Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 15
GOF and Bacall

Cache maggot arrested.

Recommended Posts

Theft is never ok, regardless of the dollar amount. The issue in my mind is that the ends do not justify the means in this case. If all they are going to charge him with is the theft of a $4 magnet, then what's the point?

I think that you just answered your own question in your opening remark. What part of "Never" did you not really mean?

 

This reminds me of something I was taught about raising children. Choose your battles. Sometimes my 14 year old does something "wrong" and I decide to do nothing. My not punishing him does not change the fact that what he did was wrong. According to your logic, my choosing not to punish him means that I condone what he did. Forgive me Sarah Palin, but that's a retarded position.

Share this post


Link to post

Being 'ok' and being important and worthy of police and/or court actions are two vastly different issues.

 

"Theft is never ok, regardless of the dollar amount."

Edited by Team Cotati

Share this post


Link to post

Theft is never ok, regardless of the dollar amount. The issue in my mind is that the ends do not justify the means in this case. If all they are going to charge him with is the theft of a $4 magnet, then what's the point?

I think that you just answered your own question in your opening remark. What part of "Never" did you not really mean?

 

This reminds me of something I was taught about raising children. Choose your battles. Sometimes my 14 year old does something "wrong" and I decide to do nothing. My not punishing him does not change the fact that what he did was wrong. According to your logic, my choosing not to punish him means that I condone what he did. Forgive me Sarah Palin, but that's a retarded position.

According to my logic you are making the kid think you condone it or confusing the kid with mixed signals about what you believe regardless of your beliefs.

So if the court just drops the case against Repak what is he going to think?

Share this post


Link to post

Theft is never ok, regardless of the dollar amount. The issue in my mind is that the ends do not justify the means in this case. If all they are going to charge him with is the theft of a $4 magnet, then what's the point?

I think that you just answered your own question in your opening remark. What part of "Never" did you not really mean?

 

This reminds me of something I was taught about raising children. Choose your battles. Sometimes my 14 year old does something "wrong" and I decide to do nothing. My not punishing him does not change the fact that what he did was wrong. According to your logic, my choosing not to punish him means that I condone what he did. Forgive me Sarah Palin, but that's a retarded position.

According to my logic you are making the kid think you condone it or confusing the kid with mixed signals about what you believe regardless of your beliefs.

So if the court just drops the case against Repak what is he going to think?

 

If they drop the case, he'll thank his lucky stars.. Why would he possibly think that it means what he did was ok? Morality is not based on the law... The law is based on morality. I think you may have it a little backwards.

Share this post


Link to post

Yay! Nothing worse than getting to a location and the cache not being there because some idiot has issues. Lock him up and put the key on a TB.

Share this post


Link to post

Theft is never ok, regardless of the dollar amount. The issue in my mind is that the ends do not justify the means in this case. If all they are going to charge him with is the theft of a $4 magnet, then what's the point?

I think that you just answered your own question in your opening remark. What part of "Never" did you not really mean?

 

This reminds me of something I was taught about raising children. Choose your battles. Sometimes my 14 year old does something "wrong" and I decide to do nothing. My not punishing him does not change the fact that what he did was wrong. According to your logic, my choosing not to punish him means that I condone what he did. Forgive me Sarah Palin, but that's a retarded position.

According to my logic you are making the kid think you condone it or confusing the kid with mixed signals about what you believe regardless of your beliefs.

So if the court just drops the case against Repak what is he going to think?

 

If they drop the case, he'll thank his lucky stars.. Why would he possibly think that it means what he did was ok? Morality is not based on the law... The law is based on morality. I think you may have it a little backwards.

Why would he think what he did was ok? Because he is obviously being childish.

Put my answer aside and I'll counter you with a counter question.

Why wouldn't he?

After all it is only a couple bucks and it will just be a repeat if he gets caught again. If it just simply gets dropped.

 

Now because he is an engineer we can make a statistical assumption that says he has a propensity to lean towards high functioning autism (lots of people live with it and nobody knows, or they get misdiagnosed). If an autistic doesn't have enough repercussion they don't learn the negative behavior is bad. (repercussion start out at simply talking and escalates from there in severity)

 

Lets say he is simply a sociopath, dropping the case will only validate him.

 

A bipolar my be so elated if the case got dropped that they would hit a manic phase and increase the negative behavior with a fervor they have never exhibited before.

