Jump to content

South Carolina Legislation Meeting


Recommended Posts

A park is generally owned by the State, County or a City. No cache should be placed in any park without talking to the person who is responsible for that park.

 

But we are discussing how Geocaching people are behaving in cemeteries. Read the posting for April 7, 2005 about what was heard and seen at the meeting. We should all be ashamed.

I have read that post, as well as every post in that thread since then.

 

I am supposed to be ashamed because of blatant lies, misinformation, and inaccuracies that were presented as facts? If you read it, you would have seen that in the beginning Ms. Ceips and her supporters made references to geocachers damaging and robbing graves. In the LAST discussion of this - she admitted she had no evidence of that.

 

So, tell me why in the heck am I supposed to be ashamed?

 

Also - while I do agree with you that it is common courtesy that one speak to the manager of a park, many don't interpret that rule as meaning that. It also is not enforced to mean that unless there is a known policy in the park.

 

sd

Link to comment
You folks now see what kind of lies we are up against?

 

There was no paint on a marker. The paint was on a small container about the size of a makeup compact which was stuck in the vines of a tree which was near the driveway. You didn't even have to walk past any markers to find it.

 

Here is the cache in question. A reviewer has already confirmed there is only one archived log where the cache was placed detailing the location of the final. The only modified log is by Geo13, a retired missionary.

 

There are so many outright lies flying around that it would embarrass Pinocchio.

 

BTW, if it's disrespectful to be in a cemetery at night, then they need to outlaw ghost tours. 'Nuff said.

Congratulations JimmyB. You just got duped by one of the bills creators. Gee no UV paint on a gavestone in a cemetary. So what other stories did they tell, go back and reread the entire thread and you can see how some of these other lies have not panned out.

Link to comment
But we are discussing how Geocaching people are behaving in cemeteries. Read the posting for April 7, 2005 about what was heard and seen at the meeting. We should all be ashamed.

 

I'm ashamed of the lies, innuendo and exaggerations being presented as fact by an elected representative of the people.

Link to comment
Congratulations JimmyB. You just got duped by one of the bills creators. Gee no UV paint on a gavestone in a cemetary. So what other stories did they tell, go back and reread the entire thread and you can see how some of these other lies have not panned out.

 

I think once Jimmy B reads this entire thread and learns the facts he will see fit to apolgize to the cache owners and seekers whose perfectly acceptable actions and words have been deliberately misrepresented by Ms. Ceips.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

I wish I had gone into politics (and maybe I still will)...

 

Not because I'm great at lying and exaggerating (although, I am)...but because these people have formalized procrastination and get paid to do so.

 

They just tabled (put aside) a bill...and after voting to do so...someone wanted to reconsider the vote...so just before that vote, they voted to table the suggestion to reconsider...and finally went to something else (but tabled stuff in some cases will still need to be considered later)...

 

lol...

Edited by ju66l3r
Link to comment
I'm ashamed of the lies, innuendo and exaggerations being presented as fact by an elected representative of the people.

That's the biggest thing that bugs me about this whole thing. Whether you agree with the bill or not (and I don't), I think it's extremely nasty how they have gone about presenting it.

Edited by RandLD
Link to comment

I'm not bothered by the procrasnization. Its given us all the time to write e-mails to all the parties involved. They are up to page 13.

 

Not looking foward to when the bill gets presented. Now they have new set of lies, like the jewish cemetary.

Edited by magellan315
Link to comment
But we are discussing how Geocaching people are behaving in cemeteries. Read the posting for April 7, 2005 about what was heard and seen at the meeting. We should all be ashamed.

When my wifes sister died and we attended her grave side service something happned that made us all smile, and in that moment we felt her presence.

 

While she was alive she had a lot of pets. She loved them all, they ruined her house. The family fought with her to keep them a managable number. The house was owned by the family and she rented it. This was a sticking point. Familie ties were not broken over the issue we all did things together but nobody ever gave in on that issue.

 

Just when the graveside service started a dog came along from nowhere. This dog meandered amongst us nosing our hands and then while we all tried to be somber it prodeeded to find a marker and mark it. Then it found the next one and so on. When it was happy with marking its territory we camped out and watched the service. What that dog did, was the right thing at the right time for our family to see. We could not help but smile and feel like it was the sister calling in a marker to get one final word in. If the owner of the cemetary had come along to appologize for the dog and boot it, he would not have been welcome.

 

How we act and show our respect is an indvidual thing. Acting like a goof which is the worst thing discussed is not disrespect and may very well be respectful given that person and how they view life, death, and how they cope with the fact that we all die. You can be ashamed, I will accept that they meant no disrespect.

