We Let The Cop Off Easy, Wuss Award For Detectors.

[Chris R]

A big idiot. With a huge chip on their shoulder.

Minelab Explorer XS.

 

[chihuahua5]

Really ????
Oh, by the way Officer, since you can't quote the EXACT ordinance to me, I think I will just stay around. Yeah right !!!! Obviously you have never dealt with too many Texas Police Officers. They say go, best go or they will quote you something that starts with "You have the right to remain silent"

Exactly right, I could be so cool until you play just the slightest attitude card

 

[Foiled]

As someone once told me, you are well in your legal right to dig if there isnt an ordinance against it, but its 2 hours youll NEVER get back if you choose to fuss.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

reply

martin, I haven't been on the forum much at all in the past several days, d/t work issues. And I see you've got 6 pages so far on this topic! I've tried to read through all of it to be brought up to speed. This topic is a "burr in my bonnet", and .... judging from 6 pages, none-of-which is mine, it looks like a hot-topic to others as well.

The bottom line is the following factors:

1) detecting there in Plano, as you pointed out, is nothing new. Other md'rs have been detecting the parks there up till then/no, with no issue, apparently.

2) there is no specific rule that says "no detecting".

3) the Plano muni code that porsche914 links, interestingly, even has nothing that uses the word "dig" as prohibited. Only ancillary verbage that COULD be morphed/interpretted: disturbance, destroy, damage, deface, etc...

4) even the cop himself didn't seem to care, or think you were doing anything wrong.

5) HOWEVER, he receives a complaint, so ... he's duty-bound to answer the complaint, make a decision, etc... And ... sure, .... guess what some pencil pusher's "easy" answer is going to be, when tasked with this "pressing issue" ?

So if you ask me, the issue here was NOT "whether or not this is legal", but is: AVOID SUCH LOOKIE LOUS WHO MAY GRIPE.

Because I can gaurantee you that such verbage exists on EVERY speck of public land. And if you ask long enough and hard enough, and parade yourself in front of enough lookie-lou busy-bodies, you will find someone to say you can't do it. And as much as I'd love to have every last person on earth roll out red carpets for me and you, it simply isn't going to happen. So .... sometimes .... you just need to avoid those certain persons, and go at lower traffic times. It's gotten to where I do a lot of my turf hunting at night, for instance. So peaceful. So serene. Kind of like nose-picking: not necessarily illegal, nor would you ask anyone "permission", but ... sheesk, don't you pick discreet times, so as to not offend people ?

I'll answer some more, in reply to others posts:

 

[Tom_in_CA]

I would have asked the EXACT ordinance that I was violating, if the cop can't tell you that, then there is no crime being committed, right?

and

Time to read up on the local ordinances.

Well, yes and no you guys. Yes I agree that if there's nothing that specifically said "no metal detecting", then logically, it's not prohibited. However, asking them to cite something you were violating, can back-fire. Because they can simply morph/interpret something ELSE they think applies. And seriously now, who do you thinks going to win that battle of semantics ?

Interestingly, the link that porsche914 gives, shows that it's only "deface" and "damage" type verbage the cop must have been relying upon. So it could be argued that if the OP leaves no trace of his presence, then logically you have not defacED or damagED anything, NOW HAVE YOU ??

But that will just devolve into a p*ss*ng match of semantics, I know. And let's face it: duly-appointed public officials are given latitude to do their jobs. And rules/laws are PURPOSEFULLY written vaguely, so-as-to apply to a myriad of circumstances that may arise in the field. Because, of course, it's impossible to list every last thing on earth that is "illegal". That's why you have vague statutes, for example, that forbid "annoyances", "loitering", and so forth.

But those type catch-all terms are only used in cases of complaints. You and I are under no obligation to go in to every city hall we come to asking "does such & such constitute at annoyance?". Or .... "If I stand on the street corner for over 5 minutes does that constitute loitering?", and so forth. On the contrary, like noise ordinances, etc.... it takes a complaint to get such things rolling. If no complaint, well .... gee .... then no complaint.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Yeah, it's unfortunate that the vast majority of us are responsibly and respectful, yet still have to suffer the consequences of those who don't have the sense to leave the garden spade at home, or think of anything more than increasing their silver tallies.....

