+Pyewacket Posted May 27, 2005 Share Posted May 27, 2005 I'm working closely with Sissy (of Sissy and CR), trying to recruit help to keep the ludicrous SC anti-caching law (HR 3777) from passing. If ANY of you have time to do some research, please email me at teeking @ sc.rr.com or Sissy at scsissy @ sc.rr.com (remove the spaces in the addresses) and either she or I will email you a little later with details on how you can help. And we NEED your help! Thanks so much for your time. Mods, please allow the threads I'm starting in several topics to remain open; time is short and we have work to do. We need as many readers as possible. Thanks in advance. Quote Link to comment
+DrumCorpsAlum Posted June 21, 2005 Share Posted June 21, 2005 I can't find anything. HR 3777 is a financial aid law. Quote Link to comment
laserone Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 (edited) This is terrible! When will they make a decision about this? *edited to add: I found this which helped me understand it a bit more: http://www.jquinton.com/archives/002834.html Edited June 27, 2005 by laserone Quote Link to comment
Geo_Lady Posted June 29, 2005 Share Posted June 29, 2005 I think this is a pretty ridiculous law. Why would they prohibit someone who calls themselves a "geocacher" from visiting a historical landmark, but they will let every else do it? I don't get it. And if it is already illegal to visit gravesites at night and if the offical rules say you need to get permission to put it on private property, WHAT IS THE PROBLEM? So don't put the cache in the graveyard...that should be common sense. But give the historical relevance of the site. I just don't get it. Doesn't South Carolina have other problems they could be troubling the Senate with? One question: Is this a done deal or is it still in the Senate? Quote Link to comment
+Alan2 Posted June 29, 2005 Share Posted June 29, 2005 (edited) My reading of the bill precludes placement of conventional caches (ie. hidden container) without permission. Virtuals would be allowed without permission. This means that both cachers and non-cachers are allowed to use a GPS to locate historical markers and other objects already in the cemetery, archeological site or historical place. edit = clarity and spelling Edited June 29, 2005 by Alan2 Quote Link to comment
CoyoteRed Posted June 29, 2005 Share Posted June 29, 2005 My reading of the bill precludes placement of conventional caches (ie. hidden container) without permission. Virtuals would be allowed without permission. However, virtual stages would not be allowed as long as the multi ends in a physical cache. As we know, virtuals are difficult in the extreme to get approved. There is always the "can you make an offset" response. In this case, it would be a no. Then it would be, "can you place one nearby and advise people to visit the spot?" Of course, you start allowing for this and South Carolina will be held up by land agencies as the way to create caches, much to the detriment of the hobby. So, no, the bill is bad news in every form that has been presented so far. The Senators in the sub-comittee called it a bad law and unfortunately, rather than toss it out wants to work to make it a "good law." One question: Is this a done deal or is it still in the Senate? It's still in Senate sub-commitee and there will likely nothing be done until next session in January. Quote Link to comment
+Alan2 Posted June 29, 2005 Share Posted June 29, 2005 There's a lesson in this for the other 49 states. If you don't want to wind up getting laws in your state restricting caching like SC, get permision from the cemetery owners before you place your cache. That's required by GC.Com. If the rule was folowed, there would be no law proposed. SC is lucky in that the restriction basically mirrors GC.Com's own rule. What my concern is that the next legislature (maybe in my state) won't stop at cemeteries but make the law broader by including parks and other areas where there are no or few current restrictions. By creating a furor by caching in cemeteries without permission where, whether your like it or not many people are very sensitive, a much broader restriction could be imposed in the next state. Quote Link to comment
+webscouter. Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 I was looking for a quote for my sig line and found this. I thought it might be an appropriate rally cry for us. We must not permit our respect for the dead or our sympathy for the living to lead us into an act of injustice to the balance of the living. Davy Crockett Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.