Darn that private security!

[+Dragery]

Keep in mind people, this is a game, and different people play it different ways, no need to take up arms over 1 cache where you don't agree with the circumstances in which it's placed. Simply put if it doesn't sound like your cup-o-tea, I don't expect you to search for it.

I am not going to jump up and down, yelling "You are giving geocaching a black eye!", but to a certain extent, we all represent Geocachers each and every time we go out there, and our reputation is an important part of our ability to continue with our activity. Did your behavior enhance our reputation?

 

I would guess his opinion on matter remains neutral, seeing as I (thankfully) exhibited no sign of being a geocacher To him I was just another drunk moron passing by (Yeah you can quote and bold that part and throw it back at me if anyone would like)

[+Don_J]

 

I wouldn't expect anyone to lie about their intentions when confronted while looking for a cache. I'd personally rather not get confronted tho.

 

Yet, your intention is to set up the rest of us for just that? Because you think it will give us a thrill?

 

You entered the lot twice in 45 mins and were immediately confronted. What happens to the first cacher that looks for it?

 

We share the same reviewers and I know how they operate. As soon as the first cacher shares their "thrilling" experience with them. Instant archival.

 

Reminds me of a cache at the Citizens Bank Arena in Ontario. Almost every other log is about people being asked to leave by security, when it was finally my turn to get it, my first attempt security pulled up right away, I came back later and made the grab before they pulled up One of my most memorable. Keep in mind people, this is a game, and different people play it different ways, no need to take up arms over 1 cache where you don't agree with the circumstances in which it's placed. Simply put if it doesn't sound like your cup-o-tea, I don't expect you to search for it.

 

My concern is not with playing the game differently, or ignoring a single cache. It is with intentionally luring cachers into what will obviously become an uncomfortable situation for them. Imagine a cacher looking for his first cache, or someone with a car full of kids. They will probably quit the game on the spot.

 

There will always be a certain amount of unintended circumstances when searching for urban caches, but the difference here is that you are intentionally setting cachers up for a confrontation. I think that shows a lack of respect for the game and it's players.

[+Dragery]

 

I wouldn't expect anyone to lie about their intentions when confronted while looking for a cache. I'd personally rather not get confronted tho.

 

Yet, your intention is to set up the rest of us for just that? Because you think it will give us a thrill?

 

You entered the lot twice in 45 mins and were immediately confronted. What happens to the first cacher that looks for it?

 

We share the same reviewers and I know how they operate. As soon as the first cacher shares their "thrilling" experience with them. Instant archival.

 

Reminds me of a cache at the Citizens Bank Arena in Ontario. Almost every other log is about people being asked to leave by security, when it was finally my turn to get it, my first attempt security pulled up right away, I came back later and made the grab before they pulled up One of my most memorable. Keep in mind people, this is a game, and different people play it different ways, no need to take up arms over 1 cache where you don't agree with the circumstances in which it's placed. Simply put if it doesn't sound like your cup-o-tea, I don't expect you to search for it.

 

My concern is not with playing the game differently, or ignoring a single cache. It is with intentionally luring cachers into what will obviously become an uncomfortable situation for them. Imagine a cacher looking for his first cache, or someone with a car full of kids. They will probably quit the game on the spot.

 

There will always be a certain amount of unintended circumstances when searching for urban caches, but the difference here is that you are intentionally setting cachers up for a confrontation. I think that shows a lack of respect for the game and it's players.

 

I added a note in the description advising against looking for the cache at night due to the uninformed security guard, I may take it upon myself to bridge the gap with him soon. For the time being it will be preferable to search during the day for this cache once it's published.

 

As for someone quitting after being confronted by a security guard... Umm all i can say is maybe this isn't the game for them, because even after 4 run ins with LEO's who were unaware of what geocaching was. It can, and will happen. It's an unfortunate factor in this game we all play.

[+tozainamboku]

Keep in mind people, this is a game, and different people play it different ways, no need to take up arms over 1 cache where you don't agree with the circumstances in which it's placed. Simply put if it doesn't sound like your cup-o-tea, I don't expect you to search for it.

I am not going to jump up and down, yelling "You are giving geocaching a black eye!", but to a certain extent, we all represent Geocachers each and every time we go out there, and our reputation is an important part of our ability to continue with our activity. Did your behavior enhance our reputation?

There's not many things I agree with Dragery on. But clearly some people enjoy being stealthy when they look for caches. This isn't much different than people who bushwhack through brush risking stepping on a rattlesnake or wade nipple deep through alligator infested swamps. Each person is able to decide whether or not they are comfortable looking for a cache.

 

The issue of whether it gives geocachers a bad reputation or not is overblown. There are probably more people that get upset with geocachers disturbing reptiles and leaving geotrails while looking for a rural cache than get upset that cache is hidden in a parking lot without permission. After all if the cache is there without permission you can just apologize for being there, leave, and post a NA later. Anyway, the OP says he had permission to hide his cache. It sounds like a security guard from another location decided to check out something in the next lot.

 

I find people who like to seek urban hides at night a strange breed. If I go at night, I'm pretty selective about where I stop. That way I avoid having to confront angry neighbors and security guards. But if someone is willing to risk that confrontation, I trust they will either make up some excuse and never let on that there is a geocache there or they will be honest about what they are doing and if neccessary explain that the cache can be archived to prevent more problems. Either way, these events are not going spell the end of geocaching or reflect badly on any geoachers other than possibly a cache owner who should have gotten permission.

 

Just another example. I was FTF a couple of week ago of a cache hidden out on the street in front of the Playboy mansion in Los Angeles. I'm sure security knew I was there. It was mid-morning and several people coming to work at the mansion drove right by me as they pulled up to the gate to be buzzed in. I was close enough to hear the conversations these people had with guard on the intercom. Later that night a couple of other cachers stopped to look for the cache. As it got dark and they started using their flashlights, the guard came down to the gate to see what they were doing. The guard simply asked if they needed help. He probably thought they were tourists just looking for a spot to take a picture. Anyhow they left and posted DNFs saying they didn't think it was a good spot for a cache. IMO, it's a great spot for a cache. Look for it in the daytime (despite the cache owner's suggestion to look at night and avoid the tour busses that pass by every few minutes). And I suspect that once the guards do find out it's there they will have some fun watching the geocachers looking for it.

[knowschad]

Keep in mind people, this is a game, and different people play it different ways, no need to take up arms over 1 cache where you don't agree with the circumstances in which it's placed. Simply put if it doesn't sound like your cup-o-tea, I don't expect you to search for it.

