• Forum server maintanace Friday night.(around 7PM Centeral time)
    Website will be off line for a short while.

    You may need to log out, log back in after we're back online.

Killjoys at it again.

... Why do you think those fools want to hire 87,000 new IRS agents , ....

Hey there Kob : If you google around on this ^ ^ , I think you'll see that this is simply DNC vs GOP bickering over budget funding amounts. And that the "87,000" was to simply plan ahead for outgoing retiring workers over the next 10 yrs. NOT "87k auditors", so-as to reign in on md'ing scofflaws.

Google it and see. Hence no, I do not see this as an ominous indication that they are coming after our geeky forum show & tells.
 
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....
What gets me is it seems to be ok to leave it in the ground to rot away ie "protect" but let someone go detecting and find it , share it with whomever they choose and keep it as a keepsake so in a way that IS preserving the artifact. Better for it to be out of the ground and on display even if it's only displayed in someones home should the finder choose. Alot of the artifacts that are on display in places like Gettysburg came from private collections that people simply picked up off the ground at the battle sites after the fighting stopped. guess that's ok since they didn't pass a detector over them.
 
What gets me is....

Magicmantx : The purist archies already have your objection answered : "How do you know that someone MIGHT NOT come along, 500 or 1000 yrs. from now, and dig on that exact spot ? And by you having removed that buffalo nickel, you will have DEPRIVED those future generations of learning about their past. How could you be so evil and cruel ? Huh ? Tsk tsk.

For example, there are worker-bee village sites, or the laborers that built the great pyramids of Egypt. That are a mile or two upstream, away from the "ground zero sensitive site" of the pyramids themselves. And those are currently being excavated by archies. And it reveals a lot about the day-to-day workers , who built the pyramids.

So: If someone with your attitude (of "what harm can it do") had been around thousands of years ago, they would have ripped items from their context back then. And thus deprived this current generation of learning about their past (how can you be so cruel ?)

So too does the same logic apply to every single old item we find today . It is supposed to be left, in-context, saved for future generations to find. Tsk tsk
 
Magicmantx : The purist archies already have your objection answered : "How do you know that someone MIGHT NOT come along, 500 or 1000 yrs. from now, and dig on that exact spot ? And by you having removed that buffalo nickel, you will have DEPRIVED those future generations of learning about their past. How could you be so evil and cruel ? Huh ? Tsk tsk.

For example, there are worker-bee village sites, or the laborers that built the great pyramids of Egypt. That are a mile or two upstream, away from the "ground zero sensitive site" of the pyramids themselves. And those are currently being excavated by archies. And it reveals a lot about the day-to-day workers , who built the pyramids.

So: If someone with your attitude (of "what harm can it do") had been around thousands of years ago, they would have ripped items from their context back then. And thus deprived this current generation of learning about their past (how can you be so cruel ?)

So too does the same logic apply to every single old item we find today . It is supposed to be left, in-context, saved for future generations to find. Tsk tsk
Then they can excavate my house 1000 years from now and try to figure out how it all got to where they find it. I guess once they find my petrified AT Pro or the 900 then maybe they be able to put the clues together. LOL
 
Another thought I had today while I was out detecting at the Boy Scout Camp. I have pulled nearly 100$ in clad 8 wheaties and 2 silver dimes from there over about 8 trips. I wondered what it would have been like if someone hadn't gotten to that place and picked the silver out before me as I know it's been hit a few times over the years. That would be fun to find a place that has as much silver as this place does clad. I know there is more than likely more silver as I find a wheat or 2 (3 today) every trip and 1965 dimes and quarters quite often. I'm not complaining though as they had every right to find the goodies .
 
Hey there Kob : If you google around on this ^ ^ , I think you'll see that this is simply DNC vs GOP bickering over budget funding amounts. And that the "87,000" was to simply plan ahead for outgoing retiring workers over the next 10 yrs. NOT "87k auditors", so-as to reign in on md'ing scofflaws.

Google it and see. Hence no, I do not see this as an ominous indication that they are coming after our geeky forum show & tells.
While I consider you a keen observer, I find I can't share your optimism here. There must be an example somewhere to suggest that a crisis wasn't wasted while the people slept. I weep for the damage to my social credit score. My CBDC ledger is eroding even as I keyboard for wrongthink.
 
Last edited:
But laws (any such govt. recognition and compromises) would never be necessary here in the USA, since we have no such intrinsic wealth rules for what's under the ground on your own private property.
There exist split estates in the law. You may own and work the surface of the land but the mineral rights have been severed from the surface estate. Shirley no federal judge would decide that that chest of silver reals or big gold nugget you found in your back yard in California on land with a split surface/mineral estate actually belongs to the gummint. I wonder if a South Dakota fossil T rex is considered a mineral?
 
.... no federal judge would decide that that chest of silver reals or big gold nugget you found in your back yard ...........