 

There is something off in the head of a maggot and because of it a lack of enough repercussion will only encourage them.

Share this post


Link to post

Yay! Nothing worse than getting to a location and the cache not being there because some idiot has issues. Lock him up and put the key on a TB.

can i keep it for my personal collection?

Share this post


Link to post

Theft is never ok, regardless of the dollar amount. The issue in my mind is that the ends do not justify the means in this case. If all they are going to charge him with is the theft of a $4 magnet, then what's the point?

I think that you just answered your own question in your opening remark. What part of "Never" did you not really mean?

 

This reminds me of something I was taught about raising children. Choose your battles. Sometimes my 14 year old does something "wrong" and I decide to do nothing. My not punishing him does not change the fact that what he did was wrong. According to your logic, my choosing not to punish him means that I condone what he did. Forgive me Sarah Palin, but that's a retarded position.

Call me anything you'd like... you can even say that my position "is retarded", but never EVER call me Sarah Palin, buddy. Them's fightin' words!! :D

 

 

 

 

:D

Edited by knowschad

Share this post


Link to post

Theft is never ok, regardless of the dollar amount. The issue in my mind is that the ends do not justify the means in this case. If all they are going to charge him with is the theft of a $4 magnet, then what's the point?

I think that you just answered your own question in your opening remark. What part of "Never" did you not really mean?

 

This reminds me of something I was taught about raising children. Choose your battles. Sometimes my 14 year old does something "wrong" and I decide to do nothing. My not punishing him does not change the fact that what he did was wrong. According to your logic, my choosing not to punish him means that I condone what he did. Forgive me Sarah Palin, but that's a retarded position.

According to my logic you are making the kid think you condone it or confusing the kid with mixed signals about what you believe regardless of your beliefs.

So if the court just drops the case against Repak what is he going to think?

 

If they drop the case, he'll thank his lucky stars.. Why would he possibly think that it means what he did was ok? Morality is not based on the law... The law is based on morality. I think you may have it a little backwards.

Why would he think what he did was ok? Because he is obviously being childish.

Put my answer aside and I'll counter you with a counter question.

Why wouldn't he?

After all it is only a couple bucks and it will just be a repeat if he gets caught again. If it just simply gets dropped.

 

Now because he is an engineer we can make a statistical assumption that says he has a propensity to lean towards high functioning autism (lots of people live with it and nobody knows, or they get misdiagnosed). If an autistic doesn't have enough repercussion they don't learn the negative behavior is bad. (repercussion start out at simply talking and escalates from there in severity)

 

Lets say he is simply a sociopath, dropping the case will only validate him.

 

A bipolar my be so elated if the case got dropped that they would hit a manic phase and increase the negative behavior with a fervor they have never exhibited before.

 

There is something off in the head of a maggot and because of it a lack of enough repercussion will only encourage them.

I dont think him getting off easy would let him think for what ever reason that he should go out and repeat the actions that got him in this mess to begin with.

As for "bipolar",you kinda have that wrong.Bipolar mania has more to do with mood than behavior.People who are bipolar have extreme mood swings,not behavior swings.And these swings have little to do with what is going on around them,its more random.Chemicals released for mood seem to happen at the wrong time.When these swings in mood happen they dont make you do bad things,they are just confusing.Kinda like feeling very depressed when you know nothing is wrong and you should be happy.Most bipolars function fine unless they are extreme.If he were an extreme bipolar he wouldnt be able to hold the type of job that he has.I think he just did something stupid,will get a small punishment,a good dose of embarassment and get on with his life and not try stealing caches again.

Share this post


Link to post

I personally don't think for one second that Mr Repak is bipolar, a sociopath, autisic, childish, or even shows negative behavior. I think he simply has a different value system than ours, and he holds onto it very strongly. Some of the "Leave No Trace" folks take their mission and beliefs to what most of us would consider extreme. I really believe that in his mind, he was doing good. Don't get me wrong... that doesn't mean that I agree with it. But I strongly believe that his motivation essentially CITO.

Share this post


Link to post

I personally don't think for one second that Mr Repak is bipolar, a sociopath, autisic, childish, or even shows negative behavior. I think he simply has a different value system than ours, and he holds onto it very strongly. Some of the "Leave No Trace" folks take their mission and beliefs to what most of us would consider extreme. I really believe that in his mind, he was doing good. Don't get me wrong... that doesn't mean that I agree with it. But I strongly believe that his motivation essentially CITO.