I am not going to jump up and down, yelling "You are giving geocaching a black eye!", but to a certain extent, we all represent Geocachers each and every time we go out there, and our reputation is an important part of our ability to continue with our activity. Did your behavior enhance our reputation?

There's not many things I agree with Dragery on... <snipped for brevity>

I was not referring to people looking for the cache. I was referring to the OP's behavior while hiding the cache.

[Robocision]

I simply refuse to use "stealth." We're normal people, not trained operatives. Believe it or not, YOU are unable to use stealth. If by "stealth" you mean "sit in your car and finish your Big Mac while you wait for the nearest muggle to leave", then yeah I guess you do use stealth. I may wait until the coast is relatively clear before grabbing a cache, but I refuse to sneak around. If it's out in the open like that, then it probably shouldn't be there. It's going to be muggled sooner or later.

[+Dragery]

I simply refuse to use "stealth." We're normal people, not trained operatives. Believe it or not, YOU are unable to use stealth. If by "stealth" you mean "sit in your car and finish your Big Mac while you wait for the nearest muggle to leave", then yeah I guess you do use stealth. I may wait until the coast is relatively clear before grabbing a cache, but I refuse to sneak around. If it's out in the open like that, then it probably shouldn't be there. It's going to be muggled sooner or later.

 

Lol, it'll only get muggled sooner or later if people like you, who don't bother not looking suspicious, go looking for it. I like your comment for one of the last caches you found

 

"Wow, I found this cache on primary voting day! Mugglers EVERYWHERE. Got some strange looks as I was walking into the brush. Good times though. Mosquitos were crazy."

 

Yeah, that's how caches get muggled.

[Mr.Yuck]

I simply refuse to use "stealth." We're normal people, not trained operatives. Believe it or not, YOU are unable to use stealth. If by "stealth" you mean "sit in your car and finish your Big Mac while you wait for the nearest muggle to leave", then yeah I guess you do use stealth. I may wait until the coast is relatively clear before grabbing a cache, but I refuse to sneak around. If it's out in the open like that, then it probably shouldn't be there. It's going to be muggled sooner or later.

 

Lol, it'll only get muggled sooner or later if people like you, who don't bother not looking suspicious, go looking for it. I like your comment for one of the last caches you found

 

"Wow, I found this cache on primary voting day! Mugglers EVERYWHERE. Got some strange looks as I was walking into the brush. Good times though. Mosquitos were crazy."

 

Yeah, that's how caches get muggled.

 

No sir, I don't like it. You have the "blame the finder" mentality. If you don't want your caches muggled, don't put them in places where people are likely to be seen retrieving them. Especially in the case of a parking lot micro (which this is), in which the finders generally tend to be after the quick smiley (in my opinion). I would never blame a finder for not being "stealthy enough" if one of my caches got muggled. I would consider it my own fault for putting it there.

[+Dragery]

I simply refuse to use "stealth." We're normal people, not trained operatives. Believe it or not, YOU are unable to use stealth. If by "stealth" you mean "sit in your car and finish your Big Mac while you wait for the nearest muggle to leave", then yeah I guess you do use stealth. I may wait until the coast is relatively clear before grabbing a cache, but I refuse to sneak around. If it's out in the open like that, then it probably shouldn't be there. It's going to be muggled sooner or later.

 

Lol, it'll only get muggled sooner or later if people like you, who don't bother not looking suspicious, go looking for it. I like your comment for one of the last caches you found

 

"Wow, I found this cache on primary voting day! Mugglers EVERYWHERE. Got some strange looks as I was walking into the brush. Good times though. Mosquitos were crazy."

 

Yeah, that's how caches get muggled.

 

No sir, I don't like it. You have the "blame the finder" mentality. If you don't want your caches muggled, don't put them in places where people are likely to be seen retrieving them. Especially in the case of a parking lot micro (which this is), in which the finders generally tend to be after the quick smiley (in my opinion). I would never blame a finder for not being "stealthy enough" if one of my caches got muggled. I would consider it my own fault for putting it there.

 

Then I encourage you to never attempt to find anything I hide, or a good majority of geocaches in this area. Not like you were going to anyways.

 

But the locals around here appreciated the hide, got a couple phone calls saying it was good to finally have a hard new hide. They even had visitors from the office building while searching The lady, and the ~10 people watching from the 2nd story break room thought geocaching looked awesome after the finder explained it to them. It's a process getting everyone informed. You can't have everyone there at once for a meeting to explain that you're putting a cache in the area. So you get the permission, and let the rest find out as they see fit. I expect within a week or so a good amount of workers at the building next door will know of geocaching, hopefully a few of them give it a try, and hopefully I smooth things over with this security guard.

[+wimseyguy]

No sir, I don't like it. You have the "blame the finder" mentality. If you don't want your caches muggled, don't put them in places where people are likely to be seen retrieving them. Especially in the case of a parking lot micro (which this is), in which the finders generally tend to be after the quick smiley (in my opinion). I would never blame a finder for not being "stealthy enough" if one of my caches got muggled. I would consider it my own fault for putting it there.

 

+15

what not +1 you say, nope 15 for each urban/greenway micro hide I have placed. Oddly the one that has been the biggest maintenance headache is on a fairly quiet greenway. The inyourface urban ones have required minimal maintenance.

Edited August 5, 2010 by wimseyguy

[+DragonsWest]

No sir, I don't like it. You have the "blame the finder" mentality. If you don't want your caches muggled, don't put them in places where people are likely to be seen retrieving them. Especially in the case of a parking lot micro (which this is), in which the finders generally tend to be after the quick smiley (in my opinion). I would never blame a finder for not being "stealthy enough" if one of my caches got muggled. I would consider it my own fault for putting it there.

 

+15

what not +1 you say, nope 15 for each urban/greenway micro hide I have placed. Oddly the one that has been the biggest maintenance headache is on a fairly quiet greenway. The inyourface urban ones have required minimal maintenance.

 

That's proof that Murphy's Law works.

 

Same here. The ones right out in the open seem to fare quite well, while the ones deep in the park, away from the mob, go missing.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

Security guards come and go; if they get any briefing on the property at all it isn't likely to cover that there is a geocache on the property.

 

International Park Cache for instance, GCHHB7, has the permission of the realty company and building management, has been been found 132 times since January 1 2004, and security still runs off cachers now and then because they don't know it's there!

 

The logs, especially mid-2004, are a hoot - having permission made dodging security (whom we generically called "Lewis the Security Guard" (imagine Barney Fife) into a bit of a game.

