Killjoys at it again.


Another quote I pull from this ^ ^ link :

"... Breaking these laws will have serious repercussions including fines or at worst jail time. Therefore, if you are planning to detect in the new location in Michigan, contacting the city, county, and state officials to ensure you’re following all pertinent laws is a good idea."

1) No it's NOT a "good idea" to go contacting cities, county, and state officials (asking "yoohoo, can I metal detect ?") That is EXACTLY what is bringing about all this bologna (the "pressing question" on their desks) IN THE FIRST PLACE !! Instead, you and I look up laws & rules FOR OURSELVES ! And If it doesn't say "no md'ing", the presto, not disallowed. :roll:

2) Re.: Jail : I defy this author to show me any such example of an md'r going to jail for md'ing there. Obviously, he's not going to come up with any examples. So why oh why oh why does this "jail" nonsense keep popping up in these chicken-little links ?

The only thing that allusions like this does, is cause the skittish to go running around swatting hornets nests (thinking they need express blessings). And : The vicious self-fulfilling cycle loop continues :(
 
You link says : "while metal detecting in Michigan is that even though metal detecting is legal on public lands, you may only collect modern money, but coins and artifacts more than 100 years old may not be collected."

Now you're talking about federal level ARPA. And various states usually have their own "cultural heritage" language for their respective state parks. And does not *necessarily* subrogate down to county and city lands for example.

I do not think you understand the significance of the Michigan laws.

Michigan has 3,300 miles of Great Lakes shoreline, the longest U.S. freshwater coastline.
The California coastline is 840 miles long.

All 3300 miles of the great lake's shoreline fall under this law alone.
 

Another quote I pull from this ^ ^ link :

"... Breaking these laws will have serious repercussions including fines or at worst jail time. Therefore, if you are planning to detect in the new location in Michigan, contacting the city, county, and state officials to ensure you’re following all pertinent laws is a good idea."

1) No it's NOT a "good idea" to go contacting cities, county, and state officials (asking "yoohoo, can I metal detect ?") That is EXACTLY what is bringing about all this bologna (the "pressing question" on their desks) IN THE FIRST PLACE !! Instead, you and I look up laws & rules FOR OURSELVES ! And If it doesn't say "no md'ing", the presto, not disallowed. :roll:

2) Re.: Jail : I defy this author to show me any such example of an md'r going to jail for md'ing there. Obviously, he's not going to come up with any examples. So why oh why oh why does this "jail" nonsense keep popping up in these chicken-little links ?

The only thing that allusions like this does, is cause the skittish to go running around swatting hornets nests (thinking they need express blessings). And : The vicious self-fulfilling cycle loop continues :(
Tom... have you ever thought that your own words bring about changes with you plastering them all over the internet? Do you think only guys who detect read them?
 
.... All 3300 miles of the great lake's shoreline fall under this law alone.

Sure, and all of our CA coast also falls under similar rules of the "artifact" boiler plate verbiage too. Technically, we're not supposed to find old coins either. Sure ! And this is exactly why we never find coins over 100 yrs. old. We have an add-on after-market device to our detectors which discriminate out coins that are older than 1923. Presto : Problem solved. :cool:
 
Tom... have you ever thought that your own words bring about changes with you plastering them all over the internet? Do you think only guys who detect read them?

Some responses to this :

1) I highly doubt that any non-md'rs reads geeky md'ing forums . For example : Do you think that any legislators or G-men read baseball card collecting forums ? Or cooking-recipes chat-room FB pages ? Hence to answer your question, there is no "men in black trench coats" reading our forums, waiting to bust the chops of an md'r.

2) Aside from some ... uh ... "locker room talk" I think that most all pencil pushers and govt. workers would not care one-bit, even if they did read our forums. The only time anyone "cares" is when a decision is on-their-desk, and they need to sign off on something (hence safe and easy answers are most convenient).

3) And you notice I say over and over to "look up rules for oneself" (if someone is skittish). Hence, shucks, what could be more law-abiding than THAT ? :?:
 
Some responses to this :

1) I highly doubt that any non-md'rs reads geeky md'ing forums . For example : Do you think that any legislators or G-men read baseball card collecting forums ? Or cooking-recipes chat-room FB pages ? Hence to answer your question, there is no "men in black trench coats" reading our forums, waiting to bust the chops of an md'r.

2) Aside from some ... uh ... "locker room talk" I think that most all pencil pushers and govt. workers would not care one-bit, even if they did read our forums. The only time anyone "cares" is when a decision is on-their-desk, and they need to sign off on something (hence safe and easy answers are most convenient).

