0
TomAiello

Naming Names

Recommended Posts

Y'all are often saying that NPS etc. are monitoring the BASE jumping forums. But isn't it possible that the NPS or another agency will implement the well-known scenario: using an insider ("spy"?), who's willing to BASE jump, but only for purposes of collecting info on the objects and then burning them all at once? This would be a disaster to the community, and it can be done, considering this technique is widely used in anti-drug wars or whatever. Especially if tensions between BASErs and government grow higher.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What are you suggesting we do?

Should we ask every BASE jumper we know... "Are you an officer of the law? Are you associated in any way with Law Enforcement?"

I don't think we're important enough to draw this sort of attention. Keeping an officer undercover long enough to get "in" with any substantial number of BASE communities would be hugely expensive.

BASE jumping is not the sort of crime that drug dealing is. We are not affecting anyone other than ourselves. So long as we follow good BASE ethics (a word used strangely correct, here) and don't leave behind evidence we were even there - I see no reason we would come under any special sort of scrutiny.

Leave only footprints...

- Cajones

The laws of physics are strictly enforced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[QUOTE]Should we ask every BASE jumper we know... "Are you an officer of the law? Are you associated in any way with Law Enforcement?"
[/QUOTE]

As a sidenote, an officer of the law enforcement can do anything to gain your confidence, i.e. use illegal drugs, distribute illegal drugs, buy illegal drugs, jump from illegal spots, smile and politely say that he is not an officer, and THEN ARREST YOU. Sorry, I just hate when people say that all you have to do is ask someone if they are a cop or not to narc out a narc.

---------------------------------------------
let my inspiration flow,
in token rhyme suggesting rhythm...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dont think any "spy" would have it in them.. it would look weired that they has to do aprox 2-300skydives and some ground crew to burn 5 objetcs or so,dont think they would spend that kind of mony while they just could set cameras up evry were if they wanted to..
Rember we dont hurt or harm others,its a minor elegal activity,if its an elegal object..

Stay safe
Stefan Faber

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Might make a good movie though... Hmmm, who would we put in the starring role? Or the love interest?
If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead.
Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No apology necessary. I was aware of this, in spite of the television portrayal that it constitutes entrapment. You actually have to prove the officer enticed you to do something you wouldn't have done on your own. Difficult, at best, when it comes to BASE jumping. My premise was more in - how do we check out the background of newbies? We generally don't. We don't care where they come from, or what they do for a living (unless they happen to work for a tower company or can bring some form of stimulation to the parties). Our community carries enough cautious suspicion of anyone interested in BASE jumping, as is. We don't need to further this with a questionnaire.

The laws of physics are strictly enforced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Most tv coverage usually only shows jumping when somthing goes wrong, same as skydiving.


Too few objects in my area and even if there were a lot, I wouldn't want to burn one.




Just out of curiousity (and so that my posts don't get edited again:$) - what constitutes burning a site?

I posted about Felix jumping in SA and I named the site which was subsequently edited out. I saw the jump on a TV program which was broadcast nationwide as well as all the way across Africa up to Egypt. The insert had so much detail that it had an almost documentary feel to it. The particular object was named and shown several times. It is one of the best-known landmarks in Johannesburg and even if it hadn't been named, every viewer in the greater Johannesburg area will have recognised it. Skreamer followed up my post with an Internet article quoting verbatim the entire TV insert's dialogue - this (unedited) article is obviously available to anyone surfing the net.

I recognise that one of the rules of this forum is to not name sites (and for breaking that rule I apologise), but how far does it go?



Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Might make a good movie though... Hmmm, who would we put in the starring role? Or the love interest?

I would like the role of Me, played by .. Adam Sandler.
Hmmm,.. and my love interest by...J-Lo Ya..Ya. O-baby
And then our love child born out of wedlock (played by).... Brittney Spears.
Conceived on the exit poit of xxxxxxxx (self edit) Fill in exit point of conception with your fovorite object.
Then to end our jumping crime spree.
with the N.P.S. and tracking dogs, hot on our heals
We would Crater-In together, hand in hand, Screeming.
The End

...Ray Losli

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

...what constitutes burning a site?



That's actually a big question. There are various degrees of "burning". Sometimes a site is just a little "hot" (so you can jump it, but you have to be careful), and sometimes it's entirely "burnt" (just about impossible to jump ever again).

As regards your specific case:

There is an unusually high density of "BASE-dangerous" people around this site. That means that we have a huge pool of people who have some desire to BASE jump, have some gear that might work (typically skydiving gear) but have no training or experience.

In my opinion, posting site details here is more dangerous (to the readers who could potentially jump it) than even showing a TV documentary across an entire continent. How many people in the "BASE-Dangerous" phase saw that documentary? I'd guess fewer than saw your post about it here.

The point is not so much to protect the site (except incidentally). It's to protect those people who might go launch themselves off the site.

I recognize that it's unlikely that someone is going to fly to SA just to jump that site. On the other hand, I do know several people who have visited SA to jump. Such people can show up without contacting locals and do some very bad (from a local jumpers perspective) things to the sites--like, say, bringing in a documentary film crew for their publicity stunt.

