Big Boys Hobbies

Have you ever gotten busted?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ive never been "busted" but Ive been told to leave a few times. I would say that normally thats all that will happen is you get told to leave or you cant do that here. But I know of some instances where people have been ticketed or even arrested , it just depends on the location and the mood of the person in authority handling it. I know of one occaision where somebody on one of these forums , maybe this one , was detecting a field near or across the street from a credit union if I remember correctly. They were cuffed and arrested. They posted pictures of the arrest and everything. Its been a long time since I seen the post but I think they thought since it was city property and not posted , they could detect there....but I think they were too close to the credit union for anyones comfort level....though I dont know why thats a big deal. The worst that can happen could be pretty bad so it pays to be careful.
 
signal said:
Nectar, that's like saying you don't hear about drug dealers getting busted, or other criminals getting busted.

Its all hype. There is very little "busting" of anyone in this hobby going on. I am not advocating breaking the law. I am just saying its all hype.
Click to expand...


Tell this guy its all hype..

http://metaldetectingforum.com/showthread.php?t=14732

and if I can find it a guy here in Connecticut was arrested and his detectors confiscated....
 
There are really only two ways of looking at a potential site, that isn't clearly off-limits. You can ask your self, "Can I get away with it", or "Could I get in trouble here". You can usually get away with it, but pressing the issue of whether or not you are legally entitled, is where you are risking civil or criminal consequences. The laws might not directly address "Metal Detecting", but there are several issues that can be applied. You can't directly target a specific group or interest, that would be discrimination.

I'm not in this to push boundaries, to see what I'm able to get away with, or what I'm entitled. I'm just out to have fun. Fun isn't getting to a confrontation over a piece of ground, I don't own title to. I tend to believe most people who get tickets, usually are aware that they are pushing the limits. Those who incidentally transgress, are given a warning. I've never been run off, or given warning. Not even a hassle from a concerned citizen. I put some thought into the where and when, so I'm not interfering, or causing concern. Sure, I probably over-think it, but it's less stressful than trying to weasle my way out of a situation I could have avoided...
 
Cfmct said:
Tell this guy its all hype..

http://metaldetectingforum.com/showthread.php?t=14732

and if I can find it a guy here in Connecticut was arrested and his detectors confiscated....
Click to expand...

Problem he had is the same thing we have to watch here. You may have all the good intentions you want. But if you aren't supposed to be there, you aren't supposed to be there. You could find the best find in history and go to prison. You may not get busted until you go to say some sort of relic show where you display your finds. They have secret agents that investigate finds. I know this from fossil shows. One friend got 5 years probation for selling fossils. And he can't go anywhere near a fossil show for 5 years:shock: I think his fines were $100,000 if I remember correctly?
 
ohiochris said:
Not the one I was thinking of but just more proof that they can do more than tell you to leave.


Here is the one I was thinking of , I googled it and found it....

http://metaldetectingforum.com/showthread.php?t=23362


Looks like it turned out to be just a prank , so my apologies :lol:
Click to expand...

I read that one and remember it :) all ne has to do is google people getting arrested metal detecting and it would fill up this page...

If people would just follow the "Code of Ethics" instead of making up their own or their interpretation of them we wouldn't have half these issues... but there will always be the selfish ones who think they can do as they please..
 
Cfmct, thanx for the 2 links.

The first one is a guy in a National park. I'm certain there's a specific "no md'ing" rule for national parks, if I'm not mistaken. And a general knowledge for any md'rs, who's browsed md'ing for more than 5 minutes, to have know that. And an "obvious historic monument" on top of that (a historic military base thing). So this is WAY outside any discussion of run-of-mill parks, schools, beaches, forests, etc...

The 2nd one involves a place where, Yes: ancillary wording was relied on to "throw the book at him". Apparently no specific rule saying "no detecting". And instead, verbage only about "altering" "defacing", "digging", etc.... Interesting. Good link. However, did you notice that in that case, he refused their warning ? He was asked to stop, and apparently could have simply complied, left, and there'd have been no "arrest" eh? So that one paints a picture of an obnoxious fellow, who was begging for trouble. So I consider this also to not show "imminent threat" of tickets, fines, arrests, etc.... Since this fellow could not take a casual chit-chat "scram" .
 