Link to comment
I'm ashamed of the lies, innuendo and exaggerations being presented as fact by an elected representative of the people.

That's the biggest thing that bugs me about this whole thing. Whether you agree with the bill or not (and I don't), I think it's extremely nasty how they have gone about presenting it.

Welcome to the world of rhetoric, posturing and spin. The truth that this is a family activity will be left on the cutting room floor. It doesn't fit what they are trying to present.

Link to comment

you know I was planning to go up there and observe today, I'm glad i didnt because this might get heard on tuesday of next week, I feel sorry for someone whose been sitting on this for this long , I know some lone Geocacher been there everyday.

Link to comment
But we are discussing how Geocaching people are behaving in cemeteries.  Read the posting for April 7, 2005 about what was heard and seen at the meeting.  We should all be ashamed.

When my wifes sister died and we attended her grave side service something happned that made us all smile, and in that moment we felt her presence.

 

While she was alive she had a lot of pets. She loved them all, they ruined her house. The family fought with her to keep them a managable number. The house was owned by the family and she rented it. This was a sticking point. Familie ties were not broken over the issue we all did things together but nobody ever gave in on that issue.

 

Just when the graveside service started a dog came along from nowhere. This dog meandered amongst us nosing our hands and then while we all tried to be somber it prodeeded to find a marker and mark it. Then it found the next one and so on. When it was happy with marking its territory we camped out and watched the service. What that dog did, was the right thing at the right time for our family to see. We could not help but smile and feel like it was the sister calling in a marker to get one final word in. If the owner of the cemetary had come along to appologize for the dog and boot it, he would not h ave been welcome.

 

How we act and show our respect is an indvidual thing. Acting like a goof which is the worst thing discussed is not disrespect and may very well be respectful given that person and how they view life, death, and how they cope with the fact that we all die. You can be ashamed, I will accept that they meant no disrespect.

RK I love that story. We all show our respect in different manners and styles.

My great aunt Sarah was an English teacher, and the family grammarian. To this day, my father still will correct me with 'your Aunt Sarah wouldn't approve'.

At her funeral both her sons deliberately? made errors in their graveside remarks, glanced down at the coffin, and said 'oops, sorry Mom.' :blink:

 

I have already instructed my wife to play some Dixieland Jazz at my Memorial Service. :huh:

I will not even add my thought on the misstatements on the Jewish cemetery issue. This is a family friendly forum. <_< And it is just giving credibility to the divisive tactics of the bill's sponsors and their staff.

Link to comment
...We all show our respect in different manners and styles.

So true. I have friends who placed a cache on the tombstone of their deceased son. It is their belief that their son would have loved geocaching; they feel it is the perfect way to honor him. :blink:<_<

Link to comment

I thought about using something on my daughter’s grave to give coordinates to a geocache, but decided against it because I don’t think she would have had any interest in geocaching.

 

But I am thinking about ordering a special head stone for myself which has a place to put a log in it for a log only geocache. But it looks like it is good thing that I wouldn't be buried in SC.

Edited by AllenLacy
Link to comment
So true. I have friends who placed a cache on the tombstone of their deceased son. It is their belief that their son would have loved geocaching; they feel it is the perfect way to honor him. :blink:<_<

In general, I do not like the idea of geocaches in cemeteries, and even if this law doesn't pass, I don't know that I would place or even seek a cache in a cemetery. As my wife said, "How would you like it if you're at a family member's grave and you see a couple of people wandering around in and out of the graves, digging in the bushes, etc.?" Cemeteries aren't so much for the dead as for the living who are left behind. They give us a place to remember his/her life and to come to grips with our own grief, and that's often a very private matter. But that's just my personal opinion, not something that I think should be legislated.

 

(The post I quoted above might be a bit different -- placed by the family of one of those buried in that cemetery. I think that's pretty neat. But most cemetery caches aren't like that.)

 

That being said -- when I was in school, we took field trips to cemeteries several times, getting "rubbings" off of various gravestones, even doing a "scavenger hunt" one time (find the tombstone of the Confederate Soldier, find the tombstone with the misspelled word, find the grave of a family pet, etc.) My teachers always got permission from the local owners before we came over, and the owner often talked to us a little bit about the cemetery before we started wandering around.

 

I don't see that as much different from geocaching (we had sheets of paper with clues on it vs. coordinates and a GPS Receiver) except for one thing -- it was a more "controlled" hunt with a teacher (and often the caretaker) looking on, making sure we weren't getting too out of hand. Geocaching is basically self-policed, and sometimes a few cachers do get out of hand, and there's no authority figure there to scold them.