Harvey, by this I'm guessing you think this was brought about by someone, in the past, who left holes (ie.: "didn't leave the garden spade at home", etc... ) Right? But in this case, what makes you think that the reason for this ?

Oh sure, the eventual call to the guys cited "holes" as the reason for the scram, but what makes you think that .... prior to this,.... there was ever any cases of un-covered holes?

On the contrary "holes" is just the knee-jerk connotation that 2 guys with metal detectors might have! (I mean, let's be honest). The fact of someone saying "because of holes" DOESN'T mean there was ever a case of holes that they can point to, or have in mind, etc.... It's just the "go to" reason for the scram they just invented often-time.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

....Don't really know what more you could have done anyway.

Well, "could have done" in the past tense, sure. But in the pre-empted sense, the thing to do, is avoid such persons-as-might-gripe, from the git-go. Like, early mornings, or late evenings, etc.... Why swat a hornet's nest and go when someone might gripe.

Not to beat up on the OP here, but .... seems he/they even noticed some sort of gathering preparing to occur, at the pavillion off in the distance. Yes I agree that it's not 100% possible to "always avoid busy-bodies", but ......

 

[Tom_in_CA]

The suggestion about hunting off hours brings up another question about our code of ethics in MDing. There have surely been a few members here reading this boot we got from a Plano park, hunters who hunt Plano, even though it's done in stealth mode as you suggested. Are they not at a minimum, shading the code of ethics themselves when they hunt Plano the next time if they don't get it written in black and white from a city official saying it's OK to detect Plano? I mean really...it's now been reported that there's a precedence that's been set in our case yesterday.

How can one preach about the code and then seemingly just decide for themselves, "I haven't been approached and told to leave yet, so I'll hunt" If it's illegal to detect that city at 10am, then it's illegal at any hour. Just where is the fine line in the code of ethics in situations like this which seemingly allows some others to continue without moral issues?

As for the information we were asked for, which we gave, I seen the Utubes where people stated that if they weren't being detained or being accused of breaking a law, that they can refuse to give that information. It looks good on Utube but I highly doubt that you could do the same here in "good ol' Texas" with most of the police here and not incur ramifications. I'd be interested to hear from someone with LEO backgrounds here in Texas as to how they think it would have flown if I'd elected to not give my information.

There will surely be a next time somewhere else. I went for 4 years with no encounters with cops while detecting, except for the nice ones just stopping by for a visit. I've now had 3 within 6 months. The gears are ratcheting up on us scary old retired folks for merely wanting to use city property with detectors.

Giving a personal cell number out like that will definitely be something I'll never do. That niceness on our part was just asking for an easy out for the policeman. The next one will be required to come visit me for a more in-depth explanation, not just a one minute glib on a phone.

Martin, I feel your pain here. Because, in your mind, now that you've gotten a "scram", then .... how is that fair that someone ELSE who hasn't gotten that same scram, at that same exact city or park (who may have hunted those parks for the past 15 yrs. un-bothered) is able to continue to go ? JUST because, I guess, they haven't gotten that same busy-body encounter?

I suppose you and those other hunters could march down to city hall, and get this "clarified", eh ? But SERIOUSLY NOW, you can see that that just might be the worst thing you could do to those other hunters. If that "clarification" ends up being the easy answer of "no" (to this "pressing new question"), then you'll be the new worst enemy of those who never had a problem there before. Eh ?

Or you feel like going back at .... uh .... "more opportune" times reeks of violation of the code of ethics?

I can think of 3 parks here in CA, in 3 different cities, where .... in my 35 yrs. of this I've gotten a "scram". And I gave lip service and moved on. Gave it a rest, (didn't come back any earlier than 6 months, for instance), and just took up where I left off. Using, of course, carefulness to avoid lookie-lou/busy-body times. And to-this-day you can go hunt those EXACT SAME PARKS and .... so long as you're not being a nuisance or sticking out like a sore-thumb, you can hunt till you're blue in the face. Does that make it right ? Maybe not. Ok, whip me. So what.