Tom_in_CA said:
Cfmct, thanx for the 2 links.

The first one is a guy in a National park. I'm certain there's a specific "no md'ing" rule for national parks, if I'm not mistaken. And a general knowledge for any md'rs, who's browsed md'ing for more than 5 minutes, to have know that. And an "obvious historic monument" on top of that (a historic military base thing). So this is WAY outside any discussion of run-of-mill parks, schools, beaches, forests, etc...

The 2nd one involves a place where, Yes: ancillary wording was relied on to "throw the book at him". Apparently no specific rule saying "no detecting". And instead, verbage only about "altering" "defacing", "digging", etc.... Interesting. Good link. However, did you notice that in that case, he refused their warning ? He was asked to stop, and apparently could have simply complied, left, and there'd have been no "arrest" eh? So that one paints a picture of an obnoxious fellow, who was begging for trouble. So I consider this also to not show "imminent threat" of tickets, fines, arrests, etc.... Since this fellow could not take a casual chit-chat "scram" .
Click to expand...

Most towns will allow one to swing over the ground and recover items just as long as one does not dig or alter the turf...

I went to a park with such a rule and went and spoke with the ranger and he told me I could hunt the park and dig as long as I stayed off the athletic fields... He told me have fun in the woodland and that was just where I wanted to hunt as that is where there are cellar holes.
 
If it's illegal...it's not legal. If it's legal...it's not illegal. Huh, imagine that.

By the way, do you know what 'pro se' means ?:lookclose:
 
mountain digger said:
If it's illegal...it's not legal. If it's legal...it's not illegal. Huh, imagine that.
Click to expand...

mountain digger, you really seem to know your stuff...maybe you could help me out. I am considering going detecting in Washington State this summer and have looked up the rules for a few places. I couldn't find any specific mention of metal detecting but it said things like "no digging, disturbing, removing objects". I was just hoping you could tell me if this means detecting (the kind where you take objects out of the ground) is legal or illegal in such a place?

Thanks in advance for your help. :yes:
 
Hi stew,
It's one or the other...legal or illegal, isn't it?

I'd suggest you do your own research for the area and make your own decisions. Some call it life and each needs to live it to their own expectations. It's what most people do everyday stew, you know... making their own decisions and living with the results (aka consequences). Personally, I have no plans to MD in Washington State so if you really need some input on that, you might want to start your own thread, or not. You know only you can make that decision...or do you need help with that too?

You're welcome.;)

stewart73 said:
mountain digger, you really seem to know your stuff...maybe you could help me out. I am considering going detecting in Washington State this summer and have looked up the rules for a few places. I couldn't find any specific mention of metal detecting but it said things like "no digging, disturbing, removing objects". I was just hoping you could tell me if this means detecting (the kind where you take objects out of the ground) is legal or illegal in such a place?

Thanks in advance for your help. :yes:
Click to expand...
 
stewart73 said:
..... I couldn't find any specific mention of metal detecting but it said things like "no digging, disturbing, removing objects". I was just hoping you could tell me if this means detecting (the kind where you take objects out of the ground) is legal or illegal in such a place? ...
Click to expand...

Stewart, I'm not m-digger, but ... if I could venture an answer: Technically this would include detecting where a) you intend to dig for an object, and b) you intend to remove the object. Hence, you better avoid places that have that wording.

An alternative is to walk over to the powers-that-be (preferably with a contract in hand for them to sign), asking : "Hi. Can I dig, disturb, and remove objects from your land?" If they say "yes", then they've waived that rule. And thus, you can detect.
 
Never been approached by anybody at a public school except by police officers...who wanted to know "if I found anything interesting".

Private land is a different matter, I have gotten thrown off a couple times and pestered at others, so I stay away from private land in general unless I know the person.
 