It's better to be safe, in my opinion, than sorry. Why assume that the object is "burnt" so it must be ok to spread the info around as much as you want? What does that really help anyone?
-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey Tom, surely naming legal sites in RSA is not a problem, the Captour (Cape tourism company) talk about BASE jumping from the cable car and mountain as a bit of a tourist attraction. There are the obvious E's for anyone in the Western Cape, 'BASE dangerous' or not.
Naturally contacting a local who could advise you about a specific site would make sense, but other than that, 'BASE dangerous' people are going to jump anyway. Besides if you die in RSA no one in authority (police etc.) are going to care that much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Hey Tom, surely naming legal sites in RSA is not a problem...



Have you asked the SA guys how they feel about it? I haven't but I'd expect their opinions would be the most important.

Still, if you want to discuss specific sites, I'd recommend taking the conversation to BLiNC. I'm not very interested in changing the rules here, so until Sangiro overrules me, I expect site names, legal or not, will keep getting edited out of posts here.
-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm barely a skydiver and do not plan to BASE jump. I do appreciate the lesson in this thread though because as obvious as it may be to everyone else, it wasn't to me. Of course it is now! Thanks for the etiquette lesson. I hate going through life as a dick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Good point. Naming a site could cause someone living nearby to say "I can do that", go out and buy surplus military gear at a flea market, then get hurt, or worse. The incident will then be reported in the media as "BASE jumper....", damaging the image of your sport.

"Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ."
-NickDG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>>Good point. Naming a site could cause someone living nearby to say "I can do that", go out and buy surplus military gear at a flea market, then get hurt, or worse. The incident will then be reported in the media as "BASE jumper....", damaging the image of your sport.<<

Valid, but only up to a point. As far as I know there has never been a case where someone who just lives nearby, finds a rig, and goes ahead and hurts or kills themselves. Maybe I'm old fashioned but I tend to believe people are smarter than that. (Now watch that thought come back and bite me in the butt).

And let's face it, how much of a secret is BASE anymore. It's in the movies, in print ads, and on television. Ask any teenage boy what BASE jumping is and most will come close to getting the answer right. What stops them from looking around for something to jump from just like we do?

The image thing is a tougher nut to crack as it used to be we never cared about our image. That sounds cavalier, but that was the very essence to the freedom of BASE jumping. We spent our lives worrying about our image first as skydivers who had to deal with the FAA, local airport boards, and so on. When we started BASE jumping it seemed something we did purely for ourselves, a reward of sorts after skydiving. The thought was skydiving could be shut down by the powers that be, but BASE jumping was outlaw already, so what could they do, and how could anyone stop us? Protecting the image of BASE jumping was a laughable goal. Today a skydiver will say, yes, I'd like to BASE someday, or no, that's not for me, but rarely do you hear the kind of vitriolic hatred for BASE that used to came from the skydiving side of the house. We outlasted all our early critics and this is certainly no time to start begging people to let us BASE jump. I would call that going backwards.

But the whole dynamic of the sport has changed with the advent of legal sites all over the world. Now we do have a stake in what image we project. We now have something to protect and it's those sites. Call it the price of progress, but there it is. The biggest difference in BASE now and BASE in the 1980s is not the gear, not the techniques, not the aerials, and not the tricks. It's the fact we sold our BASE souls for access. Okay, I'm down with it, I'm a progressive, and I know nothing stays the same forever.

However, I'll admit to missing those days when the only reason we protected sites was to keep those few BASE jumpers who were glory hounds from day blazing the site on the five o'clock news. I miss that time when people could do whatever the heck they had the knobs and imagination to do without risking being ripped apart on some web site. I miss getting phone calls from around the world in the middle of the night where a brother breathlessly details his latest adventure while still wearing his rig. I miss that time when you never had to explain rudimentary parachute behavior to a prospective BASE jumper, as back then most were well past that point before they would even consider the sport.

The far bigger question is, are we better off now or then? I suppose you'd have to say we now have the potential to be safer, we are much more knowledgeable, and we are doing very cool and interesting things. But it's a different sport now so as far as being better off, well, the jury is still out and only future history will give us that answer. Stay tuned, it should be exciting . . .

NickD :)BASE 194

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

As far as I know there has never been a case where someone who just lives nearby, finds a rig, and goes ahead and hurts or kills themselves.



As far as I know, this has actually happened in Washington, involving Ebay and a much lower bridge a few miles from where the poor jumper should have been. I'm sure somebody can fill us in...

But I agree; the main reason for not naming names is in my opinion to prevent jumpers going there without the required background knowledge (access guidelines, best times to jump it, potential dangers).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
***the main reason for not naming names is in my opinion to prevent jumpers going there without the required background knowledge (access guidelines, best times to jump it, potential dangers).

Quote

Who knows someone could tie a rope between 2 trees outside of a ball field, attach a harness to themselves and then jump out of the tree while someone on the ground belays for them. :S:):S

"I'm not a gynecologist but I will take a look at it"
RB #1295, Smokey Sister #1, HellFish #658, Dirty Sanchez #194, Muff Brothers #3834, POPS #9614, Orfun Foster-Parent?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
0