I agree..not bipolar or other.Maybe a bit misguided..He might have thought he was doing no wrong or at least no harm.CITO? could be.I am vey curious to hear his thoughts,in his words.

Share this post


Link to post

I personally don't think for one second that Mr Repak is bipolar, a sociopath, autisic, childish, or even shows negative behavior. I think he simply has a different value system than ours, and he holds onto it very strongly. Some of the "Leave No Trace" folks take their mission and beliefs to what most of us would consider extreme. I really believe that in his mind, he was doing good. Don't get me wrong... that doesn't mean that I agree with it. But I strongly believe that his motivation essentially CITO.

Well as a conservationist who is a tad touched in the head I like to try to convince myself that eco-terrorists are way crazier than I. :D

And it doesn't take any convincing for me to be certain that they are childish.

Only a child will illegally board a ship on the high seas and cry how unfair it is that they where imprisoned by the occupants.

Attack you by throwing paint on you and scream you have no right to defend yourself.

Drive spikes into trees and wonder why they are being imprisoned for grievous bodily harm. Should be attempted murder.

Stealing property to prevent a legal activity. Heck, stealing property to prevent an illegal activity can lad ya butt in jail.

I'll bet Repak did not try any legal action to prevent geocaching.

I have childishly broken laws in protest, but at least I tried a legal route first and was trying to get caught without being malicious. This guy didn't want to get caught or he would have never run, shows how much he believes he was doing right, don't it.

Share this post


Link to post

Can anyone show me where the idea that he was motivated by any moral position was anything other than speculation on our part? When did he say anything that led us to believe that he had these grand motives?

Share this post


Link to post
Theft is never ok, regardless of the dollar amount. The issue in my mind is that the ends do not justify the means in this case. If all they are going to charge him with is the theft of a $4 magnet, then what's the point? If I stole a bag of candy from Walmart, I honestly don't think the time and effort would be worth it to prosecute the case. That doesn't mean stealing candy is right, just that the ends don't justify the means.

Hmmm... Curious. So... Stealing is bad. But your proposed response to folks who only take things that cost less than $20 is to do nothing? Are we shopping for morals at Wally World now? Remind me. Where is the incentive not to steal, in your plan? I'm thinking if you become the Imperial World Leader, I'd never have to pay for my meals again. Whoo Hoo!! Breakfast would be at one restaurant, lunch at another and dinner at a third. Of course I'd have to make sure my bill did not exceed $19.99, or walking out on it might be criminal. The same would apply to my vices. If I needed a can of Copenhagen, since it's less than $20, I could just walk into 7-11, grab a can and walk out. Out of Guinness? No problem! There's a Jiffy Mart right down the street! Heck, even with the suggested future hike in gas prices, I could still pump 5 gallons and simply drive away, since, in your hypothetical world it would not be a crime. What a country!

 

History shows us that ignoring negative behavior always leads to an increase in negative behavior.

 

Google "Broken Windows Theory" for some educational reading.

Share this post


Link to post
Why would he possibly think that it means what he did was ok?

He already believes that what he did was perfectly justified, (AKA: OK), or he would not have done it.

 

Morality is not based on the law... The law is based on morality.

That's an odd statement from someone who believes that theft of something with a value of less than $20 should not be criminal. :D

Doesn't the 8th Commandment say something about not stealing?

I would certainly see that as a moral issue.

Should the law be based upon those morals?

Or should the Commandment be altered to fit the times?

Thou Shalt Not Steal Anything That RoN Says Is Valuable? :D

Share this post


Link to post
Can anyone show me where the idea that he was motivated by any moral position was anything other than speculation on our part? When did he say anything that led us to believe that he had these grand motives?
There is very little in this entire conversation that is not speculation. I base the speculation that his motives were based on a moral position primarily by way of his association with "Leave No Trace", which, although we tend to throw the term around rather casually in our little forums, I have heard that it has a rather large extremist fringe (I base that only on heresay. I have no personal knowledge of the group or any of its membership). I will admit that I don't know how this fits in with stealing Altoid tins from a town park, aside to guess that it probably did not begin there.

 

At the very least, I'd bet you an ammo box that he has a copy of Edward Abbey's Monkey Wrench Gang on his bookshelf.

Share this post


Link to post
If you park a $400 bicycle and walk inside a mini-mart to get a soda, is it abandoned? What if someone steals it?
Ok.. What if you find the bike 50 feet off trail in the woods, lying under a bush ?
If it is not yours, do not take it. Simple.