[+EscapeFromFlatland]

My geofriend had one published. Full permision from the occupants and owners of the building. The building and parking lot has a state patrol officer stationed there (Government office). He came out to question me. I was honest and friendly. I found out after I left he removed the cache. It was replaced, and he removed it again. He knows that she has permission to place it there, but still kept removing it. It is now archived. Try to work with the security.

 

Sue the state patrol for unlawful seizure of property.

[Mr.Yuck]

No sir, I don't like it. You have the "blame the finder" mentality. If you don't want your caches muggled, don't put them in places where people are likely to be seen retrieving them. Especially in the case of a parking lot micro (which this is), in which the finders generally tend to be after the quick smiley (in my opinion). I would never blame a finder for not being "stealthy enough" if one of my caches got muggled. I would consider it my own fault for putting it there.

 

+15

what not +1 you say, nope 15 for each urban/greenway micro hide I have placed. Oddly the one that has been the biggest maintenance headache is on a fairly quiet greenway. The inyourface urban ones have required minimal maintenance.

 

This must be misunderstand TWU day. I wasn't saying that if you put caches in an urban environment where people can be observed logging them that they absolutely are going to get muggled every time. I was saying that cache owners should not blame finders for not using stealth if they do get muggled. I'm sure you agreed with that last sentence somewhere on page 1, which I can't see as I'm typing this.

[+Harry Dolphin]

"Stealth Required" is usually a euphemism for "there really ought not to be a cache here."

 

While OP's cache sounds like a terrible concept, I find your response to be very provincial, and even insulting to cache owners who hide caches in popular parks, with tremendous views. I bring you here for the view. Tour buses also bring people here for the views. Wedding parties love to have their pictures taken here! "Stealth Required" Yup! It's best if you use stealth. And, by all means enjoy the view! But, to say what you said, is very insulting, and shows no comprehension of the real world.

[+mountainman38]

...Statments like "It is the COs problem" make you sound like an ignorant jerk.

Nope -- they make it sound like he's an adult, who isn't interested in sneaking around dimly lit parking lots trying to find ill-advised caches.

 

Your condescending statement, on the other hand, tends to put you in that category.

[+Dragery]

http://www.cacheopedia.com/wiki/Stealth

A quote from the 'unofficial' description:

"Hiding the geocache is not enough, though. Our actions can give away the location of the geocache. Try to not be observed when hunting, locating, retrieving, and replacing the geocache. If it is impossible to not be observed, then the next best thing is act like you are doing something ordinary so no one will think twice. If it will be obvious that you will compromise the geocache location, many hunters will opt to leave the area and try at another time instead of risking the cache location."

 

After a lot of reading, I understand there is a divide on the issue of stealth, some like it, some don't. But the general consensus on handling "Stealth required" hides is to A) Don't do them. B ) Use the required discretion or stealth as to not draw undesired attention towards you and/or the cache location so it doesn't get compromised. While I personally wouldn't get upset over a missing cache after a lack of stealth, it's naive to think the finder has no responsibility in maintaining the integrity of the hide itself at the request of the cache owner.

 

In the end, users who enjoy stealthy urban micros will very much enjoy doing them, and those who do not will skip them. I personally just go for whichever is next on my list, and prepare accordingly.

Edited August 6, 2010 by Dragery

[+rachanel]

today, i went to a cache that was guarded with hobos...

 

One of those robbed me from my FTF last week because he was sleeping at GZ! I tried to sneak around behind him without waking him up, but I would have had to go within like 10 feet of him, and I figured that wasn't very wise...

i guess there is another cache that i wanna go to in chicago that has the same homeless guy in front of it everyday panhandling...

[Robocision]

http://www.cacheopedia.com/wiki/Stealth

A quote from the 'unofficial' description:

"Hiding the geocache is not enough, though. Our actions can give away the location of the geocache. Try to not be observed when hunting, locating, retrieving, and replacing the geocache. If it is impossible to not be observed, then the next best thing is act like you are doing something ordinary so no one will think twice. If it will be obvious that you will compromise the geocache location, many hunters will opt to leave the area and try at another time instead of risking the cache location."

 

After a lot of reading, I understand there is a divide on the issue of stealth, some like it, some don't. But the general consensus on handling "Stealth required" hides is to A) Don't do them. B ) Use the required discretion or stealth as to not draw undesired attention towards you and/or the cache location so it doesn't get compromised. While I personally wouldn't get upset over a missing cache after a lack of stealth, it's naive to think the finder has no responsibility in maintaining the integrity of the hide itself at the request of the cache owner.

 

In the end, users who enjoy stealthy urban micros will very much enjoy doing them, and those who do not will skip them. I personally just go for whichever is next on my list, and prepare accordingly.

 

Whatever man. If there's a cache nearby, I'm going to find it. I'm not going to draw attention from the authorities to myself by acting sneaky/stealthily. People like you and I will never see eye to eye so...

 

EDIT: In regards to the cache in which you quoted my log, it's busy even on a non-voting day. I'm not going to sneak around a school looking shady no matter what the circumstances are. I don't need people thinking I'm bombing the place or I am a chester. Sorry if it gets muggled. Find a better spot for it next time.

Edited August 6, 2010 by Robocision

[knowschad]

"Stealth Required" is usually a euphemism for "there really ought not to be a cache here."

 

While OP's cache sounds like a terrible concept, I find your response to be very provincial, and even insulting to cache owners who hide caches in popular parks, with tremendous views. I bring you here for the view. Tour buses also bring people here for the views. Wedding parties love to have their pictures taken here! "Stealth Required" Yup! It's best if you use stealth. And, by all means enjoy the view! But, to say what you said, is very insulting, and shows no comprehension of the real world.

Yeah, good points, but I'm sure that you know the caches that she was referring to, and they had no bearing on the caches that you are referring to.

[+Dragery]

I'm not going to sneak around a school looking shady no matter what the circumstances are. I don't need people thinking I'm bombing the place or I am a chester. Sorry if it gets muggled. Find a better spot for it next time.

 

Dude, I think you take the term "stealthy" WAY to literally, you're not supposed to tip toe around looking over your shoulder every other second. Just exhibit some confidence, that alone is enough "stealth" for most populated area.

Edited August 6, 2010 by Dragery

[Robocision]

I'm not going to sneak around a school looking shady no matter what the circumstances are. I don't need people thinking I'm bombing the place or I am a chester. Sorry if it gets muggled. Find a better spot for it next time.

