Jump to content

Geocaching, Dc, & The Fbi


traeumer

Recommended Posts

I wonder if you made a break for the embassy and asked for political asylum….?

<<tongue in cheek>>

 

Personally, I feel (and hope) that they were doing their job, not trivializing it. We don’t know what their assignments were. We don’t know what they were after? We are hearing only one side of the story and I doubt that we will find out their side of it.

 

Geocaching is not the center of the universe. It is a new and exiting endeavor for most of us. The vast majority of the public are not aware of what it is. Let’s not scoff at those who know not what they are missing. The answer is to have something to present to authorities if we are questioned. Procedures need to followed. It takes time.

 

Let’s go caching!!!

Link to comment
But save the third degree for when you have sufficient reason to believe that I have committed a crime.

 

Its funny to me that a few years ago, a thread like this would have had people up in arms.  A few hundred years ago, our forefathers literally got up in arms about this sort of thing.

Third degree? This all happened on a street corner. That barely qualifies as first degree. second degree would start with them inviting you to join them in their office. Third degree includes bright lights and a smoky room in the basement.

 

A few years ago, fanatics were not flying planes full of passengers into buildings full of offices.

 

A few hundred years ago people were literally burned at the stake because of a rumor.

 

I'd say it was an appropriate response to an appropriate suspicion.

Andy, right on dude!!

 

Thanks.

 

I wonder how many wish that the suspicions of that agent in florida had been followed up upon? Huuummm, so you want to jump right to the pilot's seat of a 757? And oh, don't want to bother with learning how to take-off and land the thing? OK, no problemo........let's go flying!!!

Edited by Team cotati697
Link to comment
The entire exchange was silly.  Legally, they could not even compel you to give any info without first having reasonable evidence that you had broken a law.  BTW, carrying a pda or GPSr does not constitute such evidence.

Er, not cooperating is NOT in your best interests, unless you want to be their "guest" for a while. Legally, they CAN hold you without charging you for something like four hours (if I recall correctly, that is...)

They can indefinitely. That's the US-Patriot act for you. All they need to do is put a checkmark in the "terrorism suspect" box.

 

On the other hand -- kudos for being straight up about saying you were "geocaching."  Lord only knows how many locals I've lied to about what I was doing.  "Surveying," "checking plants for infestation," "testing radiation levels," on and on...

 

Receiving signals from outer space.

Link to comment
KEWL BEANS.... I rather see that the feds are active. Admittedly geocaching activity could seem suspicious. Probably one of the reasons I do not try and be too stealthy.. just draws attention.

 

Proactive law enforcement is OK by me.

Most of it is makebelief, so people will THINK that something is being done about security. Like those funny airport shoe checks.

Link to comment
Yes please keep the politics out of this!

 

<offensive text removed by moderator - hydee>

How about human rights? (Which, I believe, was one of the points of OP too.)

 

Anyway, I'm glad I 'heard' you saying that.

Edited by hydee
Link to comment
KEWL BEANS.... I rather see that the feds are active.  Admittedly geocaching activity could seem suspicious.  Probably one of the reasons I do not try and be too stealthy.. just draws attention.

 

Proactive law enforcement is OK by me.

Most of it is makebelief, so people will THINK that something is being done about security. Like those funny airport shoe checks.

I hope you're kidding. After reading the whole thread alot of you are coming off as I'm too important to be asked questions by law enforcement. Someone did bring up a good point about being aware of identity thieves out there but it doesn't help anything to be jackasses to them either.

 

So they ate 20 minutes of your time... someone mentioned a "whatif" about someone being in a time constraint. Thats probably why one of the first questions they ask are "What are you doing". From there they can infer how much time they have to do their job. No one was being "detained". No one "took a ride down town" or got to "visit the office".

 

We so easily quote Ben Franklin and start humming certain NWA tunes to ourselves and blow it all out of proportion. The fact is traeumer was by himself and for the time that he was being watched he displayed an uncommon and unique precense that was worth checking out.

 

Those of you who immediately assumed that everyone with PDA's get stopped, once again I think you're making something its not.

 

If my job was to be on the look out for peculier behavior and I see a man visit 6 spots with a GPS while possibly writing a few notes by himself I think it would be in the best interest to go check it out. To put up a fight, be disrespectful, or quote Ben Franklin for god's sake in this situation is rather much.

