I think the grass roots direction is prefect. I went to backcountryparachutists.org and sent a letter to congress =). Thanks for the direction...
Jim
It's a two-part question. Question 1's options are 1-3. Question 2's options are 4-7. I just didn't feel like splitting it into two separate polls/threads. The poll is set to allow multiple answers.
Question 1 (options 1-3):
How do we, as a community, best attack the NPS' stance on jumping in the Parks?
Personally, my vote goes for option 2 and here's why I think so...
A counter-suit against the Park Service, stemming from the arrest and gear-siezure of a jumper who violated a standing (if unfair, unconstitutional, etc.) policy--in my opinion--already starts in defecit. A judge will see that the defendant knew beforehand that the act they committed was illegal, yet chose to do it anyway. Judges don't typically smile upon this kind of situation and there's a history with their stance on BASE jumpers that doesn't sit in our favor. Furthermore, despite the jumper's best efforts to act only on their own behalf and not speak for the community as a whole, the NPS and judge are likely to take said jumper and stereotype the rest of us based on that one case (or multiple cases over history).
Grass-roots efforts such as letter-writing campaigns, the ABP (Alliance of Backcountry Parachutists) will show a more proactive stance on legalization of jumping than a reactive court battle to eliminate the charges, reclaim gear, etc.
Which leads into Question 2 (options 4-7):
If a jumper is caught and arrested, whether in a National Park or private land, how viciously should they fight the charges or is there a point at which it's better to take your punishment and walk quietly away?
For this, I lean to 5 first, but depending on the charges...I'd have to go with 6. The problem here is once again, the jumper's actions could have far reaching implications on other jumpers, beyond simple stereotyping. The bigger the fight, the more likely a city (or county or whatever) is to enact legislation to ban fixed-object jumping and not simply rely on trespassing charges. I know this has been done before and I don't question or point at any jumpers involved. I don't know the full specifics of their case(s) and will not pass judgement. I just point this out as one of those "far reaching implications on other jumpers".
I personally don't think there are right or wrong answers to this. If I did, I'd have an agenda, a soap-box and I'd have posted this in the Speaker's Forum and have pre-written flames at the ready for anyone who disagrees with me. Not the case. I want to know what other jumpers think about this, how they'd react and why they'd react in that way.
-C.
Edit to modify the subject line.
