forgot his backpack behind the stand, etc.

Link to comment

 

I was interviewed by the Urbana Detective and was called on Monday being told there would be no charges filed against me...

 

 

Whew! I am glad. I never though they could possibly press charges against you. IF anything, the hider (if not gaining permission) could be charged with littering or inducing panic (maybe) but it would still be unfair.

 

 

How would that be unfair? This website publishes such caches under what I would call an "assumption of permission" policy. If there is no permission from Tim Horton's, and there's a better chance of me being struck by lightning as I type this then there is, it's all on the hider. All the seeker was doing was looking for something that was listed on this website.

Link to comment

 

I was interviewed by the Urbana Detective and was called on Monday being told there would be no charges filed against me...

 

 

Whew! I am glad. I never though they could possibly press charges against you. IF anything, the hider (if not gaining permission) could be charged with littering or inducing panic (maybe) but it would still be unfair.

 

 

How would that be unfair? This website publishes such caches under what I would call an "assumption of permission" policy. If there is no permission from Tim Horton's, and there's a better chance of me being struck by lightning as I type this then there is, it's all on the hider. All the seeker was doing was looking for something that was listed on this website.

 

If it was a strip mall, where Hortons are typically located, permission would come from the property manager, not Hortons. Hortons would most likely be oblivious unless they owned the property. I have a cache hidden on a piece of proprerty, owned by a friend, and I gaurentee he did not notify EVERYONE who works there it is hidden there.

Link to comment

 

I was interviewed by the Urbana Detective and was called on Monday being told there would be no charges filed against me...

 

 

Whew! I am glad. I never though they could possibly press charges against you. IF anything, the hider (if not gaining permission) could be charged with littering or inducing panic (maybe) but it would still be unfair.

 

 

How would that be unfair? This website publishes such caches under what I would call an "assumption of permission" policy. If there is no permission from Tim Horton's, and there's a better chance of me being struck by lightning as I type this then there is, it's all on the hider. All the seeker was doing was looking for something that was listed on this website.

 

If it was a strip mall, where Hortons are typically located, permission would come from the property manager, not Hortons. Hortons would most likely be oblivious unless they owned the property. I have a cache hidden on a piece of proprerty, owned by a friend, and I gaurentee he did not notify EVERYONE who works there it is hidden there.

 

Well, yeah. But you're like one in a million. :) I agree in this case, it does appear this is a strip mall. I do admit, there have been many problems in the past where "everyone" isn't in on the secret. But that can happen anywhere, in almost any case. I even know of a "front yard cache" incident, where the cache owner's tenant accosted a geocacher!!! But I always maintain If anyone thinks even a fraction of 1% of parking lot caches are hidden with any permission, I've got some swampland to sell them in Florida. :wub:

Edited by TheWhiteUrkel
Link to comment

You know, this kind of stupid stuff makes me think. I have come up with an idea. The problem arises when law enforcement has not idea what a geocache is and does not know the website exists.

 

Suppose geocaching.com makes a program for geocachers in their area to go to every ones local police station and let them know geocaching exists, and show them the web site, and it can be kept track of on geocaching.com what stations have been notified.

 

This way if they get a call about a suspicious container maybe they will check geocaching.com for the area and see if the suspicious container in question is listed on the site before the call in the bomb squad.

 

Now I have something to say about the size of the container and explosives. I don't even think a film canister full of a very high explosive like centex would even take out the lamp post. The mythbusters tackled the james bond myth about exploding pens. even in a gigantic ridiculous sized pen couldn't obliterate a foam manikin. The normal sized pen full of centex did almost nothing.

 

If some one could get their hands on c4 or centex, I am sure they would use a better container then a film canister. So logically it would most likely be black powder in the canister, as well a film canister would not create a very good explosion.

 

We had an event in Piqua, Ohio and sent invitations to nearly every police establishment within 50 miles. We had a geocacher who was also a police officer who was going to be the speaker. Take a guess as to how many showed up?

 

If you guessed 1.. You are wrong!! Not a single one showed up

Link to comment

I also can't imagine how something the size of a film canister could prompt the evacuation of 3 stores. I don't know anything about explosives, but something that small could only have a very local impact if it were real I would think.

 

The Christmas bomber only had a few ounces of explosive. That amount of that kind of explosive can make quite a bang.

Edited by jholly
Link to comment

I know some things about explosives and if this were an explosive of some type, it would most definitely be a very localized explosion. I've purchased fireworks larger than a 35mm film canister. Worst case scenario, it might take your hand off, if you were holding it. This is truly pathetic. People are such idiots. If it was a big container of some type sitting in a weird spot with a cell phone attached to the side and some wires protruding out of it, then I might understand the concern. These days, it seems as though everyone is a terrorist and everything is a bomb. The whole point of terrorism is to terrorize and that's exactly what they're doing without even doing it. And they're considering bringing charges, what a joke. OMG! OMG! IT'S A BOMB! WE'RE ALL GONNA' DIE! THE RUSSIANS ARE COMING! THE SKY IS FALLING AAAAAAAAAAAH! :):):lol::) Pfff, give me a break.

Link to comment
I haven't seen anywhere that cachers actually had to pay for this kind of nonsense, but maybe if they do then cachers will start

A) Taking permission seriously

So long as TPTB are willing to turn a blind eye toward permission issues, the players won't change.

The only effective change will be from Groundspeak.

I would love to see a revision in the guidelines requiring explicit permission for hides on private property.

But I'm unwilling to hold my breath waiting for it.

 

All the problems stem from the dips who make bombs and blow things up.

<snip for brevity>

To answer your idea. Once a call is made protocol takes over.

Actually, the biggest problem, (of many), stems from the first responder, not your run of the mill urban terrorist.

 

Consider the following chain of events:

 

Person observes suspicious object.

Person calls police.

Initial responder arrives and investigates.

If he finds the object mundane, the incident is over.

If he finds it suspicious, he calls his supervisor.

Supervisor investigates.

If he finds it mundane, the incident is over.

If he finds it suspicious, he calls the appropriate task force, usually EOD.

Once they show up, all bets are off.

Folks join EOD because they love blowing stuff up.

This results in policies that require explosive responses to suspicious objects.

 

There's hardly a day that goes by that doesn't see me being dispatched to a suspicious object.

 

Of these thousands of objects, I forwarded a grand total of one up the chain of command.

 

Dimwitted or overly paranoid first responders might end up with different percentages.

 

The Christmas bomber only had a few ounces of explosive. That amount of that kind of explosive can make quite a bang.

Abdulmutallab reportedly used Pentaerythritol tetranitrate (PETN), which is a relatively light compound. I doubt you could pack more than an ounce, by weight, into a film can. If you included a microchip timer, detonator and power source, you'd have even less room in the film can. When it detonated, the explosion would not be directed. As such, it would probably only blacken the exterior of a lamp post, and cause a big dent in the side, while blowing the skirt apart. Setting a similar device off inside a sealed environment, such as a pressurised aircraft, might have a markedly different effect.

 

Apples and oranges

Link to comment

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

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