3) And you notice I say over and over to "look up rules for oneself" (if someone is skittish). Hence, shucks, what could be more law-abiding than THAT ? :?:
Regarding #1. Are you kidding ? Why do you think those fools want to hire 87,000 new IRS agents , if they haven't already ? They want to go after waiters tips as it is. So what does that tell you ? Hopefully those donkeys will be put to pasture soon.....
 
Huh ? What do any laws in Michigan have to do with finds made on private property there. If Farmer Bob tells Joe Blow he can detect a farm in Michigan, and they find a cache, then : It's totally between the farmer & Joe Blow on how to split or sell it.

Do you have something that says any different ? If so, I would very much like to see it. Thanx.
You should do more research before posting about the US vs each individual states laws. In many states a person may own the land but NOT what is underground such as oil, gold, mineral, etc... NM, NJ, NY are a few that come to mind
 
You should do more research before posting about the US vs each individual states laws. In many states a person may own the land but NOT what is underground such as oil, gold, mineral, etc... NM, NJ, NY are a few that come to mind
ADD: Michigan to that list.

I own 600 acres and no mineral or oil rights. In fact some party holds a mineral lease on one of my 40's.
 
..... In many states a person may own the land but NOT what is underground such as oil, gold, mineral, etc... NM, NJ, NY are a few that come to mind
Grizz, fair enough. So to grant what you're saying above in this quote ^ ^ Then: If a farmer in NM, NJ, or NY, finds a rare gold coin (or a cache or whatever) while out plowing his field, then what you're saying is : That farmer may own the land, but not the coin or cache that he found that was underground.

By virtue of what your quote says, then : That farmer doesn't own that gold he just found on his land. I'm merely repeating back to you, what you are saying.

Ok, fair enough, let's just grant that. So do tell: What does that farmer do with the gold that he found ? What happens to the gold ? If YOU were the farmer, what would happen to that gold ? :?:
 
.... Why do you think those fools want to hire 87,000 new IRS agents ...

Kob, let's not stop there. It's more than just "paying taxes on our clad total finds" (and melt silver and gold, blah blah). I mean, SURE ! Let's assume that G-men are looking for tax scofflaws on geeky md'ing forums. Ok.

But don't stop there ! Because LEO people (by the same logic) can be lurking on our forums to catch another bigger law violation. Namely : L&F law compliance. For example : Take a quick look at the show & tell on md'ing forum beach sections. See all those gold rings that fetch the atteboys ? (including some that you & I have posted) . Ok, then as we all know, *technically* all of us are supposed to be turning those into the local police (if over a certain dollar value) for proper L&F procedure.

Hence technically, why don't we muse that LEOs are likewise lurking here to police L & F ? So again : I still maintain that the average person (yes, even LEO's and the IRS) doesn't give 2 sh#ts about us geeky md'rs. I am convinced they have bigger fish to fry than the dude who finds the 101 yr. old penny in the school yard, or the dude who just found the gold bracelet in So. CA.
 
Kob, let's not stop there. It's more than just "paying taxes on our clad total finds" (and melt silver and gold, blah blah). I mean, SURE ! Let's assume that G-men are looking for tax scofflaws on geeky md'ing forums. Ok.

But don't stop there ! Because LEO people (by the same logic) can be lurking on our forums to catch another bigger law violation. Namely : L&F law compliance. For example : Take a quick look at the show & tell on md'ing forum beach sections. See all those gold rings that fetch the atteboys ? (including some that you & I have posted) . Ok, then as we all know, *technically* all of us are supposed to be turning those into the local police (if over a certain dollar value) for proper L&F procedure.

Hence technically, why don't we muse that LEOs are likewise lurking here to police L & F ? So again : I still maintain that the average person (yes, even LEO's and the IRS) doesn't give 2 sh#ts about us geeky md'rs. I am convinced they have bigger fish to fry than the dude who finds the 101 yr. old penny in the school yard, or the dude who just found the gold bracelet in So. CA.
True. But my point is they will if they have the audacity to go after waiters tips. That's how you and everyone else will pay for the abuse of donkey spending. They flat out lie. I gotta go cool off now....
 
Let's keep your hatred of the "donkey" party out of this discussion, KOB. No need to keep posting that garbage here.
I'm sorry you got offended ! FYI : I don't hate all DONKEYS. And you're correct on the GARBAGE. 😀
 
I think the fundamental difference between detecting in the UK and the US is that we have a large amount of ancient heritage we need to protect.

Although this amendment to the existing Treasure law will bring in additional items under the terms of "Treasure", it also aims to streamline the whole process and speed up the decision making and the allocation of the reward to the Finders/Landowners when a museum wishes to acquire an item.