 

It sure is reassuring to know you live in a society where its apparently just as wrong to be too careful as it is to be not careful enough

Edited by pnew
Link to comment
So they ate 20 minutes of your time... someone mentioned a "whatif" about someone being in a time constraint. Thats probably why one of the first questions they ask are "What are you doing". From there they can infer how much time they have to do their job. No one was being "detained".

Not true. What happened here was a "Terry stop", which does mean detention. traeumer could not have walked away during the investigation. He was detained for 20 minutes based on "reasonable suspicion", which was not enough for arrest but it was sufficient for a Terry stop. A Terry stop should be limited in duration but there is no specified time limit. If it takes too long it turns into an arrest. I think 20 minutes is close to the upper limit of what was reasonable in this case.

Link to comment
Legally, they could not even compel you to give any info without first having reasonable evidence that you had broken a law.

Actually, they don't have to have any evidence to stop you. All they need is "reasonable suspicion." The U.S. Supreme Court has recognized "that a law enforcement officer's reasonable suspicion that a person may be involved in criminal activity permits the officer to stop the person for a brief time and take additional steps to investigate further." As was mentioned earlier, this is the basis for what is known as a Terry stop. Basically, if a fed, or any other type of LEO thinks you are suspicious, or up to no-good, they CAN stop you and ask for your name, etc., and try to determine exactly what you are doing. You are required by law to give, at least, your name. If you don't comply, or the LEO doesn't like the answers you give, the LEO then has probable cause to arrest you.

 

More reading here about the case that prompted the ruling below.

 

Interesting U.S. Supreme Court ruling here.

Edited for typo.

Edited by TimInOhio
Link to comment

They seemed so interested in the National Archives. I think he should have told them he was trying to steal the Declaration of Independence to follow a map on the back of it. They would have...

 

A. dismissed him as a smartass with a movie obssession

B. locked him up as a lunatic

 

(all said in jest, of course.)

Edited by Beowulf83
Link to comment
Don't forget that it was an invisible map on the back of the Declaration of Independence. :D

Hey, why do you think that they "restored" the declaration a few years back? :o

They actually do have lifesized photos (or some kind of reproduction) of the back of the Declaration of Independence on display now just outside of the area where the actual one is displayed. You walk by it on leaving that area.

 

To think they got that many questions about it that they had to set up a display.

 

There was nothing there but you know "they" are not showing us the real deal. :lol: And back on goes my tin foil hat.

Edited by GrizzlyJohn
Link to comment
Legally, they could not even compel you to give any info without first having reasonable evidence that you had broken a law.

Actually, they don't have to have any evidence to stop you. All they need is "reasonable suspicion." The U.S. Supreme Court has recognized "that a law enforcement officer's reasonable suspicion that a person may be involved in criminal activity permits the officer to stop the person for a brief time and take additional steps to investigate further." As was mentioned earlier, this is the basis for what is known as a Terry stop. Basically, if a fed, or any other type of LEO thinks you are suspicious, or up to no-good, they CAN stop you and ask for your name, etc., and try to determine exactly what you are doing. You are required by law to give, at least, your name. If you don't comply, or the LEO doesn't like the answers you give, the LEO then has probable cause to arrest you.

 

More reading here about the case that prompted the ruling below.

 

Interesting U.S. Supreme Court ruling here.

Edited for typo.

Just because the supreme court says they can do somethng, does not make it RIGHT, there was a court in Germany around 60 years ago that saw not problems with the activities of the German Government at the time.

Link to comment
Just because the supreme court says they can do somethng, does not make it RIGHT, there was a court in Germany around 60 years ago that saw not problems with the activities of the German Government at the time.

Hey blue smurf boy can we get a ruling on this?

 

Does this fall within the guidelines of Godwin's law? It is a reference to Nazi's but there is not a mention by name. I am not sure how that works.

 

:lol:

 

But yes I agree we can all name some boneheaded decisions the supremes have made over the years.

