Would you consider this vandalism?

3.8k · October 1, 2009

Ok, I know what you high-strung forum veterans are going to say. I want the opinion from actual geocachers here.. :lol: And the question posed has not been implemented. It's just a thought.

I know writing on or marking any object such as a sign, post, any type of infrastructure, is considered vandalism. I am in agreement with that and would never support such kind of activity. All copycat and erosion questions aside, would you consider the marking on the back of a stop sign for instance, written in invisible UV ink, to still be considered vandalism? I know generally speaking if you have to ask, you should already know the answer. But I am struggling with where my sensibilities should lie on this one. On one hand, you are marking the object. On the other hand, it's not like anyone can see your message (unless looking for it).

October 1, 2009

IS it vandalism, by black-letter law? Yeah, probably. Would I do it anyway? Yeah, probably. But then I'm a stinker.

4.2k · October 1, 2009

This is kind of a "if a tree fell in the woods" kind of question...

In my mind, for the vandalism to exist there has to be the perception of vandalism. If you can't see the ink under normal conditions, then it's not vandalism.

I don't have a problem with it. I guess the real question is, would a reviewer have a problem with it?

19k · October 1, 2009

Its kind of a "sound of one hand clapping" question, I guess,

I may have too many forum posts now to answer this, but I see no problem with invisible vandalism (pardon the pun)

3.8k · October 1, 2009

Its kind of a "sound of one hand clapping" question, I guess,

I may have too many forum posts now to answer this, but I see no problem with invisible vandalism (pardon the pun)

Yeah, I see you have thousands more posts than me. But since I know you personally, and not that Chad guy, I'll take your opinion. Your styles are not too far different than mine. And I love that in a cacher.

18.9k · October 1, 2009

Well I can't exactly argue that as defacing anything in that it can't be seen (easily). Still though, it is a near permanent form of writing on a public sign. I wouldn't do it myself. But I'd also have a hard time calling it vandalism too. However, it would not be a stretch of the imagination for a city worker to call it vandalism.

38.2k · October 1, 2009

Technically it is not allowed, but if people can't see it, what is the harm? Of course I'm not a geocacher so what do I know?

Edited October 1, 2009 by briansnat

19k · October 1, 2009

Odds are, it could probably be wiped off with an alcohol swab, lacquer thinner, or some other solvent without injuring the back of the metal sign in the least.

2.4k · October 1, 2009

Yeah, I see you have thousands more posts than me. But since I know you personally, and not that Chad guy, I'll take your opinion. Your styles are not too far different than mine. And I love that in a cacher.

So I don't quite get this...

You're asking a question on geocaching forums, and asking for only geocachers to answer....

And so how many hang out here who don't geocache?

But only geocachers without many forum posts.

and then a geocacher answers and you decide to take their opinioin because you like their style.

So then you're not taking the opinions of those whose styles you don't like (like mine perhaps right about now) and those who have too many forum posts (maybe only the hard-core geocachers post on the forums, ever think of that?).

Perhaps before you asked your question you should have written up your requirements a little more clearly,

LIke,

a. How many posts are too many for someone to have, before you disregard an answer?

b. how many caches we've had to have found to be a geocacher (since we all have an account here to post, I thought that made one a geocacher, but it seems you need more than that). And let us know if there are certain types of caches we have had to have found to qualify. Perhaps someone who has only found traditionals doesn't count as a real geocacher.

C. What style of person would you like to answer?

So then the rest of us won't waste our time.

But then, maybe you're basing someone's style on what their answer is.

If that is the case, then why ask the question at all?

(edited for typo)

Edited October 1, 2009 by Sol seaker

7.7k · October 2, 2009

Of course I'm not a geocacher so what do I know?

So I guess you're not in the running for US Geocacher of the Year 2009?

Back on topic...

I think Castle Mischief said it best. I have nothing new to add.

6.5k · October 2, 2009

I have far fewer posts that Brian, so I guess I can reply? I do consider myself a geocacher.

I don't think it would qualify as vandalism. But what would a LEO or DOT worker think if they saw you writing on the sign with your marker?

15.3k · October 2, 2009

Odds are, it could probably be wiped off with an alcohol swab, lacquer thinner, or some other solvent without injuring the back of the metal sign in the least.

As a practical matter, the UV from sunlight would probably fade the fluorescent paint fairly quickly. From what I've seen, caches that use fluorescent paint/ink must protect it from exposure to sunlight, and even then, the owner must regularly refresh the fluorescent markings.