 

Dude, I think you take the term "stealthy" WAY to literally, you're not supposed to tip toe around looking over your shoulder every other second. Just exhibit some confidence, that alone is enough "stealth" for most populated area.

 

This is what I'm saying. I got out of my Jeep, walked into the woods next to the school. Looking confident and using stealth are not even remotely close to being related.

[+Dragery]

 

This is what I'm saying. I got out of my Jeep, walked into the woods next to the school. Looking confident and using stealth are not even remotely close to being related.

 

Alright, I think I've found the root of our miscommunication. In Geocaching, looking confident can be considered being stealthy. WHATEVER helps you not stand out is an example of being stealthy. Think of it as camouflaging yourself with the atmosphere around you. Not many people will even think twice of someone who LOOKS like they belong there.

 

Glad we got that cleared up

[+ZeLonewolf]

I make no attempts to be stealthy, I just walk up to GZ and start searching. If somebody sees me retrieving and removing the cache, it's not my problem -- it's the COs problem for putting it somewhere inappropriate. In these terrorism-crazed times, the LAST thing I want to do is to act "stealthy" or "sneaky" while removing/replacing a small container in a public place. If a cop pulls up while I'm searching, I keep searching until he walks up to me an addresses me. I'm not doing anything wrong or illegal, however, if I'm acting "sneaky" or "stealthy", than it sure looks like I'm doing something wrong or illegal which is why I refuse to do it.

 

Well I think that you are also missguided. Although you should not have to avoid LEO when caching, it is realy your job to not draw muggle attention to a cache. If you don't think you can, then don't look for it. But, I will aggree that your technique is often the best for not attrachting attention. And your statments about the cops are totaly correct, don't want to appear sneaky.

 

Statments like "It is the COs problem" make you sound like an ignorant jerk.

 

You can call me any name you like, however, there is an implicit relationship between hider and finder. My responsibility as a finder is to return the cache as I found it, and report any problems with the cache (log wet, cache broken, etc). My responsibility as a hider is to ensure that the place I've selected for the hide is environmentally sensitive, has the permission of the land owner, and is likely to remain in place on a long-term basis. The onus is on the hider to hide in an appropriate location. If I need to use a cloak-and-dagger routine to keep the cache from being muggled, it's A BAD HIDE. I will not use stealth, period, ever, and if my lack of stealth causes a cache to go missing, it should be an indication to the cache owner that THIS IS NOT A GOOD SPOT FOR A HIDE.

 

IMO, Geocaching is a totally legit and family friendly activity, and encouraging people to be stealthy undermines the sport by setting people up to act in a way that may lead to a negative interaction with law enforcement or the public, who are likely to get the understanding that caching is fundamentally based in trespassing. My not being stealthy SPECIFICALLY helps to weed out those caches that have no business being there in the first place. Not to mention, looking like you belong there is usually better cover than trying to apply stealth!

[+Dragery]

 

You can call me any name you like, however, there is an implicit relationship between hider and finder. My responsibility as a finder is to return the cache as I found it, and report any problems with the cache (log wet, cache broken, etc). My responsibility as a hider is to ensure that the place I've selected for the hide is environmentally sensitive, has the permission of the land owner, and is likely to remain in place on a long-term basis. The onus is on the hider to hide in an appropriate location. If I need to use a cloak-and-dagger routine to keep the cache from being muggled, it's A BAD HIDE. I will not use stealth, period, ever, and if my lack of stealth causes a cache to go missing, it should be an indication to the cache owner that THIS IS NOT A GOOD SPOT FOR A HIDE.

 

IMO, Geocaching is a totally legit and family friendly activity, and encouraging people to be stealthy undermines the sport by setting people up to act in a way that may lead to a negative interaction with law enforcement or the public, who are likely to get the understanding that caching is fundamentally based in trespassing. My not being stealthy SPECIFICALLY helps to weed out those caches that have no business being there in the first place. Not to mention, looking like you belong there is usually better cover than trying to apply stealth!

 

deja vu

[Robocision]

I make no attempts to be stealthy, I just walk up to GZ and start searching. If somebody sees me retrieving and removing the cache, it's not my problem -- it's the COs problem for putting it somewhere inappropriate. In these terrorism-crazed times, the LAST thing I want to do is to act "stealthy" or "sneaky" while removing/replacing a small container in a public place. If a cop pulls up while I'm searching, I keep searching until he walks up to me an addresses me. I'm not doing anything wrong or illegal, however, if I'm acting "sneaky" or "stealthy", than it sure looks like I'm doing something wrong or illegal which is why I refuse to do it.

 

Well I think that you are also missguided. Although you should not have to avoid LEO when caching, it is realy your job to not draw muggle attention to a cache. If you don't think you can, then don't look for it. But, I will aggree that your technique is often the best for not attrachting attention. And your statments about the cops are totaly correct, don't want to appear sneaky.

 

Statments like "It is the COs problem" make you sound like an ignorant jerk.

 

You can call me any name you like, however, there is an implicit relationship between hider and finder. My responsibility as a finder is to return the cache as I found it, and report any problems with the cache (log wet, cache broken, etc). My responsibility as a hider is to ensure that the place I've selected for the hide is environmentally sensitive, has the permission of the land owner, and is likely to remain in place on a long-term basis. The onus is on the hider to hide in an appropriate location. If I need to use a cloak-and-dagger routine to keep the cache from being muggled, it's A BAD HIDE. I will not use stealth, period, ever, and if my lack of stealth causes a cache to go missing, it should be an indication to the cache owner that THIS IS NOT A GOOD SPOT FOR A HIDE.

 

IMO, Geocaching is a totally legit and family friendly activity, and encouraging people to be stealthy undermines the sport by setting people up to act in a way that may lead to a negative interaction with law enforcement or the public, who are likely to get the understanding that caching is fundamentally based in trespassing. My not being stealthy SPECIFICALLY helps to weed out those caches that have no business being there in the first place. Not to mention, looking like you belong there is usually better cover than trying to apply stealth!

 

This. He said it in a much more intelligent fashion than I, however.

[+Dragery]

1 step forward and 2 steps back. Ok I'm done in here

[+tozainamboku]

"Stealth Required" is usually a euphemism for "there really ought not to be a cache here."

 

While OP's cache sounds like a terrible concept, I find your response to be very provincial, and even insulting to cache owners who hide caches in popular parks, with tremendous views. I bring you here for the view. Tour buses also bring people here for the views. Wedding parties love to have their pictures taken here! "Stealth Required" Yup! It's best if you use stealth. And, by all means enjoy the view! But, to say what you said, is very insulting, and shows no comprehension of the real world.