There was a guy in my city who went to city hall about 30 yrs. ago (thinking he needed "permission"), and got a "no". Hmmm, that was news to others of us who, by then, had already been hunting the parks here for years by then! Confusion erupts, and some people interpret that to mean "oh no, you can't hunt parks here anymore!". While others say to themselves "nonsense, no one cares, and .... if they do, just give lip service and move on". That was 30 yrs. ago, and ... to this day, you can hunt parks here. Is that right? maybe not. Does that make every person since then "ninja" ? Call it what you want. But is it reality ? Yes.

Just avoid that one person or cop.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

And this is exactly why I carry written permission slips in my backpack from park superintendents, mayors, city officials, etc....

Nectar-detector, asking mayors, superintendents, etc... for permission can set someone up for a "no", in places where no one ever had a problem or issue before. There's been lots of examples of this in posts on forums. I know you probably think "ok, no problem I'll just go somewhere else". But the problem THEN becomes: Guess what happens when that same pencil pusher or mayor or whatever is passing by the park, and sees another md'r ? He'll remember the earlier inquiry and think: " AHA! there's one of THEM!" and start booting others. I've seen that happen before ! So I know you think it's harmless, but ... just saying, it can back-fire and result in rules or scrutiny.

And think of it: The very fact you think you need to go ask someone "permission", merely presumes this is an activity that needs permission to begin with. (lest why else would you be asking?). As if your hobby was somehow dangerous, damaging, wrong, harmful, illegal, etc.... (lest why else would you be asking, if it were innocuous?) These implications are not subconsciously lost of the person you're asking, which thus often leads to "safe" answers on their part.

And .... sheeesk, asking for them to put that in writing seems like the FASTEST way to get a "yes" changed to a "no". Putting some document in front of a city bureaucrat to sign, seems to just conjur up legal connotations, hassles, and seems to be a quick permission killer.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

I think the reason here is the person who called to complain most likely said "metal detecting is not legal in the park", that being said he had to investigate further. If someone called and said frisbee or whatever is illegal in the park, he probably would have stopped them as well. If it wasn't for the complaint I'm sure he would not have stopped the detectorist or even gave him a second glance.

emphasis mine. Bingo. And what's the moral of that story ? Avoid such lookie-lous who might gripe.

I wish it wasn't that way, and that every last archie and gardener loved us. I wish there were neon signs at park entrances saying "metal detecting welcome here". But alas, I don't see that day coming. Metal detecting simply has "connotations", and you're NOT going to get every last person to sign off on it. So .... sometimes you have to give lip service, and come back later.

I've even had cops say that by the way!! One time, in a certain big city in CA, a cop came out to us. He even told us they'd received a call or complaint or something from another park goer who had observed us. He said .... with a wink .... come back another day just to appease that lookie-lou for right now.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

If I were in your position on this matter I would go back to the park by myself in a low key way. It is possible that you are not allowed to metal detect in the park if someone calls and complains and it is possible that you can detect in the park if no one complains. Go back by yourself keep your un-digger in your back pocket with no handle and don't wear a pouch for your finds.

I have employed this tactic many times. Do I like it ? No, of course not. I certainly wish every last person loved my hobby. But you're right: sometimes a cop has to justify his being called out, when .... in fact .... maybe he personally doesn't care.

 

[Martin_V3i]

Well, "could have done" in the past tense, sure. But in the pre-empted sense, the thing to do, is avoid such persons-as-might-gripe, from the git-go. Like, early mornings, or late evenings, etc.... Why swat a hornet's nest and go when someone might gripe.

Not to beat up on the OP here, but .... seems he/they even noticed some sort of gathering preparing to occur, at the pavillion off in the distance. Yes I agree that it's not 100% possible to "always avoid busy-bodies", but ......

If I scurried off to another park each time I happen to see activity in any park's facility, I'd never get any hunt time in. Yes, there is the wee hours at daylight or literally at night but doesn't that choice in itself say in self admission what I am doing is a possible legal infraction?

This gathering was a bit different only in the fact that the entire park was empty 'cept for them and us guys, and there were what seemed to be employee badges dangling off several of them. The other parks up here in McKinney which I hunt at free will(same county, and the county seat to top it off) have had tons of these events at the times when I and others have hunted them, and if there was any encounter with police in these over time, it's been a friendly wave, "are you finding anything" or someone called about me wandering aimlessly around the grounds, with them many times finishing by saying, "What you are doing is legal, have a nice day, and good luck!"