 

Alert the police, let them deal with it.

 

If they can find the owner, great, if not you can get it from their abandoned property after a period of time.

I'm just pointing out the difference. I think the difference is significant in whether the item is perceived as abandoned or not
Repak's car was found to contain another stolen cache container AND a list of cache coordinates. No way he thought it was just an abandoned container. Unlike you, most cachers don't consider their caches as abandoned. When was the last time you read the cache listing guidelines?
This reminds me of something I was taught about raising children. Choose your battles. Sometimes my 14 year old does something "wrong" and I decide to do nothing. My not punishing him does not change the fact that what he did was wrong.
It might change the perception of your child as to what is or isn't wrong, though.
According to your logic, my choosing not to punish him means that I condone what he did. Forgive me Sarah Palin, but that's a retarded position.
When was the last time you read the forum guidelines? Your reference to Palin means you obviously know that many people find that term insulting & offensive. I have some very dear friends who campaign every day to get people to stop using the word. Think about it. :D

 

http://therword.org/

Share this post


Link to post

Can anyone show me where the idea that he was motivated by any moral position was anything other than speculation on our part? When did he say anything that led us to believe that he had these grand motives?

Too true, in which case I will still call him childish until somebody shows he is part of a maggot black market.

Share this post


Link to post
According to your logic, my choosing not to punish him means that I condone what he did. Forgive me Sarah Palin, but that's a retarded position.
When was the last time you read the forum guidelines? Your reference to Palin means you obviously know that many people find that term insulting & offensive. I have some very dear friends who campaign every day to get people to stop using the word. Think about it. :D

 

http://therword.org/

Yeah, you could have phrased that much better without being offensive to some folks out there.

Share this post


Link to post

At the very least, I'd bet you an ammo box that he has a copy of Edward Abbey's Monkey Wrench Gang on his bookshelf.

 

Don't we all?

Share this post


Link to post
Even if he's not convicted, at least everyone now knows who he is.

If he works for AFRL and has a security clearance, this is going to cause him some serious trouble whether or not he is convicted.

 

It may or may not. It will, of course, pop up as any arrest within a 7 (or 10) year period, depending on the level of clearance. But my understanding is that adjudicators will look at a person's entire life and the context of the infraction. Taking a small magnetic container that was left someplace may not be a problem if the rest of his history is clean.

 

When they take a look into this they will probably find not one "small magnetic container" but a history of seeking caches for the removal from the game. This guy is someone who had a lot going for him and now his

boss(es) are gonna be lloking at all that he has done for years. Security is a big deal.

 

What this guy was doing was very weird. I know that waht we do is weird but we are not grinches out to spread sorrow and misery.

 

What I think will come of this is the judge won't send him to jail but he might recommend some psychiatric observation and counseling. He may get mental care through the Air Force as he spends the rest of his last tour scrubbing trash cans and replacing urinal cakes. I think he won't be in the Research Laboratory long.

Share this post


Link to post

Yay! Nothing worse than getting to a location and the cache not being there because some idiot has issues. Lock him up and put the key on a TB.

 

But when you go to find it it won't be there :D

Share this post


Link to post

At the very least, I'd bet you an ammo box that he has a copy of Edward Abbey's Monkey Wrench Gang on his bookshelf.

 

Don't we all?

I do.

Share this post


Link to post
Gun toting, beer swilling, litterbugs with a penchant for destruction. The worlds perfect environmentalist role models. :laughing:
Hey... the beer swilling was just his way of judging distance, OK?

 

Wikipedia, by the way, has a very interesting paragraph on how their values differ drastically from modern day environmentalists. Mostly it was just as you stated.

Share this post


Link to post

Gun toting, beer swilling, litterbugs with a penchant for destruction.

Sounds like my last family reunion! ;):P;)

 

Hey! I have family in the Virginias to.

:laughing:

Share this post


Link to post
Ah... The oh so ridiculous "abandoned property" defense. I see. That explains a lot.

I can only speak for myself here, but I can say that none of my caches are abandoned.

A gamepiece, left for a specific function, at a specific location, cannot be considered abandoned.

My game pieces get visited on a regular basis, by folks hunting for them. Definitely not abandoned.

I can see where a muggle might use such a defense, as, having no knowledge of the game, they might think they were abandoned.