Link to comment
Actually, they don't have to have any evidence to stop you. All they need is "reasonable suspicion." The U.S. Supreme Court has recognized "that a law enforcement officer's reasonable suspicion that a person may be involved in criminal activity permits the officer to stop the person for a brief time and take additional steps to investigate further." As was mentioned earlier, this is the basis for what is known as a Terry stop. Basically, if a fed, or any other type of LEO thinks you are suspicious, or up to no-good, they CAN stop you and ask for your name, etc., and try to determine exactly what you are doing. You are required by law to give, at least, your name. If you don't comply, or the LEO doesn't like the answers you give, the LEO then has probable cause to arrest you.

 

More reading here about the case that prompted the ruling below.

 

Interesting U.S. Supreme Court ruling here.

Edited for typo.

I'm actually pretty familiar with that case already. The question is whether reasonable suspician existed in this case. Some would say yes, I would argue that it did not. I do not believe that it is reasonable to suspect that I may be involved in an illegal activity simply because I use a gpsr and a pda while visiting tourist spots in DC.

Link to comment
I will say this, when I signed in I was asked what the thing in my hand was. I said it was a GPS. The response came back "What's a GPS?"

 

Bret

 

perhaps if you mentioned it was a "GPSr", they may have understood. :D:lol:

Sure, they just thought you were nuts. 'Hey, that guy thinks he's got a satellite in his hand.' :o

Link to comment
Good God Almighty!!!! They had the nerve to ask you questions??!!!! How vicious!!!! How cruel!!!! How unconstitutional!!!! O'Brother!!! :lol:

It wasn't that they just asked me questions. It was that they used the whole 'good cop, bad cop' routine with me. And I assure you, the ‘bad cop’ didn't have a very friendly tone.

Link to comment
CAUTION, BATMAN... HOLY MISTAKEN IDENTITY (or is it)?

 

If they were legitimate FBI Agents, they did the right thing... but you need to be careful. There are a lot of scammers, and I hope you didn't give any personal information to them without verifying their identity FIRST...

It was the big suburban with flashing lights that had FBI emblazoned on the side that kinda gave it away. Oh, and the agents with the FBI uniforms & guns helped too.

Link to comment
It was the big suburban with flashing lights that had FBI emblazoned on the side that kinda gave it away. Oh, and the agents with the FBI uniforms & guns helped too.

Hey I think I saw them selling that kind of stuff at the Party! Party! Party! store by me. Right there next to the Elvira outfit.

 

But were they wearing those dark sunglasses? That is always the giveaway for me. I know they are for real then.

 

:lol:

Link to comment

For the past several years, I have been spending several days to ride m bike along the Great Allegheny Passage and the C&O Canal Towpath from near Pittsburgh to Washington DC. So far, when I've arrived in DC after 3 or 4 days on the trail the city is just too hot and too crowded for me to want to stay.

 

I had been considering sticking around for a few hours to geocache and benchmark with my wife who would have come into town to sightsee, pick me and my bicycle up and return home.

 

But the more I hear about average people engaging in normal tourist-like behavior being accosted by over-zealous representatives of the Ministry of Homeland Security the more I am likely to just abandon the city and save myself the hassle.

 

If we could harness the energy of George Orwill spinning in his grave. . .

Link to comment

About a month ago a guy in an SCI (state correctional institution) cane into work and started asking tons of questions abut the owner. I didn't give him any information at all. Why should I? Then he turns into a jerk. Asking for my name, address, phone, to file in the "record"

 

I politely told him that If they wanted to they could easily look up my information, and until I know what i going on I am not telling him anything.

 

The entire experience lasted about an hour and cost me a few sales to boot. The owner was freaked out about the whole thing, until I showed her that with $100 and about week I could have gotten his outfit, badge, and belt on line.

 

He never came back.

 

 

 

back to the subject.

 

I see no reason to give up my rights for "safety" I may be a little paranoid, but the government has done allot of bad stuff to innocent people over the years because of the terrorist angle. Go read the patriot act, congress sure didn't read it or they wouldn't have passed it.

 

In the situation I would have been polite, explained what I was doing, and let them know that I am not pleased about being stopped for no reason.

 

Joe

Link to comment

Give cops a break, y'all, and put yourself in their shoes for a moment.

 

People act strangely - we just do! Geocachers often more so than most.

 

If a cop were to stop everyone he/she saw that was acting wierd they'd never have time for coffee and a donut!

 

They, however, have quite a lot of experience with what is "normal wierd" and "totally out of place". That's the distinction we pay them to make.