 

Do I think the state government needs to be the "authority figure" here? No. I just think that some Geocachers need to be a little more respectful. If that means Geocaching.com banning cemetery caches, I think that's something Geocaching.com needs to consider and handle, not the state of SC.

 

(Sorry for the long post -- I got a little wound up ...)

Link to comment

RandLD, You have made some well thought through statements. One thing everyone who is new to this thread should remember is that this bill is also going to include any place that is listed as a historic site/location. Which will include portions of or entire cities, towns, and counties.

Link to comment
RandLD, You have made some well thought through statements. One thing everyone who is new to this thread should remember is that this bill is also going to include any place that is listed as a historic site/location. Which will include portions of or entire cities, towns, and counties.

I remember reading that, but I was a little unclear on what constitutes a "Historical Property of the State" (even after reading the notes on the SC website ...) so I wasn't quite what to say about that. According to this site:

 

(4) "Historic properties" means those buildings, sites, objects, structures, and districts that are listed in the National Register of Historic Places.

 

Does this bill also include "Historic Districts"? It doesn't specifically say that. Is this really as broad as you say it is?

 

One other thing -- the bill mentions archaeological sites, too. Aren't those already off-limits?

Edited by RandLD
Link to comment

I think you're right.

 

I did some quick research on http://www.nationalregisterofhistoricplaces.com.

 

For example, if you go down to South Carolina, and then Charleston County, you'll see that Ashley River Historic District, Charleston Historic District, Charleston's French Quarter District, etc. are all listed under the "National Registry of Historic Places".

 

So, yeah. You're right. Sorry about that.

 

(Even if that wasn't the case, I'm no fan of this legislation, but that makes it even worse ...)

Link to comment

The amusing thing is you can download the entire database for the national register of historic places. And you know what is in that access database? You guessed it - coordinates. In fact it even includes coordinates that draw the entire area around each location. But don't you dare think of using this to go to those locations. Uh uh uh.

Link to comment
So true.  I have friends who placed a cache on the tombstone of their deceased son.  It is their belief that their son would have loved geocaching; they feel it is the perfect way to honor him.  <_<  :blink:

In general, I do not like the idea of geocaches in cemeteries, and even if this law doesn't pass, I don't know that I would place or even seek a cache in a cemetery. As my wife said, "How would you like it if you're at a family member's grave and you see a couple of people wandering around in and out of the graves, digging in the bushes, etc.?" Cemeteries aren't so much for the dead as for the living who are left behind. They give us a place to remember his/her life and to come to grips with our own grief, and that's often a very private matter. But that's just my personal opinion, not something that I think should be legislated.

 

(The post I quoted above might be a bit different -- placed by the family of one of those buried in that cemetery. I think that's pretty neat. But most cemetery caches aren't like that.)

 

That being said -- when I was in school, we took field trips to cemeteries several times, getting "rubbings" off of various gravestones, even doing a "scavenger hunt" one time (find the tombstone of the Confederate Soldier, find the tombstone with the misspelled word, find the grave of a family pet, etc.) My teachers always got permission from the local owners before we came over, and the owner often talked to us a little bit about the cemetery before we started wandering around.

 

I don't see that as much different from geocaching (we had sheets of paper with clues on it vs. coordinates and a GPS Receiver) except for one thing -- it was a more "controlled" hunt with a teacher (and often the caretaker) looking on, making sure we weren't getting too out of hand. Geocaching is basically self-policed, and sometimes a few cachers do get out of hand, and there's no authority figure there to scold them.

 

Do I think the state government needs to be the "authority figure" here? No. I just think that some Geocachers need to be a little more respectful. If that means Geocaching.com banning cemetery caches, I think that's something Geocaching.com needs to consider and handle, not the state of SC.

 

(Sorry for the long post -- I got a little wound up ...)

Well said.

 

I remember going to the Mormon Pioneer cememtary at Winter Quarters here in Omaha. We were expected to stand quietly at the base of the statue and be respectful. Tall order for a bunch of 5th graders, but we did it. Its one thing to visit a historic place and its another to wander around it it off the beaten path.

 

The cemetary here is a small thing by modern standards and has one large statue and monument area, and then some head stones. While I have no reason to believe that these headstones are unusually fragile, I also have no reason to doubt that the people who care for the cemetary budget a certain amount for wear and tear in the public area, but not for the private area. Adding people walking around the private area or disturbing vegetation in these areas means adding cost of maintenance. Adding costs to the cemetary is inconsiderate.