Just be respectful of other peoples property and get permission. I have chased a number of people off of my property that decided to hunt/camp/party, ect. The last thing you want is some buckshot flying in your direction, when all you had to do was ask.:laughing:
 
Tom_in_CA said:
Stewart, I'm not m-digger, but ... if I could venture an answer: Technically this would include detecting where a) you intend to dig for an object, and b) you intend to remove the object. Hence, you better avoid places that have that wording.

An alternative is to walk over to the powers-that-be (preferably with a contract in hand for them to sign), asking : "Hi. Can I dig, disturb, and remove objects from your land?" If they say "yes", then they've waived that rule. And thus, you can detect.
Click to expand...

Interesting, but thanks for the advice (which seems to run counter to everything else you've said over the past year, but nevermind..) Just to confirm: you're saying that such wording DOES in fact apply to metal detecting? And that the best way to get permission is to make sure you mention the words "dig", "disturb", and "remove"? And having a contract in hand is also a good idea? Hmmm....not sure about all that but thanks anyway! :?:
 
mountain digger said:
Hi stew,
It's one or the other...legal or illegal, isn't it?
Click to expand...

Most certainly. My question was about how you personally go about deciding which it is when the rules do not mention the words detecting and yet do mention things like "digging, removing, disturbing". I see yet again however that simple, direct questions do not go over well with you so I suppose we'll leave it at that. :roll:
 
stewart73 said:
.... Just to confirm: you're saying that such wording DOES in fact apply to metal detecting? ...
Click to expand...

Yup. we remove, alter, take, disturb, and dig our targets. Hence, it technically applies.


stewart73 said:
.... And that the best way to get permission is to make sure you mention the words "dig", "disturb", and "remove"? ...
Click to expand...

It would make no difference whether you asked to "metal detect", versus "remove, alter, dig, disturb", etc... Because it has been pointed out that a) the terms are equivalent anyhow, and b) the person you're asking has full knowledge of the implications (that "digging" is required, for instance). Hence since they know the automatic equivalence, it will make no difference which terms you use.

stewart73 said:
... And having a contract in hand is also a good idea? ...
Click to expand...

Yes. You "can't be too safe" afterall. What if someone else comes along and tries to boot you ? You merely flash that puppy, and they slink away embarassed for having questioned you.
 
Tom_in_CA said:
Yup. we remove, alter, take, disturb, and dig our targets. Hence, it technically applies.




It would make no difference whether you asked to "metal detect", versus "remove, alter, dig, disturb", etc... Because it has been pointed out that a) the terms are equivalent anyhow, and b) the person you're asking has full knowledge of the implications (that "digging" is required, for instance). Hence since they know the automatic equivalence, it will make no difference which terms you use.



Yes. You "can't be too safe" afterall. What if someone else comes along and tries to boot you ? You merely flash that puppy, and they slink away embarassed for having questioned you.
Click to expand...

Interesting. But confusing. Concerning contracts you recently mentioned that...

the consensus is right: showing a contract to a total stranger to sign, is the FASTEST way to get a no.

Concerning words like "dig, remove, disturb" applying to metal detecting you had this to say:

I take such verbage to inherently mean the end result. Ie.: their intention is to address damage. Trust me: verbage like that exists at every single park across the entire USA. Even parks where you can detect [and retrieve] till you're blue in the face. Thus I do not interpret such things to ... of necessity ... equate to "no metal detecting".

You have also several times told people that they should NOT mention things like "dig, disturb, remove" when trying to get a yes.

Forgive me for my confusion but you seem to contradict yourself.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

B
Does anyone keep a permission Log?
Replies
3
Views
132
LovestheShiny!
L
wolf-n-wa
Have a permission for those interested. Webster lake, Massachusetts old barn and property.
Replies
1
Views
64
wolf-n-wa
wolf-n-wa
FliesOnly
Got a new permission
Replies
4
Views
103
markinmichigan
markinmichigan
maxxkatt
sharing with property owner question
Replies
5
Views
148
Rock Jock
Rock Jock
MasonDixonMding
New permission
Replies
4
Views
150
MasonDixonMding
MasonDixonMding
Back
Top Bottom