astrov

I wouldn't go to the Olys for climbing.

http://www.bellsfromeverest.com/ordering.html The bells turned from canisters were being offered in the mountain gear catalog year before last for something like 10 grand!!!

"destroy Christian America" Not too sure here but aren't most people from Mexico Catholic?

not quite sure I can follow the logic, heliophile. anyway, things like this happen because litigation costs too much.

Last summer on the Emmons route one of the womyn guiding the group in front of us dropped trou at about 12 thousand feet and laid a deuce while tied to her rope team. Unfortunately we were right behind, following them up. Gross. Use a bag next time. But the spectacle was free, "faster than you"!

thanks for the link - i'd heard of this case before but didn't remember the specific details Hi Ivan. This is from the opinion's syllabus, so it's more of a coherent distillation of the (constitutional) law than an expression of the law itself. Long and short of it is that if this case is still controlling, your search of the i-pod wouldn't fly under 4th Amendment. The search was not justified "at its inception" since the offense which you had "reasonable suspicion" to believe was going on (disrupting class) was a foreclosed possibility as soon as the i-pod was taken away. Unless you had some "reasonable" (that is, articulable) suspicion that search of the i-pod would turn up evidence of violation of the law or of school code, you shouldn't have searched it. This is not to say that the law forbids a search; rather, just that if the 4th Amendment exclusionary rule is deemed to apply, the evidence of commission of crime you gathered couldn't be used in a prosecution of the girl et al. It would of course be up to you and the prosecution to argue that the girl's reluctance to hand over the i-pod (before turning it off) gave you grounds to believe that it contained fruits of criminal activity. (After all, maybe she didn't want the batteries to die?) I don't really know the cases, or the law in Washington. Hell, I don't really know anything. I just thought it would be interesting to talk about this in addition to the "should we let our kids do drugs" aspect. "2. Schoolchildren have legitimate expectations of privacy. They may find it necessary to carry with them a variety of legitimate, noncontraband items, and there is no reason to conclude that they have necessarily waived all rights to privacy in such items by bringing them onto school grounds. But striking the balance between schoolchildren's legitimate expectations of privacy and the school's equally legitimate need to maintain an environment in which learning can take place requires some easing of the restrictions to which searches by public authorities are ordinarily subject. Thus, school officials need not obtain a warrant before searching a student who is under their authority. Moreover, school officials need not be held subject to the requirement that searches be based on probable cause to believe that the subject of the search has violated or is violating the law. Rather, the legality of a search of a student should depend simply on the reasonableness, under all the circumstances, of the search. Determining the reasonableness of any search involves a determination of whether the search was justified at its inception and whether, as conducted, it was reasonably related in scope to the circumstances that justified the interference in the first place. Under ordinary circumstances, the search of a student by a school official will be justified at its inception where there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that the search will turn up evidence that the student has violated or is violating either the law or the rules of the school. And such a search will be permissible in its scope when the measures adopted are reasonably related to the objectives of the search, and not excessively intrusive in light of the student's age and sex and the nature of the infraction. Pp. 337-343."

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0469_0325_ZS.html

https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/Study?tid=-1

Sunnyside, Crystal Mountain :tup:

All dressed up and no place to go- I was planning on going up to Canmore from Jan. 2 thru the 7th. However, my anticipated partner bailed on me due to job concerns. If you want to make the drive up with me and partner up, that would be cool- they still have room for us in the Clubhouse in Canmore. I could leave before the 7th, too. It's only a 12 hour drive ... In the alternative, I'm free for local or other ice climbing from the 1- 8th. I could go to Banks Lake, or where-ever. So pm me. I have gear and car.

Jamin, "you're gonna be the first man to climb the Murderhorn!"

Here's a suggestion, implied: http://www.nsf.gov/discoveries/disc_summ.jsp?cntn_id=100201&org=NSF

hey, I'll be out of school and otherwise just bumming around in Seattle area for this period of time. I would like to climb some ice. I am not experienced enough to be leading any hard stuff (WI 4/5) but I can certainly follow you up it ... I am willing to go to Banks lake, BC, maybe even alberta ... I have a car, ice gear, and snowshoes (2 pair). PM me - Ian

makes a good case for clearcutting

Is the Valley of the Silent Men the East or West fork of Lena Creek? Either way, that sucks, because that's some beautiful forest in there ...

I can go on Friday as well ... I am in portland. No class friday.

I am interested in beacon rock on friday (tomorrow). I have a car and gear. I will send a pm.

check out condom fishing in Wapato Lake

+ free solo

just give me a break from studying ... we have many local options. I am flexible on time of day, too. I can belay you on whatever you want to lead (and clean) but I'm probably not climbing over 5.10 I have car and gear, sport and trad.

okay, let's just keep it local if anyone wants - broughton bluff, chimney rocks ... lots of options according to http://ors.alpineclub.org/AAC/crags_gds.html I am new to climbing around portland but not new to climbing ...

What does someone say to heading out from Pdx to Smith, leaving tonight at about 7 (when my last class ends), crashing at the free camp ground, climbing in the morning / aft., and coming back before night fall? I am interested in sport up to 5.10 and easier trad. alternatively a trip to beacon rock might be in order, which would come with the benefit that we could leave Friday morning. c'mon, let's climb ... pm me.

yes, the third-to-last photo is marvelous ... looks like a beautiful trip, it's on the top of my list, but probably somewhat above my ability ...

O.k., everybody. I am a law student at lewis and clark law school in Portland. I am working with the NEDC, our in house non-profit, (see NEDC.org), on submitting commentary to the Park Service et al. regarding this Olympic National Park plan. Filing commentary helps us establish standing if we decide to litigate later on an issue on which we believe the park service is violating the law. Additionally, commentary has stopped some illegal actions altogether via preliminary injunctions, for example, the logging of the Bull Run watershed. So, if you have concerns about this plan, or think it violates laws, or have some other specific critique, please share it with me and we might be able to work it into our submission. An attorney (or several) will review the commentary for relevance and accuracy before it is submitted. We are all doing this on a strictly volunteer basis, so it's all for the benefit of the park. If anyone decides to include your suggestion I can give you proper credit and cc: you the commentary when they decide to send it off. If you have spare time and enjoy researching, and a love of ONP (like I do), this is a great way for you to be heard and to influence the park in a positive way. thanks. Ian