 

The police know pretty well what's normal, what's normal weird, and what's "very interesting behaviour" in their area, and geocaching does in fact place us in the very interesting behaviour category.

 

While I agree that the vast majority of this Homeland Security business is a sham to make the public feel like something is being done, I applaud the cops on the line that are trying to make this a safer country.

 

I get stopped by the police a lot - I mean a whole lot!

 

I geocache night and day, urban and rural, alone and with friends. My fellow geocachers in the AGA (Alabama Geocachers Association) call me a cop-magnet because I get checked out so often!

 

I have been geocaching this last ten days or so in a new Jeep, without a tag, and so have been stopped seven times!

 

I live a clean life, don't drink or drug and haven't had a ticket since '73, so they either take my geocaching explanation and send me on my way or they run my license, insurance and title to verify me. I don't mind, we pay them to do this! (and don't pay 'em much!)

 

Last weekend I and a friend were caching on a dirt road behind an elementary school and some kids wandered off the school grounds to talk to us and see what we were doing. Three scared moms weren't far behind, and my explanation of two guys in the woods behind a school doing a GPS-based treasure hunt certainly failed to mollify them! We left, but within 10 minutes were stopped and surrounded by three police cars!

 

They checked us out and sent us on our way - it took at least twenty minutes; they asked very much the same type of questions mentioned in this thread, only more so - "What are you doing here?" "Why are you talking to children in the woods behind their school?", you know, the basics...and I AM SO HAPPY that the police responded quickly and sorted the situation out.

 

I love a well-policed community - I don't own a house key, my cars are never locked, my wi-fi access is open so that local cops and firefighters can park in the alley behind my house and connect to the 'net if they want to. That, to me, is a comfortable life!

 

I have had run-ins with bad cops; I was once threatened in one instance by FBI agents in their headquarters elevator that if I ever talked to the press about a certain issue that they (the agents) would destroy me and my family. Now THESE guys violated my rights and trust - but that was a very unusual situation.

 

My (unsolicited) advice to all geocachers is EXPECT to be stopped, move slowly, keep your hands in sight, explain the game, answer their questions and let them run your ID.

 

This is not a violation of your rights - it's your protectors doing what you pay them to do. Make their job easy and you'll have no problems.

 

Most of all, have fun; I have had some great conversations with cops while waiting on my ID to be run!

 

Ed

Link to comment
Give cops a break, y'all, and put yourself in their shoes for a moment.

 

People act strangely - we just do! Geocachers often more so than most.

 

If a cop were to stop everyone he/she saw that was acting wierd they'd never have time for coffee and a donut!

 

They, however, have quite a lot of experience with what is "normal wierd" and "totally out of place". That's the distinction we pay them to make.

 

The police know pretty well what's normal, what's normal weird, and what's "very interesting behaviour" in their area, and geocaching does in fact place us in the very interesting behaviour category.

 

While I agree that the vast majority of this Homeland Security business is a sham to make the public feel like something is being done, I applaud the cops on the line that are trying to make this a safer country.

 

I get stopped by the police a lot - I mean a whole lot!

 

I geocache night and day, urban and rural, alone and with friends. My fellow geocachers in the AGA (Alabama Geocachers Association) call me a cop-magnet because I get checked out so often!

 

I have been geocaching this last ten days or so in a new Jeep, without a tag, and so have been stopped seven times!

 

I live a clean life, don't drink or drug and haven't had a ticket since '73, so they either take my geocaching explanation and send me on my way or they run my license, insurance and title to verify me. I don't mind, we pay them to do this! (and don't pay 'em much!)

 

Last weekend I and a friend were caching on a dirt road behind an elementary school and some kids wandered off the school grounds to talk to us and see what we were doing. Three scared moms weren't far behind, and my explanation of two guys in the woods behind a school doing a GPS-based treasure hunt certainly failed to mollify them! We left, but within 10 minutes were stopped and surrounded by three police cars!

 

They checked us out and sent us on our way - it took at least twenty minutes; they asked very much the same type of questions mentioned in this thread, only more so - "What are you doing here?" "Why are you talking to children in the woods behind their school?", you know, the basics...and I AM SO HAPPY that the police responded quickly and sorted the situation out.

 

I love a well-policed community - I don't own a house key, my cars are never locked, my wi-fi access is open so that local cops and firefighters can park in the alley behind my house and connect to the 'net if they want to. That, to me, is a comfortable life!