October 2, 2009

I'm curious as to why you would want to do this? If no-one can read it, whats the point or do we have to carry around an infa red light to find the co-ords to the next stage?

19k · October 2, 2009

I But what would a LEO or DOT worker think if they saw you writing on the sign with your marker?

"What the **** is that guy doing, pretending to write on that sign with an empty marker?!?"

19k · October 2, 2009

I'm curious as to why you would want to do this? If no-one can read it, whats the point or do we have to carry around an infa red light to find the co-ords to the next stage?

Ultra-violet.

I know of one other night-cache (now archived) that did that. The first stage was an ammo can that contained a couple of battery-operated UV lamps that were needed to find UV painted markers in the woods. The hider spent about a month in his garage at night, testing out paints. The cache lasted several years.

3.8k · October 2, 2009

Yeah, I see you have thousands more posts than me. But since I know you personally, and not that Chad guy, I'll take your opinion. Your styles are not too far different than mine. And I love that in a cacher.

So I don't quite get this...

You're asking a question on geocaching forums, and asking for only geocachers to answer....

And so how many hang out here who don't geocache?

But only geocachers without many forum posts.

and then a geocacher answers and you decide to take their opinioin because you like their style.

So then you're not taking the opinions of those whose styles you don't like (like mine perhaps right about now) and those who have too many forum posts (maybe only the hard-core geocachers post on the forums, ever think of that?).

Perhaps before you asked your question you should have written up your requirements a little more clearly,

LIke,

a. How many posts are too many for someone to have, before you disregard an answer?

b. how many caches we've had to have found to be a geocacher (since we all have an account here to post, I thought that made one a geocacher, but it seems you need more than that). And let us know if there are certain types of caches we have had to have found to qualify. Perhaps someone who has only found traditionals doesn't count as a real geocacher.

C. What style of person would you like to answer?

So then the rest of us won't waste our time.

But then, maybe you're basing someone's style on what their answer is.

If that is the case, then why ask the question at all?

(edited for typo)

Anyone following my idiotic posts over the years knows that was a joke. Get over it please. It was for fun.

October 2, 2009

Want to know if it is vandalism?

Would you want someone to spray/write on your property?

I am going to assume that you live in a house. Would you like me to come and write on the side of your house? Have a car? Imagine someone you did not know wrote on your car. Would it aggravate you?

Someone will have to clean your mess.

It is graffiti and it is illegal. Don't do it. Do it and be prepared to be in trouble. Remember that your name is on the website for the cache.

3.8k · October 2, 2009

Want to know if it is vandalism?

Would you want someone to spray/write on your property?

I am going to assume that you live in a house. Would you like me to come and write on the side of your house? Have a car? Imagine someone you did not know wrote on your car. Would it aggravate you?

Someone will have to clean your mess.

It is graffiti and it is illegal. Don't do it. Do it and be prepared to be in trouble. Remember that your name is on the website for the cache.

I find your passion suspect..

11.6k · October 2, 2009

would you consider the marking on the back of a stop sign for instance, written in invisible UV ink, to still be considered vandalism?

That's an interesting question. You've added a chemical onto the metal. Does the text corrode or prevent corrosion there? Will it be permanantly etched there, as the sign rusts? Out in the elements, will it degrade and become visible?

You can put up your own sign (on a fence, etc.) with permission. Or UV-paint notes on fake leaves and hang them in a tree. Or paint some rocks. Lots of possibilities other than street signs.

October 2, 2009

Anyone following my idiotic posts over the years knows that was a joke. Get over it please. It was for fun.

I am glad. In our area unless you are in 4 digit finds, you are a know nothing rookie.

BTW, if you colour the cache container with the invisible ink, would you need a UV light to see it?

3.8k · October 2, 2009

would you consider the marking on the back of a stop sign for instance, written in invisible UV ink, to still be considered vandalism?

That's an interesting question. You've added a chemical onto the metal. Does the text corrode or prevent corrosion there? Will it be permanantly etched there, as the sign rusts? Out in the elements, will it degrade and become visible?

You can put up your own sign (on a fence, etc.) with permission. Or UV-paint notes on fake leaves and hang them in a tree. Or paint some rocks. Lots of possibilities other than street signs.

In my example, stop signs are made out of aluminum 9 times out of 10. Doesn't corrode, at least not like iron. I am not asking for possibilities. I was asking if you-all would consider it vandalism.

3.8k · October 2, 2009

Anyone following my idiotic posts over the years knows that was a joke. Get over it please. It was for fun.