But Mr Repak doesn't have the luxury of ignorance.

 

Judging by your response, one can only assume that your caches are abandoned? Is that right?

I realise you checked the little box agreeing to comply with the guidelines, including the maintenance guidelines.

Yet, still, all your caches are abandoned? Shouldn't they be archived?

Since they are abandoned, you'd have no qualms with me cleaning up your litter, right?

I'll be up in St Charles in a few months. Which ones can I take?

I'm looking fondly at "Old Railroad Bridge", "Fulton Overlook Cache" and "Twin Falls". I need more Lock & Locks.

 

My point was that legally, they are most likely considered abandoned property...a point you seem unable to grasp.

 

As far as my stuff, I do maintain my caches quite well. Have I had some stolen before? Yes. Would I call the cops? No, because I realize in a court of law they'd be considered abandoned property. That does not mean that you can come and take them. That would make me very cranky. You would not want to see me cranky.

 

:P

Share this post


Link to post

I personally don't think for one second that Mr Repak is bipolar, a sociopath, autisic, childish, or even shows negative behavior. I think he simply has a different value system than ours, and he holds onto it very strongly. Some of the "Leave No Trace" folks take their mission and beliefs to what most of us would consider extreme. I really believe that in his mind, he was doing good. Don't get me wrong... that doesn't mean that I agree with it. But I strongly believe that his motivation essentially CITO.

 

That's a good theory but I'm more inclined to think this fellow is nothing more than a thrill seeker. He has a boring Tech job during the day and he is a thrill junky after hours. This was his way of putting a thrill into the game. As others have noted he was probably following local forums and logs on the caches to follow what others were saying about his actions.

 

Nothing more than a adrenalin junky with a GPS.

 

Just my 2cts.

 

snow

Share this post


Link to post

My point was that legally, they are most likely considered abandoned property...a point you seem unable to grasp.

Actually, it is totally unknown at this time what the legal status of a cache is in that regard. This court's take on that is one of the things that many of us are waiting to see in this case.

Share this post


Link to post
Ah... The oh so ridiculous "abandoned property" defense. I see. That explains a lot.

I can only speak for myself here, but I can say that none of my caches are abandoned.

A gamepiece, left for a specific function, at a specific location, cannot be considered abandoned.

My game pieces get visited on a regular basis, by folks hunting for them. Definitely not abandoned.

I can see where a muggle might use such a defense, as, having no knowledge of the game, they might think they were abandoned.

But Mr Repak doesn't have the luxury of ignorance.

 

Judging by your response, one can only assume that your caches are abandoned? Is that right?

I realise you checked the little box agreeing to comply with the guidelines, including the maintenance guidelines.

Yet, still, all your caches are abandoned? Shouldn't they be archived?

Since they are abandoned, you'd have no qualms with me cleaning up your litter, right?

I'll be up in St Charles in a few months. Which ones can I take?

I'm looking fondly at "Old Railroad Bridge", "Fulton Overlook Cache" and "Twin Falls". I need more Lock & Locks.

 

My point was that legally, they are most likely considered abandoned property...a point you seem unable to grasp.

 

As far as my stuff, I do maintain my caches quite well. Have I had some stolen before? Yes. Would I call the cops? No, because I realize in a court of law they'd be considered abandoned property. That does not mean that you can come and take them. That would make me very cranky. You would not want to see me cranky.

 

:P

I would contend that since geocaches that are found, watched, maintained, and removed (by the cache owner when the situation calls for it) they are not abandoned.

 

An item is considered abandoned when the owner has no intention of returning to it. Since there is sufficient proof that geocaches are visited by cache owners, you need to prove that "this" cache is abandoned and the cache owner has no intention of returning. You cannot assume it without due process. Otherwise we can assume that the bicycle you left in front of the mini mart is abandoned and although it is locked, you must have abandoned it and is free for the taking.

Share this post


Link to post
Even if he's not convicted, at least everyone now knows who he is.
If he works for AFRL and has a security clearance, this is going to cause him some serious trouble whether or not he is convicted.
It may or may not. It will, of course, pop up as any arrest within a 7 (or 10) year period, depending on the level of clearance. But my understanding is that adjudicators will look at a person's entire life and the context of the infraction. Taking a small magnetic container that was left someplace may not be a problem if the rest of his history is clean.
When they take a look into this they will probably find not one "small magnetic container" but a history of seeking caches for the removal from the game. This guy is someone who had a lot going for him and now his

boss(es) are gonna be lloking at all that he has done for years. Security is a big deal.