I digress though. The fact that a gathering was taking place at that pavilion, generally at a distance of close to 100 yards away,,,"If that's the kind of circumstance that says leave...go somewhere else, NOW!..then us detectors are admitting our place on the food chain in public parks, which I pay lots of taxes to support."

How can those who say hunt off hours and at night even, to avoid lookie lous,,,how can you promote yourself as following the code of ethics. You, yourself have self-labeled your legal activity as possibly illegal. If you feel in any way that it's posibly illegal, then by our own self proclaimed metal detecting code of ethics, stop immediately. Then go get the written permissions, but whatever you do, don't break the COE by slipping under the cover of off hours and darkness.

 

[pescadore]

If I scurried off to another park each time I happen to see activity in any park's facility, I'd never get any hunt time in. Yes, there is the wee hours at daylight or literally at night but doesn't that choice in itself say in self admission what I am doing is a possible legal infraction?

This gathering was a bit different only in the fact that the entire park was empty 'cept for them and us guys, and there were what seemed to be employee badges dangling off several of them. The other parks up here in McKinney which I hunt at free will(same county, and the county seat to top it off) have had tons of these events at the times when I and others have hunted them, and if there was any encounter with police in these over time, it's been a friendly wave, "are you finding anything" or someone called about me wandering aimlessly around the grounds, with them many times finishing by saying, "What you are doing is legal, have a nice day, and good luck!"

I digress though. The fact that a gathering was taking place at that pavilion, generally at a distance of close to 100 yards away,,,"If that's the kind of circumstance that says leave...go somewhere else, NOW!..then us detectors are admitting our place on the food chain in public parks, which I pay lots of taxes to support."

How can those who say hunt off hours and at night even, to avoid lookie lous,,,how can you promote yourself as following the code of ethics. You, yourself have self-labeled your legal activity as possibly illegal. If you feel in any way that it's posibly illegal, then by our own self proclaimed metal detecting code of ethics, stop immediately. Then go get the written permissions, but whatever you do, don't break the COE by slipping under the cover of off hours and darkness.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

.... Yes, there is the wee hours at daylight or literally at night but doesn't that choice in itself say in self admission what I am doing is a possible legal infraction? ......

How can those who say hunt off hours and at night even, to avoid lookie lous,,,how can you promote yourself as following the code of ethics. You, yourself have self-labeled your legal activity as possibly illegal. If you feel in any way that it's posibly illegal, then by our own self proclaimed metal detecting code of ethics, stop immediately. Then go get the written permissions, but whatever you do, don't break the COE by slipping under the cover of off hours and darkness.

Martin, This was a major topic on the "permission" subsection of FMDF awhile back. It kind of went like this:

If our position is that we're not technically doing anything wrong or illegal, then .... we should be able to go at high noon, in full view of anyone and everyone. Right? So why do some people say to "go at low traffic hours" or "avoid griper busy-bodies" etc... To some people that just reeks of "ninja" or that you must therefore be doing something illegal, if you think you have something to hide, right ?

Let me know if I'm understanding you correctly. And also: read back through what I just wrote in the preceding posts, and that was kind of addressed so far .......

 

[Tom_in_CA]

haha pescadore: Well notice I had NOTHING to do with those first 6 pages, right?!

 

[HarveyH48]

Harvey, by this I'm guessing you think this was brought about by someone, in the past, who left holes (ie.: "didn't leave the garden spade at home", etc... ) Right? But in this case, what makes you think that the reason for this ?

Oh sure, the eventual call to the guys cited "holes" as the reason for the scram, but what makes you think that .... prior to this,.... there was ever any cases of un-covered holes?

On the contrary "holes" is just the knee-jerk connotation that 2 guys with metal detectors might have! (I mean, let's be honest). The fact of someone saying "because of holes" DOESN'T mean there was ever a case of holes that they can point to, or have in mind, etc.... It's just the "go to" reason for the scram they just invented often-time.

Well, Tom, I wasn't hunting twenty years ago, but I was using a shovel. Whole lot easier to dig holes with a spade, than it is with a knife or trowel, correct? I can't really think of any other aspect of metal detecting, that would be a major problem to anyone, except maybe sneaking into places they should know they aren't suppose to be, simply because they believe they can get away with it, without consequence.