 

I have had run-ins with bad cops; I was once threatened in one instance by FBI agents in their headquarters elevator that if I ever talked to the press about a certain issue that they (the agents) would destroy me and my family. Now THESE guys violated my rights and trust - but that was a very unusual situation.

 

My (unsolicited) advice to all geocachers is EXPECT to be stopped, move slowly, keep your hands in sight, explain the game, answer their questions and let them run your ID.

 

This is not a violation of your rights - it's your protectors doing what you pay them to do. Make their job easy and you'll have no problems.

 

Most of all, have fun; I have had some great conversations with cops while waiting on my ID to be run!

 

Ed

Some free advice: Put a tag on it.

Link to comment

As has been stated elsewhere in this thread, having a handy copy, ON PAPER, of the Geocaching Brochure (http://www.geocacher-u.com) comes in REALLY handy for just these sorts of situations. I'm also glad that I still paper-cache (as opposed to PDA-caching)...another tangible tool useful when asked to explain this "weird" thing we do.

 

I just hope that as we continue to become more mainstream, "bad people" don't start using Geocaching as a convenient cover for unsavory activities, whether Homeland-Security-related, hanging-around-school-area-related (see TAR's vignette above), or worse. "Oh, don't worry officer, I'm just Geocaching...".

 

Strange circle of thought, huh?

-Dave R.

Link to comment
Actually, they don't have to have any evidence to stop you.  All they need is "reasonable suspicion."  The U.S. Supreme Court has recognized "that a law enforcement officer's reasonable suspicion that a person may be involved in criminal activity permits the officer to stop the person for a brief time and take additional steps to investigate further."  As was mentioned earlier, this is the basis for what is known as a Terry stop.  Basically, if a fed, or any other type of LEO thinks you are suspicious, or up to no-good, they CAN stop you and ask for your name, etc., and try to determine exactly what you are doing.  You are required by law to give, at least, your name.  If you don't comply, or the LEO doesn't like the answers you give, the LEO then has probable cause to arrest you.

 

More reading here about the case that prompted the ruling below.

 

Interesting U.S. Supreme Court ruling here.

Edited for typo.

I'm actually pretty familiar with that case already. The question is whether reasonable suspician existed in this case. Some would say yes, I would argue that it did not. I do not believe that it is reasonable to suspect that I may be involved in an illegal activity simply because I use a gpsr and a pda while visiting tourist spots in DC.

There is a subtile yet important difference between 'acting suspiously' and actually doing something that is illegal.

 

People who act suspiously, given the justifying circumstances, get questioned. Get use to it. There is no constitutional prohibition that I am aware of which restrains law enforcement from making reasonable inquiries The definition of 'reasonable' can be debated but the right for law enforcement to inquire cannot.

Link to comment
I actually like that I have all the pages in my pda. In this situation, I would have been able to show them the cache page that brought me to that location and also all the other places that they saw me 'acting strangely'.

That's a valid counterpoint, although the OP and others on this thread did mention that the PDA may be part of the 'suspicion' problem in this case.

 

(I'm not saying give up your PDA and go back to paper-caching...PDA-caching is GREAT for those who do it. I just happen to like carrying my printout to each cache, is all (to each his own)...and in the case of this discussion, that would work out well.)

 

-Dave R.

Link to comment
There is a subtile yet important difference between 'acting suspiously' and actually doing something that is illegal.

 

People who act suspiously, given the justifying circumstances, get questioned. Get use to it. There is no constitutional prohibition that I am aware of which restrains law enforcement from making reasonable inquiries The definition of 'reasonable' can be debated but the right for law enforcement to inquire cannot.

You are correct, but the standard is that there must be reasonable susician that a crime is being committed (or has been).

Link to comment

I find it hard to believe that the people that really want to do something like plant a bomb or get info on certain structures would be doing it out in the open with a GPS in their hand. Sure, if the cops feel you are suspicious, they can ask for my name, but they better be ready to respect my rights as an American at the same time. I hate being made to feel like I'm guilty when I haven't been doing anything wrong. Odd maybe, but not illegal.

Link to comment
...That's a valid counterpoint, although the OP and others on this thread did mention that the PDA may be part of the 'suspicion' problem in this case....