 

We have a cemetary cache near Omaha. The cache itself is only NEAR the cemetary and one could find it, trade, write a log entry, and take pictures as desired and never disturb the actual cemetary. Even if a family member was at the site, you would be able to find the thing and never bother them. I am fine with this kind of cache, sadly this seems to be the exception rather than the rule.

 

I agree that cemetaries are for private matters of grief and such. We should be respectful of that need and hold off on cemetary caches that are in the private areas of cemetaries.

Link to comment
The amusing thing is you can download the entire database for the national register of historic places. And you know what is in that access database? You guessed it - coordinates. In fact it even includes coordinates that draw the entire area around each location. But don't you dare think of using this to go to those locations. Uh uh uh.

You could use those coordinates to go to those locations as long as you are not searching for an intentionally left behind box containing a log (or whatever legalese they gave for the definition of "Geocache" and "Letterbox").

 

You're welcome to use your GPSr and go to the proximity of those places (but not the specific location). You can even stop and smell the roses close to where the GPS told you to go. You could *even* have your picture taken next to something famous there! You could even see if there's a container hidden in a nearby tree!! Just don't touch it if you find it. That would be against the law as it would tie you to a container whose purpose is to hold small things.

 

While you're there, don't use your GPSr to find a dead relative and put flowers in the vase. That suddenly makes the vase a geocache by letter of this bill...unless the flowers are Sunflowers. Don't leave any notes for your dead relative either...

 

It would also technically be illegal to use your GPSr to locate one of those money donation boxes for MS or Jerry's Kids while in the French Quarter in SC.

 

I wonder if the state archaeologist uses GPSr to map out his excavation sites. If he does and he places anything he finds into a small container for storage and archival...I'd love to see any of you in SC file a citizen arrest against him.

 

Poorly worded bills are fun!

Link to comment
You could use those coordinates to go to those locations as long as you are not searching for an intentionally left behind box containing a log (or whatever legalese they gave for the definition of "Geocache" and "Letterbox").

Actually, no you can't. Unless they finally fixed it, this is the legalize defining a geocache in SC:

(2) "Geocaching" means the activity of participants using a global positioning system (GPS) device to locate the geocache or other specific location.

By trying to make sure evil geocachers didn't use that "virtual cache loophole", they are banning all GPS navigation.

Edited by Mopar
Link to comment

I agree that cemetaries are for private matters of grief and such. We should be respectful of that need and hold off on cemetary caches that are in the private areas of cemetaries.

While this is an important thing to remember, it should also be remembered that this bill is not just about cemetaries. This bill will also ban Geocahing from locations designated as Historic. This will mean the sections of and/or entire districts, towns, cities, and some counties will not allow Geocaching. The issue of cemetaries can be resoloved through open dialouge, not a law. This bill is overly broad and poorly written. There are laws already covering issues regarding tresspasing and vandalism.

Link to comment
You could use those coordinates to go to those locations as long as you are not searching for an intentionally left behind box containing a log (or whatever legalese they gave for the definition of "Geocache" and "Letterbox").

Actually, no you can't. Unless they finally fixed it, this is the legalize defining a geocache in SC:

(2) "Geocaching" means the activity of participants using a global positioning system (GPS) device to locate the geocache or other specific location.

By trying to make sure evil geocachers didn't use that "virtual cache loophole", they are banning all GPS navigation.

You have to read everything I wrote very carefully. You could go to those positions by using your GPSr to get within a proximity and then by using your best judgement (like anyone with a map) you could finish your desired trip. If I want to get to a specific place within the historic district, I could program a waypoint for just outside of the district and then know in general where I'd like to go from there. At no point did I "geocache" within the historic district.

Link to comment
... We should be respectful of that need and hold off on cemetary caches that are in the private areas of cemetaries.

What would normally be considered a private area of a cemetary? :blink:

 

Do I have to make a list of everyone who is ever allowed to visit me, forever, in order to get them a special pass? :huh:

 

Am I being disrespectful to the dead if a stare too hard at that nearby tree? What if I write something down?

 

Am I doing it wrong? <_<

Edited by sbell111
Link to comment

This is venturing into the "not on topic" area, but you don't really own your body after you die. So yes, someone (a living person) can "own you" after you die. Usually it is your relatives who give you a proper burial. However, someone could theoretically not allow your relatives access to your grave.

 

I'm no lawyer so please correct me if I'm wrong.

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