Well, I think we're veering off on 2 different subjects :

1) Is any G-men monitoring md'ing forum show & tells, waiting to take taxes, nuggets, etc.. And I say : No. They have bigger fish to fry, rather than lurk on md'ing forums and fret themselves silly that you found a coin or a ring.

2) Your current post seems to be akin to asking G-men : "Yoohoo, I found this chest of coins in my backyard, does that mean I can keep it ?", and being told "No".

This #2 ^ ^ is the psychology of "No one cared UNTIL you asked" routine. I bet that if you asked enough people if you can pick your own nose, that someone will eventually tell you "no". And this same psychology is what leads to a bunch of off-limits places, where word circulates that "such & such places is off-limits to md'ing". Because persons went in (bless their little hearts) asking "Yoohoo, can I metal detect here ?" And then their pressing question gets bandied back and forth between desks (where they never gave the matter a moments' thought before that). Till someone finally decides "no"

Could that same #2 psychology happen with the chest of coins you find in your back yard ? SURE ! Just keep asking long enough and hard enough. And someone will eventually tell you "no". Moral of the story ? : Don't ask silly questions. :roll:
 
And then their pressing question gets bandied back and forth between desks (where they never gave the matter a moments' thought before that). Till someone finally decides "no"
Right on brother Tom. I have been privy to this exact thing. I stopped at a city park south of us and asked if we, (wife & I) could detect and at this time they said yes. went back a month later and they said we would get fined if caught hunting there. There may be a couple silvers left there, but just a couple.:rofl2:
 
Right on brother Tom. I have been privy to this exact thing. I stopped at a city park south of us and asked if we, (wife & I) could detect and at this time they said yes. went back a month later and they said we would get fined if caught hunting there. There may be a couple silvers left there, but just a couple.:rofl2:

And I'll bet that the only reason you got the "scram" the 2nd time, was that you put this "pressing issue" (that they probably would never have thought about) on their plate to stew. As if ... by thinking you needed to ask ... that something is wrong (or harmful or dangerous, etc....). Lest why else would you be asking, if it were benign & harmless ? The implication is not lost on the person you're asking.

So then later on, when they see an md'r (that they probably would never have registered before), they think : "Aha, there's one of *them* ! " And start booting others. I have seen this happen before. Where .... the more they get asked "Can I ?", then one day it's whimsically decided "no".

It's the old "no one cared UNTIL you asked" routine. Moral of the story ? Don't ask silly questions. Don't poke hornet's nests :hornetsnest:
 
You are right to an extent my friend. In a larger town or city I probably would have said "puplic park" free to hunt. But these small towns are a little different in our area. The city police shop was right outside the entrance of this park and I learned long ago there are more Barney Fifes out there than you would expect and they really enjoy throwing their weight around. Like I said, we already hit it real hard and although there may be a couple silvers left there, you would really have to work for them. :waytogo:
 
Well, I think we're veering off on 2 different subjects :

1) Is any G-men monitoring md'ing forum show & tells, waiting to take taxes, nuggets, etc.. And I say : No. They have bigger fish to fry, rather than lurk on md'ing forums and fret themselves silly that you found a coin or a ring.

2) Your current post seems to be akin to asking G-men : "Yoohoo, I found this chest of coins in my backyard, does that mean I can keep it ?", and being told "No".

This #2 ^ ^ is the psychology of "No one cared UNTIL you asked" routine. I bet that if you asked enough people if you can pick your own nose, that someone will eventually tell you "no". And this same psychology is what leads to a bunch of off-limits places, where word circulates that "such & such places is off-limits to md'ing". Because persons went in (bless their little hearts) asking "Yoohoo, can I metal detect here ?" And then their pressing question gets bandied back and forth between desks (where they never gave the matter a moments' thought before that). Till someone finally decides "no"

Could that same #2 psychology happen with the chest of coins you find in your back yard ? SURE ! Just keep asking long enough and hard enough. And someone will eventually tell you "no". Moral of the story ? : Don't ask silly questions. :roll:
This line of discussion within this thread was engendered by the 87,000 new agents. No, I have no inclination to pose such "Can I?" questions to bureaucrats always wanting a CYA fig leaf or a hot revenue program for overachievers. That said, I have every suspicion that the 87,000 NEW agents will go looking for metal their own way. Gotta look busy! AI can be a fun law enforcement tool. Not only will they seek folks talking online about finding a goodie, they will also go after those trying to liquidate collective junk findings at the smelter. 1099s from the coin shop? Maybe they already require that. Do any of you folks know? As you suggest, it's all about income. It's only paranoia when they aren't out to get you. I wonder if gamblers have forums where they talk about winnings? This is government we are discussing so it is fair to assume the worst.
 
Last edited:
  • Wow
Reactions: KOB
...... 87,000 new agents. .......