I get your point. I still don't see what makes a pda more dangerous than the normal guy with a pencil and a celphone.

 

When I originally read the starting post of this thread, it made me think of my last 'tourist' visit to DC. It was on the fourth of July weekend in 2001. I was trudging around the city in the dark during a rain storm wearing a daypack full of flashlights, two-way radios, my GPSr and trinkets. Come to think of it, I did not use a PDA at the time, so I must not have been suspicious.

 

Before anyone mentions that this was pre-9/11, realize that the threat of terrorism did not begin with the WTC.

Link to comment

I wonder if there is now a record filed at the FBI regarding the OP... Next time they do another Terry stop on him, he might get arrested because behaving suspiciously twice will be regarded as probable cause. And if this happens to a foreign tourist, next time he wants to enter the US they might deny his entry (or he doesn't get a visa in the first place) on the basis that he has an FBI record.

Link to comment
TotemLake Posted: Jan 25 2005, 05:12 PM 

 

(mufasa1023 @ Jan 25 2005, 03:37 PM)

oh and someone needs to tell those poor schmucks down in Guantanomo Bay that they are only being held for 4 hours..... 

 

The reason why they are there is because US Constitutional Rights are not applicable on foreign soil. I suggest we keep the politics out of this.

 

The reason that we have the writ of Habeas Corpus is to protect all peoples from our governments control... think of a Mexican jail.....the kind that you get sent to for 15 years while they think about bringing you to trial for that traffic violation...is that morally right? it is without regard whether the people in Guantanomo bay are morally or legally culpable for something because they need their day in court to discuss that very problem PERIOD

if they are found to be guilty of something than sure let em rot but what if they are guilty of nothing or a mere traffic violation? are we willing to allow some american kid in mexico to rot away fifteen years of his life in a jail without even an evidentiary hearing? absurd....and anyone who really believes that this is ok needs to read and learn about how judicial proceedings evolved from it's judge jury executioner roots.

 

  Team LiquidCache Posted: Jan 25 2005, 05:29 PM 

Yes please keep the politics out of this!

 

<text removed by hydee> 

 

This has very little to do with 'politics' such as you seem to suggest, this is not a right wing left wing thing it is a BASIC MORAL PRECEPT What if the government didnt life the attitude of that guy who lives down the street from you? so they up and take him down to a secret prison and leave him there for a few years.....oh you dont know about that guy being in the prison? maybe thats because he hasnt had a court date yet.....and your generalization makes me sick....let them rot simply because they are detainees? maybe you meant let them rot if they did something morally bad that would properly subject them to detainment....oh wait how are we supposed to know if they are guilty of anything without a hearing on the matter?

 

oh and with regards to this instant matter...yes its good to check up on people acting weird but there is a point of over doing it

Link to comment
I think all virtuals in DC should be removed from the website until the war against terror has been completely won.

 

And we'll know this has happened... when exactly ? When no terrorist attacks (other than home-grown Anthrax mailings... still unsolved, last time I looked) have taken place on American soil for, say, 1000 days ? 1000 years ? How long can you ask an entire nation (and by extension, much of the world) to put everything on hold ? What if the government kind of got used to the idea of having all this much power ?

Edited by sTeamTraen
Link to comment

:lol:

Our 1NatureFamily also cached the virtuals in DC this summer; we did raise an undercover-eyebrow IN the Lincoln Memorial~while holding a GPSr you don't get bumped into like that on purpose :D Funny how I reconized the same individual checking me out (wasnt my shorts either :o ) at the WWII memorial finding the hint "outside of the box". :(

 

FYI, you can search the internet and read all the patriot acts ya wanna; 'we're not in Kansas anymore Toto'. Tis a new world we live in; survalance (in anyform) does not have to go thru a judge nor take 24 hours when it comes to homeland security. Dispute my remarks all ya wanna; I know :o And......anyone living in the shawdows of the World Trade Towers, whom can say they have a loved one affected by active terroism, should applaud the efforts of the FBI & Congress.

 

Ever think someone could use geocaching as a coverup? :D

 

Now I have to kill ya. :o

 

Leslie

Link to comment
I think all virtuals in DC should be removed from the website until the war against terror has been completely won.

 

I'll spring for the milk and honey to celebrate when we put them back up.