Yeah, good points, but I'm sure that you know the caches that she was referring to, and they had no bearing on the caches that you are referring to.

Sort of like saying "Micro" is a euphemism for "no reason to hide a cache here."

 

It's fine that some people don't enjoy stealth just as some people don't enjoy micros. What's wrong is to say that just because a cache requires stealth means it is not a good place for a cache or because it is a micro means it's a lame hide.

 

Cachers looking for caches with muggles around ought not bring undo attention to the cache. That very well may mean just walking up to it confidently and signing the log instead of trying to be sneaky. Stealth just means not being noticed. It doesn't mean being sneaky. If the finder starts shouting "I found it! Yippee!" when they find the cache and attracts muggles then they are not being stealthy. I would think most cachers would understand this and would be stealthy in high muggle areas. On the other hand, if a hider has placed a cache in a high muggle area where a geocacher is likely to stand out, they really shouldn't be too surprised if the cache is found by muggles.

 

The guidelines say

For all physical caches and waypoints, think carefully about how your container and the actions of geocachers will be perceived by the public.

Stealth required does not necessarily mean that someone looking for a cache will seem suspicious or out of place. Any cacher could act like a fool and attract attention to themselves and the cache, but I believe that cache owners are justified in believing that cachers are not going to do this. On the other hand, in one of the threads on a bomb-squaded cache, I suggested that if a muggle sees you in a parking lot lifting a lamppost cover, it may be a good idea to hold up the cache and show them what you found, so they know it a just a game and not something nefarious.

[+ZeLonewolf]

Stealth just means not being noticed. It doesn't mean being sneaky.

 

Stealth required does not necessarily mean that someone looking for a cache will seem suspicious or out of place.

 

Let's do a quick dictionary check. Courtesy of dictionary.com:

 

Stealth:

 

–noun

1. secret, clandestine, or surreptitious procedure.

2. a furtive departure or entrance.

 

–adjective

1. surreptitious; secret; not openly acknowledged: a stealth hiring of the competitor's CEO; the stealth issue of the presidential race.

 

Seems pretty clear to me. Note that "confidently oblivious to one's surroundings" doesn't seem to qualify as "stealthy"

[knowschad]

"Stealth Required" is usually a euphemism for "there really ought not to be a cache here."

 

While OP's cache sounds like a terrible concept, I find your response to be very provincial, and even insulting to cache owners who hide caches in popular parks, with tremendous views. I bring you here for the view. Tour buses also bring people here for the views. Wedding parties love to have their pictures taken here! "Stealth Required" Yup! It's best if you use stealth. And, by all means enjoy the view! But, to say what you said, is very insulting, and shows no comprehension of the real world.

Yeah, good points, but I'm sure that you know the caches that she was referring to, and they had no bearing on the caches that you are referring to.

Sort of like saying "Micro" is a euphemism for "no reason to hide a cache here."

 

It's fine that some people don't enjoy stealth just as some people don't enjoy micros. What's wrong is to say that just because a cache requires stealth means it is not a good place for a cache or because it is a micro means it's a lame hide.

<snipped for much brevity>

OK, if you won't do it, I will:

 

I refuse to admit that there is no such thing as a bad cache, that it is all about what flavor of ice cream cone you prefer. Quite frankly, shocking as though it may be, most people would spit roasted garlic ice cream out. MOST PEOPLE would not like it. Yeah, there probably are a few, although they also are probably half drunk. But the majority know that roasted garlic ice cream cones would not be something that they would care to try.

[+Dragery]

Stealth just means not being noticed. It doesn't mean being sneaky.

 

Stealth required does not necessarily mean that someone looking for a cache will seem suspicious or out of place.

 

Let's do a quick dictionary check. Courtesy of dictionary.com:

 

Stealth:

 

–noun

1. secret, clandestine, or surreptitious procedure.

2. a furtive departure or entrance.

 

–adjective

1. surreptitious; secret; not openly acknowledged: a stealth hiring of the competitor's CEO; the stealth issue of the presidential race.

 

Seems pretty clear to me. Note that "confidently oblivious to one's surroundings" doesn't seem to qualify as "stealthy"

 

I already had this chat with the other dude above you. You're taking the term WAY TO LITERALLY. Use the widely accepted geocaching version of the term. Come on, you're an engineer, use that brain of yours.

[+mountainman38]

.......Let's do a quick dictionary check. Courtesy of dictionary.com:

 

Stealth:

 

–noun

1. secret, clandestine, or surreptitious procedure.

2. a furtive departure or entrance.

 

–adjective

1. surreptitious; secret; not openly acknowledged: a stealth hiring of the competitor's CEO; the stealth issue of the presidential race.

 

Seems pretty clear to me. Note that "confidently oblivious to one's surroundings" doesn't seem to qualify as "stealthy"

 

I already had this chat with the other dude above you. You're taking the term WAY TO LITERALLY. Use the widely accepted geocaching version of the term. Come on, you're an engineer, use that brain of yours.

Why the nasty tone there, dragery? He clearly IS using his brain, to use the english language as it was intended -- not just reinvent it as it suits him, to fit whatever definition he chooses, as you have done here.

 

You've been caching what, two months now? And you've had 4 run-ins with the law?! Granted, you're in a more populous area than I am, but in the nine months I've been caching I've never had even a glance from a passing representative of the law.

 

Maybe I've just been lucky, but for you to say that "It's just part of the game we all play" is incorrect.

Edited August 6, 2010 by mountainman38

[+Dragery]

1st run in private security pulled up on me, it was 11pm at night I was in my business attire walking around a sprinkler piping system in an empty parking lot, I explained what geocaching was, they dug it and left.

 

2nd time was behind Citizens Business Bank Arena, under a transformer box behind their corporate building, as the security pulled up, I left before they got out of the car, it was too early and I didn't want to deal with it.

 

3rd I walked up to a lamp post hide, there were 2 water bottles on it, I moved them and got the cache, as I was driving away I noticed a security guard walking towards the lamp, fearing it may get muggled by the guard I turned my car around, returned, asked her if she was wondering what I was doing. I explained geocaching, she was cool about it, she was just wondering why I was moving her water bottles

 

4th.. Umm ok I guess I exaggerated in my initial claim of "4 run ins with LEO's".

 

Being in such a populated area does have an effect, also the fact that I'm 26 walking around in a suit and tie at 11pm, or 6am doesn't help much. I'll retract my statement about it being part of the game, but I will say it is a potentially unintended side effect, and it's something you deal with. It happens, and it's not that big of a deal.

