Has Anyone Gotten Into Trouble While Geocaching?

[+on4bam]

FYI - caches are not allowed to be hidden on/in/under mailboxes, so save yourself the trouble and don't search around mailboxes in the future. Of course, I'm just assuming that your encounter was while you were searching the mailbox.

 

?? I found a few hidden on/in/under a mailbox. Doesn't seem to be a problem.

 

Blue post boxes are prohibited.

 

This does not preclude someone's mailbox type on their property or the popular 'mailbox in the woods'.

 

We don't have "blue mailboxes" ours are red.

 

Maybe caches are not allowed on US mailboxes that doesn't mean it the same elsewhere.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

FYI - caches are not allowed to be hidden on/in/under mailboxes, so save yourself the trouble and don't search around mailboxes in the future. Of course, I'm just assuming that your encounter was while you were searching the mailbox.

 

?? I found a few hidden on/in/under a mailbox. Doesn't seem to be a problem.

 

Blue post boxes are prohibited.

 

This does not preclude someone's mailbox type on their property or the popular 'mailbox in the woods'.

 

We don't have "blue mailboxes" ours are red.

 

Maybe caches are not allowed on US mailboxes that doesn't mean it the same elsewhere.

 

The guidelines don't say anything about placing a cache on a mailbox. They state that one must comply with all local laws, and in the U.S. tampering with a mailbox is a federal offense. I suppose that if it's legal to tamper with a mailbox in Belgium that placing a cache on one wouldn't be a violation of the guidelines but, frankly, I'd rather know that mail that I send or receive has some degree of security rather than be able to place a cache on a mailbox.

[+on4bam]

The guidelines don't say anything about placing a cache on a mailbox. They state that one must comply with all local laws, and in the U.S. tampering with a mailbox is a federal offense. I suppose that if it's legal to tamper with a mailbox in Belgium that placing a cache on one wouldn't be a violation of the guidelines but, frankly, I'd rather know that mail that I send or receive has some degree of security rather than be able to place a cache on a mailbox.

 

I wouldn't call placing a magnetic container on a mailbox "tampering". The same goes for tags that are put on a mailbox. Your letters will be as secure as they possibly can be, even with a nano or keyholder under a mailbox. I worry more about "some organizations" spying on just about everyone/everything than I do about a cachecontainer on a mailbox.

[+Manville Possum]

I wouldn't call placing a magnetic container on a mailbox "tampering". The same goes for tags that are put on a mailbox. Your letters will be as secure as they possibly can be, even with a nano or keyholder under a mailbox. I worry more about "some organizations" spying on just about everyone/everything than I do about a cachecontainer on a mailbox.

 

Can you lock your mailbox to keep people from tampering with your mail?

 

I'm sure that if the cache container goes missing no one will open your mailbox and peek inside.

 

I'm pretty sure here in the US the only person allowed to place stuff on or inside a mailbox is postal workers out on delivery.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

The guidelines don't say anything about placing a cache on a mailbox. They state that one must comply with all local laws, and in the U.S. tampering with a mailbox is a federal offense. I suppose that if it's legal to tamper with a mailbox in Belgium that placing a cache on one wouldn't be a violation of the guidelines but, frankly, I'd rather know that mail that I send or receive has some degree of security rather than be able to place a cache on a mailbox.

 

I wouldn't call placing a magnetic container on a mailbox "tampering". The same goes for tags that are put on a mailbox. Your letters will be as secure as they possibly can be, even with a nano or keyholder under a mailbox. I worry more about "some organizations" spying on just about everyone/everything than I do about a cachecontainer on a mailbox.

 

Whether or not you consider placing a magnetic container on a mailbox to be "tampering" may not make any difference to a LEO whose job it is to enforce federal laws. If a LEO considers it tampering, you may get arresting and then the determination for whether it's tampering, and what the sentence will be if it is, will come from a judge. Perhaps the judge will agree with you that sticking a magnetic container under a mailbox isn't tampering. Is it still worth trouble?