I am glad. In our area unless you are in 4 digit finds, you are a know nothing rookie.

BTW, if you colour the cache container with the invisible ink, would you need a UV light to see it?

You wouldn't get that in our area.. we used to have an old boys club here that thought they invented geocaching. But most have lightened up or moved on, finally.

19k · October 2, 2009

Want to know if it is vandalism?

Would you want someone to spray/write on your property?

I am going to assume that you live in a house. Would you like me to come and write on the side of your house? Have a car? Imagine someone you did not know wrote on your car. Would it aggravate you?

Someone will have to clean your mess.

It is graffiti and it is illegal. Don't do it. Do it and be prepared to be in trouble. Remember that your name is on the website for the cache.

With invisible ink/paint? Are you kidding me? Write your name with water on my house all you want. Just please mow the lawn while you're there.

And there is no "name of the website for the cache"... he was asking a rhetorical question.

19k · October 2, 2009

You wouldn't get that in our area.. we used to have an old boys club here that thought they invented geocaching. But most have lightened up or moved on, finally.

... or become reviewers. :lol:

(careful there, Bart... this thread is getting your forum post count up there.)

Edited October 2, 2009 by knowschad

7.9k · October 2, 2009

If the sign can be restored to a state similar to what it was before you 'modified' it, then I'd say your are OK.

But, I am not your local reviewer.

I will say this thread has given me an idea for a REALLY EVIL cache I will probably never create.

October 2, 2009

Want to know if it is vandalism?

Would you want someone to spray/write on your property?

I am going to assume that you live in a house. Would you like me to come and write on the side of your house? Have a car? Imagine someone you did not know wrote on your car. Would it aggravate you?

Someone will have to clean your mess.

It is graffiti and it is illegal. Don't do it. Do it and be prepared to be in trouble. Remember that your name is on the website for the cache.

I find your passion suspect..

IT IS NOT YOUR PROPERTY. YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO DO IT. IT IS ILLEGAL. I WOULD HAVE SOMEONE ARRESTED IF I SAW THEM DO IT.

Edited October 2, 2009 by StripedSaint

October 2, 2009

Want to know if it is vandalism?

Would you want someone to spray/write on your property?

I am going to assume that you live in a house. Would you like me to come and write on the side of your house? Have a car? Imagine someone you did not know wrote on your car. Would it aggravate you?

Someone will have to clean your mess.

It is graffiti and it is illegal. Don't do it. Do it and be prepared to be in trouble. Remember that your name is on the website for the cache.

With invisible ink/paint? Are you kidding me? Write your name with water on my house all you want. Just please mow the lawn while you're there.

And there is no "name of the website for the cache"... he was asking a rhetorical question.

Great! give me your address and I will come urinate on your door step. Want me to spell your name? It will dry clear! It is not invisible paint if one can see it with a light. It is vandalism.

IF..IF he or someone else created a cache that used the ink on a sign then he would be registered on geocaching.com.

my DON'T DO IT is directed at anyone thinking about doing it or thinking it is okay

Edited October 2, 2009 by StripedSaint

3.3k · October 2, 2009

Odds are, it could probably be wiped off with an alcohol swab, lacquer thinner, or some other solvent without injuring the back of the metal sign in the least.
As a practical matter, the UV from sunlight would probably fade the fluorescent paint fairly quickly. From what I've seen, caches that use fluorescent paint/ink must protect it from exposure to sunlight, and even then, the owner must regularly refresh the fluorescent markings.

I have two cache utilizing invisible UV paint, and neither have needed touch up paint after 3 years. I added the paint to tree bark and a rock. Unless you use a blacklight, you can't see the paint from afar, it is visible close up. It resembles clear nail polish with a very light color tint. This is the reason I never utilized inisible UV paint in an urban environment. When I applied the paint to a rock, you could actually read the coords. I foil cheaters, I added multiple invisible colors to make it like like an abstrat painting. Once a blacklight was used, the coords were all one color.

Yes I have twice as many posts as finds, but I'm five finds shy of 1500 finds, and I have 139 hides. I think this qualifies to me to have an opinion. :lol:

Edited October 2, 2009 by Kit Fox

October 2, 2009

IT IS NOT YOUR PROPERTY. YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO DO IT. IT IS ILLEGAL. I WOULD HAVE SOMEONE ARRESTED IF I SAW THEM DO IT.

Please turn of your caps lock when you're posting. It dilutes any effect your post might have had on rational folks.....

