Oh, the first bit of laws are often like that - then they add page
after page of detailed explanation and definition and hopefully the
confusion disappears. Think of that first bit as more like a title page
than the body of a paper...... :-)

pezpam

On Tuesday, March 22, 2005, at 12:56 AM, rscarpen wrote:

>
>
>> A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING
>> SECTION 16-17-605 SO AS TO DEFINE THE TERMS "GEOCACHE", "GEOCACHING",
>> AND "LETTERBOXING", TO PROVIDE THAT IT IS UNLAWFUL TO ENGAGE IN
>> GEOCACHING OR ETTERBOXING IN CEMETERIES, ARCHEOLOGICAL SITES, OR ON
>> THE HISTORIC PROPERTIES OF THE STATE, AND TO PROVIDE A PENALTY.
>
> From reading responses, I'd like to point out that this is really
> rotten grammer. It's vague. Does that mean that only state-run
> cemeteries, archeological sites, and historic areas would be outlawed?
> Or all cemeteries, archeological sites, and historic areas IN the
> state would be outlawed? Federal or private cemeteries, archeological
> sites, and historic areas might still be fair game.
>
> But because of the crummy grammer (which you'd think lawyers and such
> would be VERY picky about), it's not really clear which it refers to.
> It's an important distinction!
>
> Happy trails. =)
>
> -- Ryan