 

What this guy was doing was very weird. I know that waht we do is weird but we are not grinches out to spread sorrow and misery.

 

What I think will come of this is the judge won't send him to jail but he might recommend some psychiatric observation and counseling. He may get mental care through the Air Force as he spends the rest of his last tour scrubbing trash cans and replacing urinal cakes. I think he won't be in the Research Laboratory long.

I seriously doubt that the judge is going to send him to any kind of counseling. Heck, the judge may not even hear this case. If he does, it's likely it will be to simply approve a deal that the twqo sides have already struck.

 

Also, it should be noted that this individual is not in the military.

Edited by sbell111

Share this post


Link to post

I have some very dear friends who campaign every day to get people to stop using the word. Think about it. :P

 

http://therword.org/

 

According to dictionary.com, the word can be used to mean "A slowing down or hindering of progress". It's also a music term referring to the slowing down of tempo.

 

I apologize if my comment offended anyone. The comment was clearly describing an argument, not a person. We have many choices in life. Being angry is a choice. Being offended is a choice. Something to think about.

Share this post


Link to post

He already believes that what he did was perfectly justified, (AKA: OK), or he would not have done it.

 

Have you ever done anything wrong CR? Being justified is not the same thing. We use justification to do something wrong that we know is wrong. I've done many things that I knew were wrong, but used some justification so I would feel better about it. At no time did I ever think it was right

 

Morality is not based on the law... The law is based on morality.

That's an odd statement from someone who believes that theft of something with a value of less than $20 should not be criminal. :P

 

Doesn't the 8th Commandment say something about not stealing?

I would certainly see that as a moral issue.

Should the law be based upon those morals?

Or should the Commandment be altered to fit the times?

Thou Shalt Not Steal Anything That RoN Says Is Valuable? :lol:

 

If someone gave me an extra $1 in change at the grocery store, I feel it would be wrong for me to keep it and I would return it.

 

Let me ask you this CR - Let's say you left a $10 bill on a table at a store and came back to find someone had taken it. You'd be bummed, no? Let's say you approached the manager of the store and told him that someone took your $10 bill and you wanted him to go through surveillance tape to find out who took it. The manager tells you that he will go through the tapes, but he'll have to charge you for the labor for the employee to get the evidence.

 

How much would you pay to find the person who stole your $10 so you could prosecute them?

 

Would it be worth it to go through all the time and hassle when you knew that when they caught the guy, he'd probably only get a slap on the wrist?

 

Would you choosing not to spend the money to collect the evidence be advocating for stealing?

 

Yeah... Sounds kind of silly doesn't it!

Edited by ReadyOrNot

Share this post


Link to post
My point was that legally, they are most likely considered abandoned property.

And you base this on which legal precedent? Two months prior to opening day of archery season, my tree stand is in the woods. I would argue that it is not abandoned, because it was placed at that spot, by me, for a very specific purpose, and it will be removed, by me, once that purpose has concluded. When I used to set up orientation courses, I would leave the markers out in the woods. I would argue that these are also not abandoned, because they were placed, by me, for a very specific purpose, and were removed, by me, once that purpose was concluded.

 

Kinda like geocaches.

 

A person who has absolutely no knowledge of hunting could stumble across my tree stand, see that it's covered in leaves, bird droppings and other indicators which might lead them to believe it had been abandoned. A person utterly clueless about orienteering could stumble across a marker, see that it is stained and sun faded, which might lead them to believe it was abandoned.

 

If they took either the tree stand or the marker out of the woods, they could easily argue that they had no intent to deprive anyone of any property, which is a key element in a successful theft prosecution. The same thing applies to caches. A muggle, caught red handed hoofing an ammo can out of the woods would likely never be prosecuted because they lack the understanding that a cache is not abandoned. Mr Repak would not be able to successfully employ such a defense... a concept you seem to be unable to grasp. :wub:

Share this post


Link to post

Would have been interesting if this guy had run into the guy described in the other thread...

Share this post


Link to post
Let's say you left a $10 bill on a table at a store and came back to find someone had taken it.

Oooh... Strawmen! I like it!

 

So, you are equating me being forgetful/careless with my money, with someone intentionally stealing.