October 2, 2009

On the topic at hand, the only thing that would cause this to be a real problem with me (a guy with only 70 or so finds to my name) would be if this were urban. Now if we're talking a stop sign out in the sticks with no one or no house around, then definitely. Actually sounds fun...

11.6k · October 2, 2009

In my example, stop signs are made out of aluminum 9 times out of 10. Doesn't corrode, at least not like iron. I am not asking for possibilities. I was asking if you-all would consider it vandalism.

If you're asking each responder individually if they'd report you to the authorities, I might, unless you're saying it's purely hypothetical, invisible paint that causes no damage, and doesn't later turn color in sunlight, or glow in the dark. And that I would know all this in advance.

If you're seriously asking each of us to decide if it's vandalism, I'd say yes it is. And if you're "invisibly writing" on signs in my neighborhood, would you expect to NOT be reported for writing on signs? You have some kind of paint pen, and you're painting on a stop sign. But I don't know specifically what charges you could be brought up on.

Now you might be justified to ask if this isn't the same thing as putting a magnetic hollow bolt on a bridge or physically attaching hardware to public property, to hide a Geocache. Well, somebody may remove it, or you may be required to remove it. And if you paint a sign with anything, you may someday soon be cleaning it off.

AND you see all kinds of weird alien-looking stickers on the backs of stop signs (I guess the DOT puts them there). Can one more sticker really matter? If not, maybe that's closer to the gray area you're looking for. Although I think UV paint is a cool idea, I'd prefer to start with the painted leaf or whatever, which you ruled out. Are you just conducting some kind of weird survey?

Sorry, I just noticed there's a find-to-post ratio requirement for a response. I think I'm not allowed to answer. Nevermind. :lol:

Edited October 2, 2009 by kunarion

8.6k · October 2, 2009

... All copycat and erosion questions aside, would you consider the marking on the back of a stop sign for instance, written in invisible UV ink, to still be considered vandalism?

No.

Because it's not visible to the general public.

It would not diminish the effectiveness of the Stop sign because it's on the back of it, so I don't believe it would create any sort of Health&Safety issues from that angle.

MrsB

October 2, 2009

I wouldn't see it as vandalism in so far as it can't be seen.

As to whether I'd be happy with someone writing on my house/car/child...? I'd not be overly pleased if they dumped a load of tupperware in my front garden either but that's not stopped me hiding caches.

October 2, 2009

... All copycat and erosion questions aside, would you consider the marking on the back of a stop sign for instance, written in invisible UV ink, to still be considered vandalism?

No.

Because it's not visible to the general public.

It would not diminish the effectiveness of the Stop sign because it's on the back of it, so I don't believe it would create any sort of Health&Safety issues from that angle.

MrsB

I wouldn't do it. road signs are always being replaced for one thing. For another, any cache which requires specialised equipment to solve is not on. Not too many people run around with black lights of the required wavelength.

1.2k · October 2, 2009

Ok, I know what you high-strung forum veterans are going to say. I want the opinion from actual geocachers here.. And the question posed has not been implemented. It's just a thought.

I know writing on or marking any object such as a sign, post, any type of infrastructure, is considered vandalism. I am in agreement with that and would never support such kind of activity. All copycat and erosion questions aside, would you consider the marking on the back of a stop sign for instance, written in invisible UV ink, to still be considered vandalism? I know generally speaking if you have to ask, you should already know the answer. But I am struggling with where my sensibilities should lie on this one. On one hand, you are marking the object. On the other hand, it's not like anyone can see your message (unless looking for it).

My post count and found count are closer than most others...but...

I wouldn't consider it vandalism...I guess that means I need to add a uv light to my caching goodies!!! Be something very tricky if one wasn't expecting it!!!

3.8k · October 2, 2009

... All copycat and erosion questions aside, would you consider the marking on the back of a stop sign for instance, written in invisible UV ink, to still be considered vandalism?

No.

Because it's not visible to the general public.

It would not diminish the effectiveness of the Stop sign because it's on the back of it, so I don't believe it would create any sort of Health&Safety issues from that angle.

MrsB

I wouldn't do it. road signs are always being replaced for one thing. For another, any cache which requires specialised equipment to solve is not on. Not too many people run around with black lights of the required wavelength.

Off topic.. are you saying just because people generally don'y run around with UV lights is a reason to not hide a cache like this? How boring.. accepting a challenge is something you should look into. Or, hit the ignore button.

4.2k · October 2, 2009

Great! give me your address and I will come urinate on your door step. Want me to spell your name? It will dry clear! It is not invisible paint if one can see it with a light. It is vandalism.