Rock Jock, look that up with google. As it turns out, the "87k new agents" was merely a budget talk of what $$ to set aside for the IRS for a coming decade (or however long) for the hiring of outgoing agents. Eg.: Retiring agents, for example. To keep-up-their staffing and ability to keep up with their work load.

This is not unusual in the various parts of govt. bureaucracy. Eg.: The military, public works, social security admin, education, etc... Everyone of them screams at budget session time that their particular wing of govt. "needs such & such $$ set aside in the upcoming budget allocations".

And as I understand it, the $$ that the IRS admin. wanted , got misinterpreted to mean that the IRS was seeking to "step up" their enforcement. But that, instead, it was merely a reference to replacing outgoing staff, keeping current with their expected load of work, etc....

And to whatever extent they also might want to reign down on scofflaws (businesses skirting tax laws, etc...) I am still of the opinion that they have bigger fish to fry, than md'rs and selling your gold rings, or spending your clad, etc...

I am a business owner, and I've seen other businesses that we deal with, come up with creative ways to .... uh ... fudge. And IMHO, if there's anything to "crack down on", it's cr*p like that. Or store-front tax-preparers, who make people's personal return filings, who advertise that they can get their clients the highest tax refund checks. And it is later found out that they are fraudulently filling out every single clients' paperwork to artificially get them higher refunds (aka lying). And some of those got caught.


THOSE ARE THE BIGGER FISH. I do not think anyone is going to be lurking on geeky md'ing forum show & tell sections.
 
Rock Jock, look that up with google. As it turns out, the "87k new agents" was merely a budget talk of what $$ to set aside for the IRS for a coming decade (or however long) for the hiring of outgoing agents. Eg.: Retiring agents, for example. To keep-up-their staffing and ability to keep up with their work load.

This is not unusual in the various parts of govt. bureaucracy. Eg.: The military, public works, social security admin, education, etc... Everyone of them screams at budget session time that their particular wing of govt. "needs such & such $$ set aside in the upcoming budget allocations".

And as I understand it, the $$ that the IRS admin. wanted , got misinterpreted to mean that the IRS was seeking to "step up" their enforcement. But that, instead, it was merely a reference to replacing outgoing staff, keeping current with their expected load of work, etc....

And to whatever extent they also might want to reign down on scofflaws (businesses skirting tax laws, etc...) I am still of the opinion that they have bigger fish to fry, than md'rs and selling your gold rings, or spending your clad, etc...

I am a business owner, and I've seen other businesses that we deal with, come up with creative ways to .... uh ... fudge. And IMHO, if there's anything to "crack down on", it's cr*p like that. Or store-front tax-preparers, who make people's personal return filings, who advertise that they can get their clients the highest tax refund checks. And it is later found out that they are fraudulently filling out every single clients' paperwork to artificially get them higher refunds (aka lying). And some of those got caught.


THOSE ARE THE BIGGER FISH. I do not think anyone is going to be lurking on geeky md'ing forum show & tell sections.
Tom. What they say and what they actually do or do not do by their actions says all you need to know. Ex: Our border is in complete operational control.
 
There has been a popular misconception, by USA hunters over the years, that the British system is some sort of "carte blanche". As if there is a lovey-dovey "hand-holding" between archaeologists there, and md'rs. Or that their system allows md'ing anywhere nilly-willy.

But I have always maintained that this is NOT what it is. And that those British guys can NOT waltz nilly-willy into historic sensitive monuments. Instead, 99% of their hunting is on private farmers lands with permission. NOT public land. Well gee, we have that here in the USA already. And : No government intrusion AT ALL ! It's completely between you and farmer Bob how to split it.

The only reason the UK crown has their "nose in the md'rs business", is that over there, unlike here, any wealth in the ground belongs to the crown. So if you find oil on your land, you're not rich like the Beverly hillbillies. Versus over here, if you find a cache on farmer Bob's land, it's TOTALLY BETWEEN YOU AND FARMER BOB how to handle it. And no one is forced to sell to the govt. (at a price the govt. decides whether or not you can keep). We have a wonderful system here to find the "market rate" : It's called (drumroll): Ebay !!

Yet for some reason md'rs wax romantic about the UK system.

And this latest link is something I've been harping on forever, that : We do NOT want "express allowances" (permits, or govt. oversight, or govt. blessings and permission and splits, blah blah). Instead it is much better that it is merely silent on the subject. Presto : Not disallowed :roll: And that the moment you are in some sort of relationship (express allowance) with the govt. then it's only going to be a matter of time before some purist archies get their panties in a wad. And start thinking "gee, do we really want all these yahoos out there digging up the past ?".

Hence the LESS that the government thinks about us, the better. And this latest proposed revisions in the UK are proof of this now. Their system merely meant it was perpetually always on-their-radar as something to monitor, bless, etc....
well said
 
Back
Top Bottom