 

OK... :wub:

 

Your arguments keep getting sillier, to the point where I suspect you know you're wrong, and you are only tossing out this dreck because to not do so would be to lose face. But so long as you are pretending to be serious, I suppose I can play along.

 

A ten dollar bill, forgotten on a table, is quite a bit different than an ammo can, intentionally placed in a hollow cypress tree, for an express purpose.

 

Your notion of a store manager charging for labor to review a security tape is foolish, at best. Assuming they had security cameras in place, they were put there as a security measure, to protect both the store's assets, and the customer. There is not a store on the planet that would so much as suggest charging a customer who had been victimized, in attempting to determine who had victimized them. But you already knew that, didn't you.

 

So, have we established that $20 is your official limit at which point theft is not worth prosecuting?

Share this post


Link to post
I would contend that since geocaches that are found, watched, maintained, and removed (by the cache owner when the situation calls for it) they are not abandoned.

He knows. He's just being contentious. :wub:

Share this post


Link to post
Let's say you left a $10 bill on a table at a store and came back to find someone had taken it.

Oooh... Strawmen! I like it!

 

So, you are equating me being forgetful/careless with my money, with someone intentionally stealing.

 

OK... :wub:

 

Boy, you missed this one by a mile. The person that stole your $10 is the person I am equating to stealing. You are purposely ignoring the entire point of my argument, because I suspect you can see the light. To what ends would you go to prosecute someone who stole $10 from you? At what point would you say, "Oh, never mind, they obviously needed it more than I did"... And when you reach that point, would you be condoning theft?

Share this post


Link to post

I don't know why this happens but I posted this a short while ago and it didn't take. :P I guess I will try again.

 

He already believes that what he did was perfectly justified, (AKA: OK), or he would not have done it.

 

Have you ever done anything wrong CR? Being justified is not the same thing. We use justification to do something wrong that we know is wrong. I've done many things that I knew were wrong, but used some justification so I would feel better about it. At no time did I ever think it was right

 

Morality is not based on the law... The law is based on morality.

That's an odd statement from someone who believes that theft of something with a value of less than $20 should not be criminal. :wub:

 

Doesn't the 8th Commandment say something about not stealing?

I would certainly see that as a moral issue.

Should the law be based upon those morals?

Or should the Commandment be altered to fit the times?

Thou Shalt Not Steal Anything That RoN Says Is Valuable? :blink:

 

If someone gave me an extra $1 in change at the grocery store, I feel it would be wrong for me to keep it and I would return it.

 

Let me ask you this CR - Let's say you left a $10 bill on a table at a store and came back to find someone had taken it. You'd be bummed, no? Let's say you approached the manager of the store and told him that someone took your $10 bill and you wanted him to go through surveillance tape to find out who took it. The manager tells you that he will go through the tapes, but he'll have to charge you for the labor for the employee to get the evidence.

 

How much would you pay to find the person who stole your $10 so you could prosecute them?

 

Would it be worth it to go through all the time and hassle when you knew that when they caught the guy, he'd probably only get a slap on the wrist?

 

Would you choosing not to spend the money to collect the evidence be advocating for stealing?

 

Yeah... Sounds kind of silly doesn't it!

 

The evidence at hand shows that this guy not only knew what he was doing but had done it before (other logs and such in his possession) and planned to do it again(coordinates for other caches in his possession). If the manager of the store knew he had someone who was repeatedly taking money that belonged to others I would hope he would do everything in his power to stop it. That is what is being done here.

 

Not so silly when you look at it like that, is it?

Share this post


Link to post

So your argument is that Repak needed that hide-a-key? :wub:

 

As a cop, I don't have the luxury of inventing a certain dollar amount at which I would refuse to take action.

I'm still hoping you will do that part for me, since you seem adamant that such a cut off exists.

So, is it $20? You were tossing that figure about a while ago.

 

Personally, I was raised to believe theft was wrong, without any qualifying dollar amount.

 

I was also raised to believe that if something is wrong, ignoring it is not a workable preventative measure.

 

Someone with a penchant for thievery, who discovers they can steal $19.99 worth of stuff without any fear of repercussion, will quite likely continue to steal right below the RoN cutoff level, victimizing more and more people every day. Trivializing criminal activity has, historically, never prevented criminal activity.

Share this post


Link to post

The evidence at hand shows that this guy not only knew what he was doing but had done it before (other logs and such in his possession) and planned to do it again(coordinates for other caches in his possession). If the manager of the store knew he had someone who was repeatedly taking money that belonged to others I would hope he would do everything in his power to stop it. That is what is being done here.