Yes, because invisible ink is a reasonable equivalent to human urine and a stop sign is perfectly interchangeable with your doorstep. :lol:

2.8k · October 2, 2009

Off topic.. are you saying just because people generally don'y run around with UV lights is a reason to not hide a cache like this? How boring.. accepting a challenge is something you should look into. Or, hit the ignore button.

I have thought about a similar idea, but I would provide a UV flashlight in one of the stages. I could build one using a battery, a resistor and a UV LED for under $5.

19k · October 2, 2009

I'm curious as to why you would want to do this? If no-one can read it, whats the point or do we have to carry around an infa red light to find the co-ords to the next stage?

I know of one other night-cache (now archived) that did that. The first stage was an ammo can that contained a couple of battery-operated UV lamps that were needed to find UV painted markers in the woods. The hider spent about a month in his garage at night, testing out paints. The cache lasted several years.

Here is the cache that I was referring to above: GCHAYC When Darkness Falls

Of special note on the cache page are these points:

It has taken over two months of testing several types of "glow" materials, as well as various types of potential caches. I have spent untold hours after dark on "practice hunts" in the garage and a dark bathroom testing new materials and various types of lighting.

You will find three black light flashlights, basic instructions and coords for the final two caches. Please use the blacklights after you get near the final hunting location. You are looking for a 1/4" spot that will glow when the blacklight shines on it. Look very carefully at the 'glow spot' and you will be able to find the final cache.

3) Bring 3 AA batteries per person hunting (for black light)

Edited October 2, 2009 by knowschad

3.8k · October 2, 2009

I'm curious as to why you would want to do this? If no-one can read it, whats the point or do we have to carry around an infa red light to find the co-ords to the next stage?

I know of one other night-cache (now archived) that did that. The first stage was an ammo can that contained a couple of battery-operated UV lamps that were needed to find UV painted markers in the woods. The hider spent about a month in his garage at night, testing out paints. The cache lasted several years.

Here is the cache that I was referring to above: GCHAYC When Darkness Falls

Of special note on the cache page are these points:

It has taken over two months of testing several types of "glow" materials, as well as various types of potential caches. I have spent untold hours after dark on "practice hunts" in the garage and a dark bathroom testing new materials and various types of lighting.

You will find three black light flashlights, basic instructions and coords for the final two caches. Please use the blacklights after you get near the final hunting location. You are looking for a 1/4" spot that will glow when the blacklight shines on it. Look very carefully at the 'glow spot' and you will be able to find the final cache.

3) Bring 3 AA batteries per person hunting (for black light)

Did this cache WAY back. Not sure what took two months of testing, but it was a fun cache none the less.

This cache, The Holy Grail, started out as a UV cache as well but then I removed that element after a while.

1.7k · October 2, 2009

... All copycat and erosion questions aside, would you consider the marking on the back of a stop sign for instance, written in invisible UV ink, to still be considered vandalism?

No.

Because it's not visible to the general public.

It would not diminish the effectiveness of the Stop sign because it's on the back of it, so I don't believe it would create any sort of Health&Safety issues from that angle.

MrsB

I wouldn't do it. road signs are always being replaced for one thing. For another, any cache which requires specialised equipment to solve is not on. Not too many people run around with black lights of the required wavelength.

see my avatar? Yes, that is me. I have not found an inexpensive UV reactive product that would not react under UVA, UVB, or UVC. I highly doubt bflentje would spend $98.00 on a pen or $129.00 on a small jar of paint so that they will only show under a specific wave length.

Buy a bottle of urine gone for $15.00 and get a free battery powered florescent black light.

For $6.00 you can make a UV LED light and the price includes batteries.

You know those blinking blue LED rings at walmarts? They emit a enough UV to cause UV inks to react and only cost $0.99.

With that last one, now you have thousands of people that run around with black lights of the required wavelength.

I love UV.

bflentje,

Who is the manufacturer of this hypothetical invisible UV ink? Not all invisible UV ink is invisible as such one brand would be vandalism, another would not.

example: sorta

I forgot to have non UV versions of these photos taken but, You would not see the UV makeup on my skin, you might notice something odd about it if you know my oily zones, but you cant see the makeup.

My hair is a different story, it was turned a most unnatural gray.

October 2, 2009

Great! give me your address and I will come urinate on your door step. Want me to spell your name? It will dry clear! It is not invisible paint if one can see it with a light. It is vandalism.