 

::Edit for age correction, I'm forgetting my age already

Edited August 6, 2010 by Dragery

[+Dragery]

not just reinvent it as it suits him, to fit whatever definition he chooses, as you have done here.

 

They can use whatever definition of the word they please, but if they go looking for caches around my area, I don't doubt they'll rouse suspicion trying to hide behind poles and duck under benches trying to not be seen. Meanwhile the rest of the geocachers will [hopefully] calmly disguise the location in which they found the cache by being nonchalant or discreet.

[+cw1710]

It is always fun to harass security guards. A lot of them take there job way too seriously.

 

On the other hand, I am a police officer and I get off at midnight. This is about the time our reviewer likes to drop caches most of the time. I met someone one night right as I got off to grab an FTF and as we were parked we spotted a very familiar FTF chaser that had just parked (this was the dead end of a neighborhood) so I walked up with the light shining and sternly asked "What are you doing out here?" and could hardly keep from laughing while he (very nervously) explained geocaching to me. Then I laughed and said I know, now lets go find it and he realized who I was.

[+tozainamboku]

He clearly IS using his brain, to use the english language as it was intended -- not just reinvent it as it suits him, to fit whatever definition he chooses, as you have done here.

Relying on some incomplete internet dictionary for definitions of words is not using your brains.

 

There are plenty of threads where it is discussed how to be stealthy when looking for a geocaches. There's wearing a safety vest, carrying a clipboard, talking into you GPS like it is a cell phone, and yes often the suggestion of just walking confidently up to the cache. Stealth clearly is not used here to be mean cloak and dagger hiding in the shadows. In the dictionary it may mean action taken to avoid detection, but in relation to geocaches it means action taken to avoid suspicion by muggles that you are up to something no good and to protect the location of the cache. If you don't understand that and want to discuss the intent of some word in the English language instead feel free. But when people resort to posting dictionary definitions in internet discussions it usually means they don't have a real response to someone's argument. Perhaps we could debate about whether we a different word should be used to describe what is commonly referred to here as stealth, but I think most geocachers understand what is meant.

[+roziecakes]

.......Let's do a quick dictionary check. Courtesy of dictionary.com:

 

Stealth:

 

–noun

1. secret, clandestine, or surreptitious procedure.

2. a furtive departure or entrance.

 

–adjective

1. surreptitious; secret; not openly acknowledged: a stealth hiring of the competitor's CEO; the stealth issue of the presidential race.

 

Seems pretty clear to me. Note that "confidently oblivious to one's surroundings" doesn't seem to qualify as "stealthy"

 

I already had this chat with the other dude above you. You're taking the term WAY TO LITERALLY. Use the widely accepted geocaching version of the term. Come on, you're an engineer, use that brain of yours.

Why the nasty tone there, dragery? He clearly IS using his brain, to use the english language as it was intended -- not just reinvent it as it suits him, to fit whatever definition he chooses, as you have done here.

 

You've been caching what, two months now? And you've had 4 run-ins with the law?! Granted, you're in a more populous area than I am, but in the nine months I've been caching I've never had even a glance from a passing representative of the law.

 

Maybe I've just been lucky, but for you to say that "It's just part of the game we all play" is incorrect.

 

And for some more perspective, I've been caching 4 and a half years mostly in Denver, which is a large urban area, and mostly all over Oregon and have had only one run-in with LEO and it was positive because the dispatcher for the sheriff is a geocacher...

Edited August 6, 2010 by nymphnsatyr

[+Team Cotati]

.......Let's do a quick dictionary check. Courtesy of dictionary.com:

 

Stealth:

 

–noun

1. secret, clandestine, or surreptitious procedure.

2. a furtive departure or entrance.

 

–adjective

1. surreptitious; secret; not openly acknowledged: a stealth hiring of the competitor's CEO; the stealth issue of the presidential race.

 

Seems pretty clear to me. Note that "confidently oblivious to one's surroundings" doesn't seem to qualify as "stealthy"

 

I already had this chat with the other dude above you. You're taking the term WAY TO LITERALLY. Use the widely accepted geocaching version of the term. Come on, you're an engineer, use that brain of yours.

Why the nasty tone there, dragery? He clearly IS using his brain, to use the english language as it was intended -- not just reinvent it as it suits him, to fit whatever definition he chooses, as you have done here.

 

You've been caching what, two months now? And you've had 4 run-ins with the law?! Granted, you're in a more populous area than I am, but in the nine months I've been caching I've never had even a glance from a passing representative of the law.

 

Maybe I've just been lucky, but for you to say that "It's just part of the game we all play" is incorrect.

 

And for some more perspective, I've been caching 4 and a half years mostly in Denver, which is a large urban area, and mostly all over Oregon and have had only one run-in with LEO and it was positive because the dispatcher for the sheriff is a geocacher...

 

What was the nature and content of the dispatch that was communicated to the sheriff's deputy?

[+mountainman38]

It is always fun to harass security guards. A lot of them take there job way too seriously.

 

On the other hand, I am a police officer and I get off at midnight. This is about the time our reviewer likes to drop caches most of the time. I met someone one night right as I got off to grab an FTF and as we were parked we spotted a very familiar FTF chaser that had just parked (this was the dead end of a neighborhood) so I walked up with the light shining and sternly asked "What are you doing out here?" and could hardly keep from laughing while he (very nervously) explained geocaching to me. Then I laughed and said I know, now lets go find it and he realized who I was.

So you used your position as an officer of the law, someone that we should be able to look to for protection from harassment, as a means of harassing someone for your amusement?! Not cool.

 

I've seen people post this type of story before, and it seems to me that any cop (or person in any position of authority) who uses that position to harass someone for their amusement, needs to find a new line of work.

 

I'll try to extend the benefit of the doubt to you, and hope that you hadn't thought of it this way, but that's exactly how your actions come across.

[+roziecakes]

What was the nature and content of the dispatch that was communicated to the sheriff's deputy?

 

I don't think anything was dispatched at the moment... but the story was that I was out at dusk in early spring, looking for a guard rail cache out a country road, and the sheriff pulled up next to me. He looked me up and down and said, "Are you caching?" And I said, "yes!" and he asked if I knew cobraleader312 (except he said her real name) and I said yes, and he said, "Have fun" and drove away.

 

Cobraleader312 worked for the sheriff department, and so they all know what caching is apparently. I believe she even got a sheriff boat escort to a terrain 5 cache once.

 

Which just goes to show that it can be in your favor to be nice to law enforcement... even if they are 'just' a security guard.

