goatboy Posted May 10, 2006 Posted May 10, 2006 thank dog goatboi has given his thumbs down disapproval. case closed. Your sarcasm is most insightful and interesting, but what about my points do you disagree with, Llama? I'm more interested in the topic of this thread than anonymous insults from Llamas.. Can't goats and Llamas co-exist??? Quote
G-spotter Posted May 10, 2006 Posted May 10, 2006 Arches acting Chief Ranger Karen McKinlay-Jones believes Potter's actions on Sunday violated the intent of park regulations but said the park's solicitor advised that Potter cannot be prosecuted because the regulation "was not worded well." Quote
G-spotter Posted May 10, 2006 Posted May 10, 2006 BTW how many of you haters wrote to 5.10 to complain after Sharma tested positive for weed? Quote
jmace Posted May 10, 2006 Posted May 10, 2006 (edited) Bwahahaha...they cant even charge him...sounds like it wasnt illegal to me.. Edited May 10, 2006 by jmace Quote
olyclimber Posted May 10, 2006 Posted May 10, 2006 Bwahahaha...they cant even charge him...sounds like it wasnt illegal to me.. ya...funny! don't you love pissing off the people who can decide whether you can climb in a particular area or not? so he gets off, and all of us get to deal with more restrictively worded regulations as well as a black eye for climbers in general over the press on this. looks like we're all winners! Quote
olyclimber Posted May 10, 2006 Posted May 10, 2006 What else is new? Heres a news flash for you dru: Don't Climb on Da Arch! Quote
cj001f Posted May 10, 2006 Posted May 10, 2006 and all of us get to deal with more restrictively worded regulations THAT DID ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO CHANGE WHAT IS OPEN TO CLIMBING! oh, sorry, they banned slacklining Quote
DirtyHarry Posted May 10, 2006 Posted May 10, 2006 Not in the short run, but long term ramifications ... Another stone in the puddle and all that. Quote
olyclimber Posted May 10, 2006 Posted May 10, 2006 apparently it was fine to climb....look at potter...he faces no legal repercussion...and I'm sure his actions won't have any result beyond filling up 10 pages of spew here, right? focus on the unimportant things if it makes you feel better. Quote
jmace Posted May 10, 2006 Posted May 10, 2006 First of all, he didnt do anything illegal...yes he made it clear to the wardens that they have misinformed the public about the regulations regarding climbing and that they should re-word them... as well as a black eye for climbers in general over the press on this. looks like we're all winners! Isnt there a post with all the links to all the magazine's so you can write in and tellem how bad this is..so who's giving the bad press here... Quote
olyclimber Posted May 10, 2006 Posted May 10, 2006 i believe the links posted were not to magazines (the press) but to potter's sponsors (those funding his "work"). Quote
DirtyHarry Posted May 10, 2006 Posted May 10, 2006 First of all, he didnt do anything illegal...yes he made it clear to the wardens that they have misinformed the public about the regulations regarding climbing and that they should re-word them... Potter did do something illegal. The regulation just wasn't specific enough to stand up to a constitutional challenge in court. Public / state perception and access is the issue here, not whether Potter will get ticketed. That is irrelevant. The Park Service didn't misinform anyone, what are you talking about? Quote
cj001f Posted May 10, 2006 Posted May 10, 2006 i believe the links posted were not to magazines (the press) but to potter's sponsors (those funding his "work"). Focusing on whats important: http://www.accessfund.org http://www.succ.org/ Do you give kudos to patagonia for supporting causes like the Access Fund? Oh whats really important is 'the image' of climbing. Bullshit, you all lovee the rebel schtick and suck it up through a straw. And few of you bother to be involved with the managers in a positive manner - the image improvement that will really make a difference, and cancel out much of the bad will generated by the few. Quote
olyclimber Posted May 10, 2006 Posted May 10, 2006 damn, you're right! potter is an american hero, sticking his finger in the Man's eye for all of us. I thank you potter. thanks for making my life better. Quote
cj001f Posted May 10, 2006 Posted May 10, 2006 damn, you're right! potter is an american hero, sticking his finger in the Man's eye for all of us. I thank you potter. thanks for making my life better. He's not a hero. He's only done what climbers before him have done, and climbers after him will do. Bitching to Patagonia will only eliminate this thorn; it won't eliminate future thorns or even change the 'culture' of climbing so the thorns stop appearing. If we, as climbers, start forming positive relationships (of which we have too few) it will go along way towards eliminating future sources of strain with managers when these thorns appear. Quote
RogerJ Posted May 10, 2006 Posted May 10, 2006 isnt it innocent till proven guilty..? Don't all those HD Camera videos, articles, self agrandizing statement and photos sort of at least "prove" he did it? Quote
slothrop Posted May 10, 2006 Posted May 10, 2006 "Innocent", WTF? He admitted to climbing it. Any fool can see that the NPS meant to ban climbing named arches, but the legalese wasn't up to snuff. Him suffering no consequences and climbers suffering a worsened relationship with land managers is the worst possible outcome. If there's no legal path to punishment, then Patagonia and any other sponsors should do something to take up the slack. Quote
jmace Posted May 10, 2006 Posted May 10, 2006 ya it proved he climbed something that was not illegal..if it was he would be fined or another appropriate punishment.. The onus is on him to understand the regs before climbing and filming it for the digi. Maybe he did maybe he hired a lawyer before hand to interpet the law for him and it was obvious that it was legal to climb...? Quote
G-spotter Posted May 10, 2006 Posted May 10, 2006 Maybe the Park Service will cement a giant "Climbing This Arch Is Forbidden" sign on the bottom of the Arch, and reduce the difficulty of the sit-start significantly. Quote
G-spotter Posted May 10, 2006 Posted May 10, 2006 If there's no legal path to punishment, then Patagonia and any other sponsors should do something to take up the slack. Yeah, since what he did was legal, therefore his sponsors should punish him for not breaking the law. Quote
slothrop Posted May 10, 2006 Posted May 10, 2006 STFU, Dru. I'm going to punish you for being a contrarian argumentative asshole, which is perfectly legal, by not letting you have any of my cheesy poofs. Quote
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.