 

 

[+The Rat]

I've been challenged several times. Twice that I remember by security guards and at least once by police. One of the challenges by a guard happened to be on a public transit agency property where I had previously served as an attorney. I was able to ask him about the current security director and union issues I was familiar with, so we were good buddies by the end. For another guard at corporate property a similar thing happened when I told him I had served as a corporate security director and asked him which of several security companies he worked for and the current pay rate. Two policemen challenged me and my fellow geocacher when we were at a the edge of a fenced property that jutted out into the Alameda, Ca. estuary. That was considered the boundary of the Oakland Airport property, even though there was water between the pier there and the airport. We never crossed or climbed the fence or did anything illegal, but we were there a long time on a DNF. I showed them my ID as a retired FBI agent and again we were good buddies by the end. They hadn't heard of geocaching so we explained it to them.

Edited December 9, 2016 by The Rat

[+on4bam]

Whether or not you consider placing a magnetic container on a mailbox to be "tampering" may not make any difference to a LEO whose job it is to enforce federal laws. If a LEO considers it tampering, you may get arresting and then the determination for whether it's tampering, and what the sentence will be if it is, will come from a judge. Perhaps the judge will agree with you that sticking a magnetic container under a mailbox isn't tampering. Is it still worth trouble?

 

I find it funny that people in the US seem to have so many encounters with law enforcement and immediately think about court cases. Not happening around here

Worst case scenario (hasn't happened to me since I started in 2006) is just telling what I'm doing and that will be it.

[+Manville Possum]

I find it funny that people in the US seem to have so many encounters with law enforcement and immediately think about court cases.

 

That may be because of our judicial system, once arrested and charged with a crime we get a court case. Not that anyone is actually dumb or lame enough to place a magnetic geocache container on someone's mailbox, are are they?

[+noncentric]

FYI - caches are not allowed to be hidden on/in/under mailboxes, so save yourself the trouble and don't search around mailboxes in the future. Of course, I'm just assuming that your encounter was while you were searching the mailbox.

 

?? I found a few hidden on/in/under a mailbox. Doesn't seem to be a problem.

My mistake, I should've been more specific when I replied to the poster. My statement was in regards to USPS (United States Postal Service) mailboxes, like the one in New York that the poster had encountered. It's too late for me to edit my earlier post. Yes - regulations may be different in non-US locations.

 

ETA: Attaching caches to postal service mailboxes are prohibited in Canada as well. See this post from Keystone.

Edited December 10, 2016 by noncentric

[+colleda]

FYI - caches are not allowed to be hidden on/in/under mailboxes, so save yourself the trouble and don't search around mailboxes in the future. Of course, I'm just assuming that your encounter was while you were searching the mailbox.

 

?? I found a few hidden on/in/under a mailbox. Doesn't seem to be a problem.

My mistake, I should've been more specific when I replied to the poster. My statement was in regards to USPS (United States Postal Service) mailboxes, like the one in New York that the poster had encountered. It's too late for me to edit my earlier post. Yes - regulations may be different in non-US locations.

 

ETA: Attaching caches to postal service mailboxes are prohibited in Canada as well. See this post from Keystone.

Prohibited in Australia. Although it doesn't seem to stop people doing it as they obviously haven't bothered checking. I did query one CO and he claimed that he did have permission.

We have red boxes here.

[+on4bam]

My mistake, I should've been more specific when I replied to the poster. My statement was in regards to USPS (United States Postal Service) mailboxes, like the one in New York that the poster had encountered. It's too late for me to edit my earlier post. Yes - regulations may be different in non-US locations.

 

My comments were also about the postal service boxes, not private ones.

Anyway, found one in a private mailbox too, it was in the CO's front yard and took 15 minutes of puzzle solving to open (after a long multi) so again, no problem.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Whether or not you consider placing a magnetic container on a mailbox to be "tampering" may not make any difference to a LEO whose job it is to enforce federal laws. If a LEO considers it tampering, you may get arresting and then the determination for whether it's tampering, and what the sentence will be if it is, will come from a judge. Perhaps the judge will agree with you that sticking a magnetic container under a mailbox isn't tampering. Is it still worth trouble?