Edited August 6, 2010 by nymphnsatyr

[+Don_J]

 

On the other hand, in one of the threads on a bomb-squaded cache, I suggested that if a muggle sees you in a parking lot lifting a lamppost cover, it may be a good idea to hold up the cache and show them what you found, so they know it a just a game and not something nefarious.

 

If It's obvious that I was observed returning a cache to it's hiding place, I tend to stick around for about ten minutes to make it look like I belong there. A common theme with the bomb squad caches is that someone saw someone hide something and then quickly leave the area. This is makes them look suspicious.

[+mountainman38]

He clearly IS using his brain, to use the english language as it was intended -- not just reinvent it as it suits him, to fit whatever definition he chooses, as you have done here.

Relying on some incomplete internet dictionary for definitions of words is not using your brains.

Really? How is this incomplete? Because it doesn't have YOUR definition listed somewhere? Seems like a pretty reasonable source to me. If you have a more credible definition, feel free to post it. If not, just attacking someone else's research proves nothing.

 

There are plenty of threads where it is discussed how to be stealthy when looking for a geocaches. There's wearing a safety vest, carrying a clipboard, talking into you GPS like it is a cell phone, and yes often the suggestion of just walking confidently up to the cache.

True. However, this has nothing to do with whether "Stealth" is the correct term to use for this type of behavior. Deception, misdirection, etc. would fit better.

 

Stealth clearly is not used here to be mean cloak and dagger hiding in the shadows. In the dictionary it may mean action taken to avoid detection, but in relation to geocaches it means action taken to avoid suspicion by muggles that you are up to something no good and to protect the location of the cache.

You don't get to decide when or where a words definition fits. Words have meaning, whether you choose to use them properly or not.

 

If you don't understand that and want to discuss the intent of some word in the English language instead feel free.

I do understand that. I fear you don't, however.

 

But when people resort to posting dictionary definitions in internet discussions it usually means they don't have a real response to someone's argument.

Really? Clarifying a words definition, by showing it's actual meaning, tells you that this person doesn't have a real response? How do you figure?

 

Perhaps we could debate about whether we a different word should be used to describe what is commonly referred to here as stealth, but I think most geocachers understand what is meant.

I agree that the concept of avoiding detection is understood. Calling it by the wrong name certainly doesn't serve any useful purpose, however.

[+SwineFlew]

What was the nature and content of the dispatch that was communicated to the sheriff's deputy?

 

I don't think anything was dispatched at the moment... but the story was that I was out at dusk in early spring, looking for a guard rail cache out a country road, and the sheriff pulled up next to me. He looked me up and down and said, "Are you caching?" And I said, "yes!" and he asked if I knew cobraleader312 (except he said her real name) and I said yes, and he said, "Have fun" and drove away.

 

Cobraleader312 worked for the sheriff department, and so they all know what caching is apparently. I believe she even got a sheriff boat escort to a terrain 5 cache once.

Which just goes to show that it can be in your favor to be nice to law enforcement... even if they are 'just' a security guard.

 

Yep, thats how I heard the story too. LOLZ...

[+Dragery]

It is always fun to harass security guards. A lot of them take there job way too seriously.

 

On the other hand, I am a police officer and I get off at midnight. This is about the time our reviewer likes to drop caches most of the time. I met someone one night right as I got off to grab an FTF and as we were parked we spotted a very familiar FTF chaser that had just parked (this was the dead end of a neighborhood) so I walked up with the light shining and sternly asked "What are you doing out here?" and could hardly keep from laughing while he (very nervously) explained geocaching to me. Then I laughed and said I know, now lets go find it and he realized who I was.

So you used your position as an officer of the law, someone that we should be able to look to for protection from harassment, as a means of harassing someone for your amusement?! Not cool.

 

I've seen people post this type of story before, and it seems to me that any cop (or person in any position of authority) who uses that position to harass someone for their amusement, needs to find a new line of work.

 

I'll try to extend the benefit of the doubt to you, and hope that you hadn't thought of it this way, but that's exactly how your actions come across.

 

Interesting, after a 2 paragraph rant, scolding and finger pointing, you then mention you'll give him the benefit of the doubt, contradicting your entire rant. And why did you post that then? I thought it was a funny story. You need to lighten up. I'm sure the two have seen each others aliases in logs, and once he mentioned who he was it was a grand ole' time.

 

PS.. You don't know many cops to you? They are mostly cocky and full of odd humor that you apparently don't understand.

[+Dragery]

He clearly IS using his brain, to use the english language as it was intended -- not just reinvent it as it suits him, to fit whatever definition he chooses, as you have done here.

Relying on some incomplete internet dictionary for definitions of words is not using your brains.

Really? How is this incomplete? Because it doesn't have YOUR definition listed somewhere? Seems like a pretty reasonable source to me. If you have a more credible definition, feel free to post it. If not, just attacking someone else's research proves nothing.

 

There are plenty of threads where it is discussed how to be stealthy when looking for a geocaches. There's wearing a safety vest, carrying a clipboard, talking into you GPS like it is a cell phone, and yes often the suggestion of just walking confidently up to the cache.

True. However, this has nothing to do with whether "Stealth" is the correct term to use for this type of behavior. Deception, misdirection, etc. would fit better.

 

Stealth clearly is not used here to be mean cloak and dagger hiding in the shadows. In the dictionary it may mean action taken to avoid detection, but in relation to geocaches it means action taken to avoid suspicion by muggles that you are up to something no good and to protect the location of the cache.

You don't get to decide when or where a words definition fits. Words have meaning, whether you choose to use them properly or not.

 

If you don't understand that and want to discuss the intent of some word in the English language instead feel free.

I do understand that. I fear you don't, however.

 

But when people resort to posting dictionary definitions in internet discussions it usually means they don't have a real response to someone's argument.

Really? Clarifying a words definition, by showing it's actual meaning, tells you that this person doesn't have a real response? How do you figure?

 

Perhaps we could debate about whether we a different word should be used to describe what is commonly referred to here as stealth, but I think most geocachers understand what is meant.

I agree that the concept of avoiding detection is understood. Calling it by the wrong name certainly doesn't serve any useful purpose, however.

 

Wow man.. just wow.. Pick your battles, you're seriously going into a narcissistic rage over a word.

[+mountainman38]

It is always fun to harass security guards. A lot of them take there job way too seriously.