Yes, because invisible ink is a reasonable equivalent to human urine and a stop sign is perfectly interchangeable with your doorstep.

Since urine is fluorescent under black light it is very comparable. A doorstep is your property and a sign is city property. I don't see what is so hard to understand. It is against the law.

19k · October 2, 2009

Since urine is fluorescent under black light it is very comparable. A doorstep is your property and a sign is city property. I don't see what is so hard to understand. It is against the law.

Do you seriously think that any city prosecutor would entertain the notion of prosecuting someone for writing a set of coordinates on the back of a sign in invisible ink? Do you really think that any judge would waste his/her time hearing a complaint like that? Do you think for one moment that any taxpayer would want a dollar of their taxes going to prosecuting something so frivilous?

October 2, 2009

Since urine is fluorescent under black light it is very comparable. A doorstep is your property and a sign is city property. I don't see what is so hard to understand. It is against the law.

Do you seriously think that any city prosecutor would entertain the notion of prosecuting someone for writing a set of coordinates on the back of a sign in invisible ink? Do you really think that any judge would waste his/her time hearing a complaint like that? Do you think for one moment that any taxpayer would want a dollar of their taxes going to prosecuting something so frivilous?

It doesn't matter if they think it is a waste of time. It is illegal. End of story. I am amazed by your arrogance against the law.

And I would gladly spend my taxpaying dollars to fine you and make it mandatory for you to either remove the ink or replace the sign.

19k · October 2, 2009

Since urine is fluorescent under black light it is very comparable. A doorstep is your property and a sign is city property. I don't see what is so hard to understand. It is against the law.

Do you seriously think that any city prosecutor would entertain the notion of prosecuting someone for writing a set of coordinates on the back of a sign in invisible ink? Do you really think that any judge would waste his/her time hearing a complaint like that? Do you think for one moment that any taxpayer would want a dollar of their taxes going to prosecuting something so frivilous?

It doesn't matter if they think it is a waste of time. It is illegal. End of story. I am amazed by your arrogance against the law.

And I would gladly spend my taxpaying dollars to fine you and make it mandatory for you to either remove the ink or replace the sign.

Life is not all that black & white. You seem to be looking at the letter of the law. I am considering the spirit in which those laws were created. In addition, that is how the legal system is going to look at it.

3.8k · October 2, 2009

Since urine is fluorescent under black light it is very comparable. A doorstep is your property and a sign is city property. I don't see what is so hard to understand. It is against the law.

Do you seriously think that any city prosecutor would entertain the notion of prosecuting someone for writing a set of coordinates on the back of a sign in invisible ink? Do you really think that any judge would waste his/her time hearing a complaint like that? Do you think for one moment that any taxpayer would want a dollar of their taxes going to prosecuting something so frivilous?

It doesn't matter if they think it is a waste of time. It is illegal. End of story. I am amazed by your arrogance against the law.

And I would gladly spend my taxpaying dollars to fine you and make it mandatory for you to either remove the ink or replace the sign.

I see issues here.. it is no coincidence that this dude's face is covered in his avatar.

3.8k · October 2, 2009

Since urine is fluorescent under black light it is very comparable. A doorstep is your property and a sign is city property. I don't see what is so hard to understand. It is against the law.

Do you seriously think that any city prosecutor would entertain the notion of prosecuting someone for writing a set of coordinates on the back of a sign in invisible ink? Do you really think that any judge would waste his/her time hearing a complaint like that? Do you think for one moment that any taxpayer would want a dollar of their taxes going to prosecuting something so frivilous?

It doesn't matter if they think it is a waste of time. It is illegal. End of story. I am amazed by your arrogance against the law.

And I would gladly spend my taxpaying dollars to fine you and make it mandatory for you to either remove the ink or replace the sign.

I see issues here.. it is no coincidence that this dude's face is covered in his avatar.

Not to mention the fact that the New Orleans Police Dept is historically known as THE most corrupt in the nation.

Edited October 2, 2009 by bflentje

19k · October 2, 2009

I want the opinion from actual geocachers here..

What is is that you generally post when someone asks for opinions here...? Oh yeah, I remember now. "Why?"

October 2, 2009

What is it with people from MN?

Please tell me what you think about me and why you have issues. I am dying to know. Really.

Life isn't all black and white but the law is. You don't have the right to interpret the law. That is what the court system does.

October 2, 2009

I answered in invisible ink so you have to shine a UV light on the text to see it. Please don't report me.

Would you consider this vandalism?

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

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