I do have some reservations on how the law will eventually be applied, but can see the reasoning behind it...

It will primarily cover things like Roman helmets or Bronze Age shields ie stuff not made of precious metals but of significant historical importance. The intention is to set the bar high as to what this new category will eventually cover, and of course the devil will be in the detail, which has not been made public as yet....
 
..... the fundamental difference between detecting in the UK and the US is that we have a large amount of ancient heritage we need to protect.....

There may be a difference in the # of years of metal-carrying-human history , sure. However, this is merely factored in to the equation of what "needs protecting". So for example, here in the USA, there has been ages of 50 or 100 yrs. given as cutoff, for what needs to be protected. While in the UK, they don't consider stuff old, unless it's like 500+ yrs. or older. Right ? Hence it's all relative.

So in that sense, there would be no difference. This "protection" notion will be the same for each continent. And it's merely a matter of what age criteria is invoked.

As for the UK law revisions in question : If, as you say, there is potentially "devil in the details" (ie.: UK hunters are dubious and leery of them), then all I'm saying is that : This is an example of how it is much better that we md'rs were NOT on govt. pencil pusher's minds.

Lest one day (as evidenced here), someone's looking at all those express allowances they give . Ie.: The amount of manpower over there that has to oversee all this. And presto: Someone thinks "Gee, do we really want these yahoos walking away with cool stuff ?"

Hence as you can see, it would be much better if we had NOT been on their radar, as one-more-thing for them to perpetually think about.
 
There may be a difference in the # of years of metal-carrying-human history , sure. However, this is merely factored in to the equation of what "needs protecting". So for example, here in the USA, there has been ages of 50 or 100 yrs. given as cutoff, for what needs to be protected. While in the UK, they don't consider stuff old, unless it's like 500+ yrs. or older. Right ? Hence it's all relative.

So in that sense, there would be no difference. This "protection" notion will be the same for each continent. And it's merely a matter of what age criteria is invoked.

As for the UK law revisions in question : If, as you say, there is potentially "devil in the details" (ie.: UK hunters are dubious and leery of them), then all I'm saying is that : This is an example of how it is much better that we md'rs were NOT on govt. pencil pusher's minds.

Lest one day (as evidenced here), someone's looking at all those express allowances they give . Ie.: The amount of manpower over there that has to oversee all this. And presto: Someone thinks "Gee, do we really want these yahoos walking away with cool stuff ?"

Hence as you can see, it would be much better if we had NOT been on their radar, as one-more-thing for them to perpetually think about.
Tom...

You missed your calling... you would have made an excellent woman... they have great abilities to twist to their advantage words spoken to them by whom they are discussing things with.... a little advice... you want to spew your opinions then stick to your own country... all you need to do is google metal detectorist arrested in England and you will come across many....
 
  • Haha
Reactions: OBN
Tom...

You missed your calling... you would have made an excellent woman... they have great abilities to twist to their advantage words spoken to them by whom they are discussing things with.... a little advice... you want to spew your opinions then stick to your own country... all you need to do is google metal detectorist arrested in England and you will come across many....
Craig,

1) What have I twisted ? I'm all ears.

2) when have I denied that there's onerous laws in the UK ? When have I suggested that md'rs there should flaunt them ?

But I *get* what you are driving at: You're suggesting that the reason of the further restrictions are not as I've suggested that: "It's merely because we were on their radar as something permitted". Instead you're suggesting that it's because "people flaunted rules already-in-place". Right ? Ok, I get the push-back. Thanx.

But in-lieu of the proposed revisions (that the UK hunters will get to keep LESS of their finds from legal places) , wouldn't that be analogous to the following : If people break the 55 mph speed limit. So the govt. gets mad and lowers the speed limit to 40 mph. Somehow that doesn't logically follow. So I'm not so sure that UK scofflaws were the reason for the proposed furthering of restrictions.

Instead I liken it to the phenomenon we've seen on a micro-scale here in the USA, that : Notice whenever there's been cities or counties that dreamed up permits (for their parks or beaches). Notice that it's invariably riddled with silly rules (can't dig, etc...). And that often-time, one day years later, the entire system is revoked or further restricted. And in THOSE cases, it's not scofflaws that brought that about. IMHO it's the mere fact that it's on their radar as something they permit. Hence perpetually on their mind. So all I'm trying to say is that : "Better that we were never on their mind, in the first place". Period.

Thus I'm not so sure the UK scofflaws are what brings about ADDED rules. No more so than speeders cause the speed limit to be lowered. I guess this is a "what came first, chicken-or-egg" question. But I get your pushback intention. Thanx.
 
Back
Top Bottom