 

Not so silly when you look at it like that, is it?

 

I'm trying to figure out how saying, "It's a waste of time and money to prosecute this guy" somehow equates to me saying that theft is OK and cool for the kids to do.

 

Until they charge this guy with more than 1 count of theft, your argument is moot and doesn't hold a drip of water. Until then, how about debating on fact and not conjecture?

Share this post


Link to post

So your argument is that Repak needed that hide-a-key? :wub:

I don't know what Mr. Repak needed.

 

As a cop, I don't have the luxury of inventing a certain dollar amount at which I would refuse to take action.

I'm still hoping you will do that part for me, since you seem adamant that such a cut off exists.

So, is it $20? You were tossing that figure about a while ago.

As a cop, your job is to respond to the call and determine if a crime was committed, no?

Personally, I was raised to believe theft was wrong, without any qualifying dollar amount.

Yup, me too!

I was also raised to believe that if something is wrong, ignoring it is not a workable preventative measure.

Sounds like your beef is with the DA, not me. Going by your logic thus far, when a DA chooses not to prosecute a case, for whatever reason, they are condoning the crime that was committed?

 

Someone with a penchant for thievery, who discovers they can steal $19.99 worth of stuff without any fear of repercussion, will quite likely continue to steal right below the RoN cutoff level, victimizing more and more people every day. Trivializing criminal activity has, historically, never prevented criminal activity.

Right again! What are we arguing about? Oh yeah, somehow I condone theft because I think it's a waste of time to prosecute the case if they are only going to charge him with 1 count... And the DA is condoning theft if they choose not to waste time and money prosecuting 1 count of petty theft. Am I getting your logic correct here?

Edited by ReadyOrNot

Share this post


Link to post

It isn't unusual in cases like this for only one count to be prosecuted. The evidence was there in the guys possession. The authorities decided to not put in the effort to connect the dots on the rest.

 

If nothing else happens to him I hope it has been enough of a hassle to him to keep him from going back to his old ways.

Share this post


Link to post

It isn't unusual in cases like this for only one count to be prosecuted. The evidence was there in the guys possession. The authorities decided to not put in the effort to connect the dots on the rest.

 

If nothing else happens to him I hope it has been enough of a hassle to him to keep him from going back to his old ways.

 

The authorities are condoning theft because they didn't gather enough evidence. Aren't they sending a message that you can steal hundreds of Geocaches and not suffer any substantial punishment? The authorities in New York are destroying Geocaching because of their handling of this case.

 

(just trying to sum up all the bad debate methods that have been used up to this point)

Share this post


Link to post

As a cop, I don't have the luxury of inventing a certain dollar amount at which I would refuse to take action.

 

Tell me with a straight face that you've arrested everyone for every crime they have committed. Tell me that every time you've pulled over a speeder, you've given them a ticket. If so, I shall refer to you from now on as "Clan Riffster - Enforcer of justice"

Share this post


Link to post
Personally, I was raised to believe theft was wrong, without any qualifying dollar amount.

 

To me, morality is a huge grey area. There are certain instances where theft is acceptable.

 

Just saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Personally, I was raised to believe theft was wrong, without any qualifying dollar amount.

 

To me, morality is a huge grey area. There are certain instances where theft is acceptable.

 

Just saying.

 

You going to leave us hanging? What instances? Morality is black and white for me, but I also understand that others can have incorrect views that do not coincide with my correct views :wub:

Share this post


Link to post

Here is what I've learned from this thread.

 

Some people believe that putting a key holder on a newspaper box is abandoning the keyholder but leaning a bike against the same newspaper box is not abandonment.

 

Some people believe that a ten dollar bill left at a table and then taken is theft but an ammo can being taken from a hiding spot on public property is A-OK.

 

Some people equate a nano on a stop sign with a car parked in the restaurant parking lot.

 

Some people think Paul Repak didn't break any laws because he's only charged with one cache theft even though there were several "previously placed" caches in his car and a list of others.

 

Some people belive that beng found "not guilty" in court is the same as being innocent or of actually being not guilty. Those same people seem to believe the court of public opinion needs hard legal facts and can't rely on overwhelming circumstantial evidence.

 

And, oh, so much more.

Edited by bittsen

Share this post


Link to post

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...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 15

×
×
  • Create New...