Dose this suggest that somehow traditional cache hunting in D.C. would somehow be more acceptable to the local Gendarmerie Nationale than a micro?

Link to comment
Our 1NatureFamily also cached the virtuals in DC this summer; we did raise an undercover-eyebrow IN the Lincoln Memorial~while holding a GPSr you don't get bumped into like that on purpose. Funny how I reconized the same individual checking me out (wasnt my shorts either) at the WWII memorial finding the hint "outside of the box"...

This makes my point exactly. If you do not have probable cause to believe that I was breaking the law. Keep an eye on me. Heck, cache with me if you want. If you find it first, give the brother a clue. :lol:

Link to comment
The reason that we have the writ of Habeas Corpus is to protect all peoples from our governments control...

Umm yea unless we look up the history of Abe Lincoln.

 

The president that threw out Habeas Corpus which he had no authority to do.

 

Had Federal troops go and close newspapers that wrote in favor of the South's right to secede.

 

Had an arrest warrent issued for the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court after he mentioned to Lincoln that he did not think he could support Lincoln's abuse of habeas corpus should a case come before his court.

 

Had elected officals arrested and put in jail without charges so quorums could not be had by state legislatures voting to secede.

 

And hey we went and built a huge monument to this man. So we may have all of these nice words and laws to protect us but don't think the power can't be abused.

Link to comment
I think all virtuals in DC should be removed from the website until the war against terror has been completely won.

 

And we'll know this has happened... when exactly ? When no terrorist attacks (other than home-grown Anthrax mailings... still unsolved, last time I looked) have taken place on American soil for, say, 1000 days ? 1000 years ? How long can you ask an entire nation (and by extension, much of the world) to put everything on hold ? What if the government kind of got used to the idea of having all this much power ?

:o To burst your bubble, the government has always had this 'power'; it's just since 11Sept that you know of it. There has been terrorist cell attacks, just not that you can see on CNN. As a US citizen, 'they' can ask me to put everything on hold for as long as and as often as they'd like. I'm not parionoid, I'm informed. 'They' are asking our military the same, and you should support them. :lol:

 

Now I'll be leaving for my proteted area in Arizonia. :D

Leslie (or am I whom I say I am)

Link to comment
I think all virtuals in DC should be removed from the website until the war against terror has been completely won.

 

There will alway be terrorism in the world and if you think the war on terrorism will ever be over in the eys of the clowns DC, you are in for a big disapointment.

 

More food for though.

 

The Supreme court saw nothing wrong with the US interment camps durring WWII Most of the peopleo in these were US citizens.

The Governament used the same logic, We do not know who th trust so we are going to lock them all up"

 

In the early years of this country the supreme court saw nothing wrong with Slavery.

Link to comment
Our 1NatureFamily also cached the virtuals in DC this summer; we did raise an undercover-eyebrow IN the Lincoln Memorial~while holding a GPSr you don't get bumped into like that on purpose.  Funny how I reconized the same individual checking me out (wasnt my shorts either) at the WWII memorial finding the hint "outside of the box"...

This makes my point exactly. If you do not have probable cause to believe that I was breaking the law. Keep an eye on me. Heck, cache with me if you want. If you find it first, give the brother a clue. :lol:

Our divirsity makes us 'more probable cause' ; you've been profiled brother :o

 

What were you wearing? I still like to think it was my shorts :D

 

Leslie

Link to comment

posted by the alabamarambler

 

Last weekend I and a friend were caching on a dirt road behind an elementary school and some kids wandered off the school grounds to talk to us and see what we were doing. Three scared moms weren't far behind,

 

am i the only one wondering why these kids were allowed to wander off the school grounds and approach complete strangers in a truck? why did they even want to? sounds like the kids need a few lessons in not talking to strangers.

Link to comment

Clearly my "milk and honey" statement didn't help clarify my position on the war on <insert ideology that can never actually be "defeated" here>.

 

Fortunately, our forefathers have gone to war against the British, the Germans, and so on. There's a war you can win.

 

The war on "communism" confused the current leaders of our country to think they could beat "ideas". The war on "drugs" and the war on "terror" are follow-up pursuits.

 

These can't be won....if they could...we'd all live in a land of milk and honey (ironically, what Palestine is supposed to be for the Jews according to the Bible).

 

My statement on virtuals therefore is said satirically.

Edited by ju66l3r
Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...