 

I find it funny that people in the US seem to have so many encounters with law enforcement and immediately think about court cases. Not happening around here

Worst case scenario (hasn't happened to me since I started in 2006) is just telling what I'm doing and that will be it.

 

I certainly don't think that many encounters will lead to a court case. Most minor infractions can be resolved by paying a fine without ever seeing a judge. As I said, tampering with a mailbox is considered a felony, and law enforcement officers take felonies very seriously.

I can't believe that we're having this conversation. Are you actually arguing that playing a game that involves hiding and finding containers is more important than complying with local laws?

[+on4bam]

I can't believe that we're having this conversation. Are you actually arguing that playing a game that involves hiding and finding containers is more important than complying with local laws?

 

Are you saying you think we have the same laws that you have?

I can assure you that interaction with law enforcement here is a lot different than on your end.

[+Rebore]

I can't believe that we're having this conversation. Are you actually arguing that playing a game that involves hiding and finding containers is more important than complying with local laws?

 

Are you saying you think we have the same laws that you have?

I can assure you that interaction with law enforcement here is a lot different than on your end.

 

I have not seen this warning sign in Europe so far:

 

[+tomfuller & Quill]

I do remember one noteworthy cache at the east end of Rt. 66 in Chicago. It was under a green USPS box which the letter carriers took the presorted mailbags out of for delivery.

It was at the intersection of Jackson Blvd. and North Michigan Ave. Sometime since I found it, the USPS removed the box and the cache is now attached to something else nearby.

I knelt next to the box and tied my shoes while reaching under the box for the cache.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

I can't believe that we're having this conversation. Are you actually arguing that playing a game that involves hiding and finding containers is more important than complying with local laws?

 

Are you saying you think we have the same laws that you have?

I can assure you that interaction with law enforcement here is a lot different than on your end.

 

I am well aware that laws in one country are not the same in another country. That's why I wrote "local laws". Obviously if one does something in one country where it is legal, you're going to have a different experience than if doing the same thing is legal the interaction with a LEO is not going to be the same.

 

Since you didn't answer my question, I will ask again.

 

Are you actually arguing that playing a game that involves hiding and finding containers is more important than complying with local laws?

 

 

[+TriciaG]

I'm surprised everyone is to caught up on the mailbox thing, when the other encounter in that post was more problematic to me. You have to climb on a "monument listed as a National Landmark" to get to a cache? I'm sure the CO got permission for that style of hide!

 

In the short amount of time I have been enjoying geocaching, I have managed to have several encounters with various representatives of the security enforcement world. Thus far, I'm happy to say, everything worked out ok.

 

The first was while trying to find a cache inside the cemetery adjacent to Trinity Church in lower Manhattan. The GZ was a large carving, and the cache itself was behind part of a carved sculpture that had to be accessed by, well, sort of climbing up the thing a little. I was having trouble reaching the pair of capsules stashed back there. When I finally managed to grasp them and carefully stepped down, I discovered several hundreds of pounds of security officer waiting for me. They were VERY curious about why I was climbing on a monument listed as a National Landmark (Hamilton is buried fairly nearby). I explained what I was doing, to their apparent relief and bewilderment. The one in charge said, "I'm going to pretend I didn't hear that," and the entire detail walked away. Which was an unusually good thing since: (a) I had to put the cache back in place; ( apparently, the cemetery is owned by a trust that is administered by the National Park Service, so if they had called for someone to ask me more questions, it would have been someone federal.

[+on4bam]

Since you didn't answer my question, I will ask again.

 

Are you actually arguing that playing a game that involves hiding and finding containers is more important than complying with local laws?

 

Complying with local laws is important but look at it like the difference between running a red light and going 1 Km over the speedlimit.