A short hunt for me, is between 20-30 holes, with a sod knife or trowel. A more efficient tool would be more destructive, but more productive, correct?

Altering the appearance of the park, is the only logical reason to have with metal detecting in parks. Noise, well headphones would be a simple solution. Really don't see people creating rules, simply to mess with Tom, and his harmless hobby, unless there is a real, physical reason to do so.

Sure, you can craft some slick, dismissve, deceptive response, but why waste your time? You have zero credibility, you came this forum, simply to fight, argue, and lie...

 

[Martin_V3i]

I have employed this tactic many times. Do I like it ? No, of course not. I certainly wish every last person loved my hobby. But you're right: sometimes a cop has to justify his being called out, when .... in fact .... maybe he personally doesn't care.

No one complains? How about me complaining about noisy, disrespectful bratty, obnoxious children who are basically unsupervised!? All I'm doing is staying far away from folks and doing my detecting and MY CHAIN is the one rattled.

I don't look for people to even slightly like my hobby, not love it, but I do expect an equal deck with the authorities when called out that the complainant has basically squandered the city's money with what is basically a 9-1-1 call, just to run off a senior citizen enjoying his pastime.

We just don't get that deserved respect, and that is just plain wrong! At this rate, we can begin to see the end of all detecting within ALL public lands. Any ol' biddie or lowly city employee complains and they seem to always get their way in the end.

I guess I need to shop for a headlamp and camo gear and night goggles.

Oh, about the chance this was about others leaving holes there in the past, etc...always possible I guess. Our last question on that phone call we got from the cop was, "What if we leave no trace of a dig?" That was kind of a loaded question because the cop was asked to review our digs, which he was privy to seeing the last on the way down to us, and he admitted with a smile that they were invisible to his eye.

His mood changed when on the phone, when we couldn't get him to recant his recent observation over out filled in holes. The reason I said that we let the cop off easy, was because we should have insisted to have another face to face encounter to discuss what dig meant. A one minute cell phone call was not proper, but we allowed it by giving out a cell number. DOH! martin

 

[HarveyH48]

Martin, This was a major topic on the "permission" subsection of FMDF awhile back. It kind of went like this:

If our position is that we're not technically doing anything wrong or illegal, then .... we should be able to go at high noon, in full view of anyone and everyone. Right? So why do some people say to "go at low traffic hours" or "avoid griper busy-bodies" etc... To some people that just reeks of "ninja" or that you must therefore be doing something illegal, if you think you have something to hide, right ?

Let me know if I'm understanding you correctly. And also: read back through what I just wrote in the preceding posts, and that was kind of addressed so far .......

You very clearly stated many times, your choice of ninja hunting times, has little or nothing to do with joe-citizen, just the folks with the authority to chase you off (park employees). Need some links? Joe- Citizen is a nuisance occasionally, but if the city or park really doesn't have a problem with our hobby, we shouldn't have to dodge them. Right and wrong, isn't always about the laws on paper, or what we can get away with. Why is it so important to corrupt the morals, values, ethics of everyone around you?

 

[Jay_781]

haha pescadore: Well notice I had NOTHING to do with those first 6 pages, right?!

but you had to make sure you had everything to do with this page.. Looking for another succesfull hijack?? Youre a funny guy Tom

 

[Tom_in_CA]

...... Why is it so important to corrupt the morals, values, ethics of everyone around you?

Harvey, please answer this question for us: Let's say there's a park in your city where you can metal detect without issue or problem. In fact, let's even go a step further, and say you have express written permission to detect there. Ok ? Now with that in mind, let's say you read in the newspaper that there's going to be a convention of "purist archies" convening there, for the country-wide annual BBQ picnic.

Now, you tell me: If a bunch of purist archies are going to be convening in that park, is that a good time to go metal detecting there, .... or not ? Remember, it's "legal", so .... I suppose in your mind, you will be able to waltz through their people, and .... they'll not gripe ? Or if they gripe, you'll just flash that permission and they'll slink away embarassed for having griped ?

Or would even you agree that .... perhaps that's not the BEST time to go detecting at that park ?

If you can agree that that's not the best time to hunt that park, then congradulations, you're seeing the light.