 

On the other hand, I am a police officer and I get off at midnight. This is about the time our reviewer likes to drop caches most of the time. I met someone one night right as I got off to grab an FTF and as we were parked we spotted a very familiar FTF chaser that had just parked (this was the dead end of a neighborhood) so I walked up with the light shining and sternly asked "What are you doing out here?" and could hardly keep from laughing while he (very nervously) explained geocaching to me. Then I laughed and said I know, now lets go find it and he realized who I was.

So you used your position as an officer of the law, someone that we should be able to look to for protection from harassment, as a means of harassing someone for your amusement?! Not cool.

 

I've seen people post this type of story before, and it seems to me that any cop (or person in any position of authority) who uses that position to harass someone for their amusement, needs to find a new line of work.

 

I'll try to extend the benefit of the doubt to you, and hope that you hadn't thought of it this way, but that's exactly how your actions come across.

 

Interesting, after a 2 paragraph rant, scolding and finger pointing, you then mention you'll give him the benefit of the doubt, contradicting your entire rant. And why did you post that then? I thought it was a funny story. You need to lighten up. I'm sure the two have seen each others aliases in logs, and once he mentioned who he was it was a grand ole' time.

 

PS.. You don't know many cops to you? They are mostly cocky and full of odd humor that you apparently don't understand.

If you think trying to be generous contradicts the point I was making, you need to work on your comprehension skills. Don't tell me I need to lighten up -- that's none of your business.

 

So what if the situation got resolved? You think an officer harassing someone is ok? You have a rather skewed view of what it means to be a bully.

 

How many cops do I need to know to understand that this is an abuse of power? As a matter of fact, none of the cops I know would act like that. What difference does that make to this officers actions?

[+mountainman38]

He clearly IS using his brain, to use the english language as it was intended -- not just reinvent it as it suits him, to fit whatever definition he chooses, as you have done here.

Relying on some incomplete internet dictionary for definitions of words is not using your brains.

Really? How is this incomplete? Because it doesn't have YOUR definition listed somewhere? Seems like a pretty reasonable source to me. If you have a more credible definition, feel free to post it. If not, just attacking someone else's research proves nothing.

 

There are plenty of threads where it is discussed how to be stealthy when looking for a geocaches. There's wearing a safety vest, carrying a clipboard, talking into you GPS like it is a cell phone, and yes often the suggestion of just walking confidently up to the cache.

True. However, this has nothing to do with whether "Stealth" is the correct term to use for this type of behavior. Deception, misdirection, etc. would fit better.

 

Stealth clearly is not used here to be mean cloak and dagger hiding in the shadows. In the dictionary it may mean action taken to avoid detection, but in relation to geocaches it means action taken to avoid suspicion by muggles that you are up to something no good and to protect the location of the cache.

You don't get to decide when or where a words definition fits. Words have meaning, whether you choose to use them properly or not.

 

If you don't understand that and want to discuss the intent of some word in the English language instead feel free.

I do understand that. I fear you don't, however.

 

But when people resort to posting dictionary definitions in internet discussions it usually means they don't have a real response to someone's argument.

Really? Clarifying a words definition, by showing it's actual meaning, tells you that this person doesn't have a real response? How do you figure?

 

Perhaps we could debate about whether we a different word should be used to describe what is commonly referred to here as stealth, but I think most geocachers understand what is meant.

I agree that the concept of avoiding detection is understood. Calling it by the wrong name certainly doesn't serve any useful purpose, however.

 

Wow man.. just wow.. Pick your battles, you're seriously going into a narcissistic rage over a word.

How exactly is this narcissistic? "Pick my battles"? Looks like I did, eh?

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

So you used your position as an officer of the law, someone that we should be able to look to for protection from harassment, as a means of harassing someone for your amusement?! Not cool.

 

I've seen people post this type of story before, and it seems to me that any cop (or person in any position of authority) who uses that position to harass someone for their amusement, needs to find a new line of work.

 

I'll try to extend the benefit of the doubt to you, and hope that you hadn't thought of it this way, but that's exactly how your actions come across.

Harass? Really? So in your world no jokes or pranks are allowed?

 

We have several police geocachers in Alabama. We all get some great laughs sharing stories of how they roll up on unsuspecting geocachers and gig them a bit.

 

Its been done to me several times, even by cops who knew about the cache but are not cachers. Last time a Vestavia cop rolled up on a group of us in a school playground about 10 at night, gave us the "What are you doing here" bit with a very convincing demeanor before grinning and saying "You're very close to it" which brought both relief and laughter from all of us. Harassment, no, but a fun story we'll all remember.

 

I think that you would have to be pretty paranoid about police to call that harassment.

[+mountainman38]

So you used your position as an officer of the law, someone that we should be able to look to for protection from harassment, as a means of harassing someone for your amusement?! Not cool.

 

I've seen people post this type of story before, and it seems to me that any cop (or person in any position of authority) who uses that position to harass someone for their amusement, needs to find a new line of work.

 

I'll try to extend the benefit of the doubt to you, and hope that you hadn't thought of it this way, but that's exactly how your actions come across.

Harass? Really? So in your world no jokes or pranks are allowed?

 

We have several police geocachers in Alabama. We all get some great laughs sharing stories of how they roll up on unsuspecting geocachers and gig them a bit.

 

Its been done to me several times, even by cops who knew about the cache but are not cachers. Last time a Vestavia cop rolled up on a group of us in a school playground about 10 at night, gave us the "What are you doing here" bit with a very convincing demeanor before grinning and saying "You're very close to it" which brought both relief and laughter from all of us. Harassment, no, but a fun story we'll all remember.

 

I think that you would have to be pretty paranoid about police to call that harassment.

The way I see it, I think that you would have to be pretty accepting of an abuse of authority to let those sworn to protect and serve you use their position of authority to make you nervous, uncomfortable, or scared.

 

Jokes and pranks are great, as long as they're not malicious. Using a position of power or authority to perpetrate a prank on someone under your care, is malicious. I would never tease or scare my kids in a way that made them feel unsafe, because I am who they look to for protection and security.

 

By the same token, since I look to the police for protection and security in the encounters that I have with them, were they to use their position to "gig" me, I would lose confidence in them, and become less sure about their intentions in the future.

 

The relation between law enforcement and the communities that they serve is (hopefully) one of trust and appreciation. When an officer does something to violate that trust, the relationship is damaged.

[+Dragery]

erp derp

 

 

Well if nothing else at least I know I can count on Mountainman to stand up with me against this security guard who abused his power by harassing me when I wasn't even on the property he was being paid to protect (well, the 2nd time around at least LOL)

Edited August 6, 2010 by Dragery