While you can argue that a tag or magnetic container on a mailbox is "tampering" no-one (here) will make a big deal out of it. (Just as we don't get shot for inadvertently walking on private property).

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Since you didn't answer my question, I will ask again.

 

Are you actually arguing that playing a game that involves hiding and finding containers is more important than complying with local laws?

 

Complying with local laws is important but look at it like the difference between running a red light and going 1 Km over the speedlimit.

While you can argue that a tag or magnetic container on a mailbox is "tampering" no-one (here) will make a big deal out of it. (Just as we don't get shot for inadvertently walking on private property).

 

So this isn't really about geoaching at all, but more just some bashing of laws in the U.S. that you don't agree with.

 

BTW, that sign was nothing more than a joke.

 

 

[+on4bam]

So this isn't really about geoaching at all, but more just some bashing of laws in the U.S. that you don't agree with.

 

BTW, that sign was nothing more than a joke.

 

It IS about geocaching, it's just that there's a big difference between spirit and letter of a law.

 

BTW, you might think it's a joke but you can't deny these thing happen. I could get further into this but it would just get deleted followed by a forum ban

[+NYPaddleCacher]

So this isn't really about geoaching at all, but more just some bashing of laws in the U.S. that you don't agree with.

 

BTW, that sign was nothing more than a joke.

 

It IS about geocaching, it's just that there's a big difference between spirit and letter of a law.

 

BTW, you might think it's a joke but you can't deny these thing happen. I could get further into this but it would just get deleted followed by a forum ban

 

So bringing this back to getting into trouble while geocaching, I won't deny that "these things happen", but I will deny that these things happen with any sort of regularity. I don't recall ever seeing anyone write about getting into trouble over finding a geocache hidden on a public mailbox. I think there may have been one, possibly two incidents of firearms involved while someone is trespassing but it's extremely rare. It's certainly doesn't happen frequently enough to stereotype the U.S. of having draconian laws that are going to change the geocaching experience in any way that is significantly different than the rest of the world.

[+vk2df]

One of my neighbours constantly acts like this on my parked car, on a public road just in front of MY house (and in opposite of her garage but with enough space, totally legal). She even threated me to drive into my car as her friend already had (and didn't notify me, but since it was witnessed she had to pay me, was filed a fine and got her driving license suspended). Well, it's not my driving license.

 

There even was no caching involved. You simply can't fix stupid.

Is this type of behaviour (suspicion) relatively common in the US of A? Seems to pop up a lot in forums and threads. Have never experienced anything like that here in OZ.

 

Well it's happened to me here in OZ (Sydney) when I was doing "GC68XQY - Midnight Zone" in the southern suburbs of Sydney about a year ago. The local residents wanted to lynch me, as they thought I was a drug dealer. here's my log from the time:

 

After finding “The Maze #2”, just down the road at Port Botany, I was going to head straight off to work but it was a bit too early. So instead I drove the short distance to this new one for my second find of the day. Parked the geomobile in Clonard Way and walked over to GZ for a quick find. Signed the log book, and noted the clues for the mystery cache, before replacing as found.

 

I was getting ready to leave, just snapping a few pictures of the “view from GZ” before departure, when I noticed a group of about half a dozen people had gathered a couple of doors down from the bridge, in Esperance Close. I then noticed one of them had left the group and was walking toward me. He walked up to me and started quizzing me as to why I was hanging around the bridge and taking photos. He said that there had been a number of people acting suspiciously on the bridge during the past week, and he wanted to know what we were all up to. I assume it was all of the other “finders” since this one was published last week.

 

Luckily I carry brochures that explain our wonderful hobby of geocaching, so was able to defuse the situation quickly. He had actually heard of geocaching so all was good. We then got chatting and he said that they have had a lot of trouble in the past with drug transactions happening around (on and under) the bridge and he and the other residents thought it was happening all over again, so I could understand their concerns.

 

Anyway all was good in the end, and hopefully future cachers visiting this one won’t get the “third degree” like I did. TFTC.

 

Find #905

Edited December 17, 2016 by vk2df