Friendly Metal Detecting Forums   River Team 6 Metal Detectors
List all sponsors

Go Back   Friendly Metal Detecting Forums > Metal Detecting > Research and Getting Permission

Reply
  
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 07-08-2019, 08:42 AM
FliesOnly FliesOnly is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Middle of Michigan
Posts: 39
Default

Originally Posted by Tom_in_CA View post
But, for some reason, md'rs seem to think they need princely sanctions. So they run hither and yonder asking permissions and inquiring "can I?" type questions. Thus ... we end up with the "no's". Then sit around lamenting our lack of freedoms. Without realizing : It was we ourselves who went around swatting hornet's nests, bringing this sillyness upon our own selves.
Have you, or anyone else here, actually challenged this in Court? That is to say, have you ever detected at a location for which you (or someone else) asked permission and was told "no", even though there is, in your opinion, no actual rule/regualtion/law against md'ing? After all, an employee simply saying "No" is not a legally binding answer. If it's not actually illegal, then being told "no" really doesn't matter...you can go detect anyway. If you then do receive some sort of citation, you could challenge it in a Court of Law, thus setting legal precedent regarding md'ing at that type of location.
I'm being serious, btw, not sarcastic. If you truly believe that the "no" answer someone received when they inquired about md'ng at a given location was nothing more than the doings of a "pencil pushing bureaucrat" and not the result of an actual law on the books forbidding the act of md'ing, then you should detect anyway, get into some sort of "legal" trouble and challenge it in court. That would then set the record straight and set a legal precedent allowing md'ing, would it not?
Reply With Quote


  #22  
Old 07-08-2019, 02:30 PM
Tom_in_CA's Avatar
Tom_in_CA Tom_in_CA is offline
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 9,193
Default

Originally Posted by FliesOnly View post
.... If it's not actually illegal, then being told "no" really doesn't matter...you can go detect anyway. If you then do receive some sort of citation, you could challenge it in a Court of Law, thus setting legal precedent regarding md'ing at that type of location.....


Flies-only: These are all pertinent questions. I totally understand where you are coming from. I know you are not being sarcastic. They are legitimate observations/questions. After all : At first blush, if someone gets a "no". Or a "scram" from a busy-body in-authority, Then sure ... the first gut instinct is to go get it "clarified". Eg.: To "appeal this". And "overturn the busy-body" . And/or "go higher-up and over-turn the 'no' you just got", etc.... Right ? What can be more logical than that ? Right ? To "challenge it in court", right ?

But the devil is in the details :/

Here's the answers to your question: Unfortunately (I'll admit) that our hobby *can* come under ancillary "catch-all" language/verbiage. Which is never-ending. Examples are : "harvest/remove" verbiage. After all, we "take" and "remove" things. Right ? Or "alter/deface" . After all, we (gasp) disturb the dirt or sand in-the-process of retrieving our target. Right ? Or Lost & found laws. After all, we *might* find something of value that someone else lost. Right ? Or cultural heritage issues. After all, we *might* (gasp) find an old coin or disturb an Indian bone. Right ?

So the devil in-the-details is : All of the above "maybes" might be things that no one ever thinks about, cares about, or associates with the old-geezer with the detector in the sandbox. Right ? But the problem is: Once you put this "pressing issue" *IN COURT* (as you ask about), then .... lo & behold .... some lawyers might say it falls-afoul of various things like this. EVEN THOUGH IT'S NEVER BEEN AN ISSUE, AND NO ONE CARES LESS.

Hence sometimes "good enough" is best "left that way".

Trust me, I wish it wasn't that way. I wish red carpets were rolled out for us wherever we went. But we're in an odd-ball hobby with admitted connotations. You can spend all your time attempting to "convert" people-who-object. Or ... you can simply avoid those rare individuals.

Sure: Avoid obvious historic sensitive monuments. Sure: Avoid places with actual specific rules that truly say "no md'ing". But beyond that : Don't swat hornet's nests.
Reply With Quote


  #23  
Old 07-09-2019, 02:23 PM
FliesOnly FliesOnly is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Middle of Michigan
Posts: 39
Default

Originally Posted by Tom_in_CA View post
After all : At first blush, if someone gets a "no". Or a "scram" from a busy-body in-authority, Then sure ... the first gut instinct is to go get it "clarified". Eg.: To "appeal this". And "overturn the busy-body" . And/or "go higher-up and over-turn the 'no' you just got", etc.... Right ? What can be more logical than that ? Right ? To "challenge it in court", right ?
Correct. It’s the only way to get clarification.

Originally Posted by Tom_in_CA View post
But the devil is in the details :/
Yes…and you repeatedly ignore those details.

Originally Posted by Tom_in_CA View post
Here's the answers to your question:
You’re about to “answer” a question that I did not ask.

Originally Posted by Tom_in_CA View post
Unfortunately (I'll admit) that our hobby *can* come under ancillary "catch-all" language/verbiage. Which is never-ending. Examples are : "harvest/remove" verbiage. After all, we "take" and "remove" things. Right ? Or "alter/deface" . After all, we (gasp) disturb the dirt or sand in-the-process of retrieving our target. Right ? Or Lost & found laws. After all, we *might* find something of value that someone else lost. Right ? Or cultural heritage issues. After all, we *might* (gasp) find an old coin or disturb an Indian bone. Right ?
Correct…you might find some, or all, of those items. Your point?

Originally Posted by Tom_in_CA View post
So the devil in-the-details is : All of the above "maybes" might be things that no one ever thinks about, cares about, or associates with the old-geezer with the detector in the sandbox. Right ? But the problem is: Once you put this "pressing issue" *IN COURT* (as you ask about), then .... lo & behold .... some lawyers might say it falls-afoul of various things like this.
And then your lawyer should easily be able to put forth an awesome, legally binding counter argument.

Originally Posted by Tom_in_CA View post
EVEN THOUGH IT'S NEVER BEEN AN ISSUE, AND NO ONE CARES LESS.
Who cares…the Genie is already out of the bottle. Someone went and asked and was told no. It’s irrelevant if no one used to care. Someone cares now, and that someone is a person of [some] authority. The only way to now resolve the issue is to take it to Court.

Originally Posted by Tom_in_CA View post
Hence sometimes "good enough" is best "left that way".
But what I’m telling you is that it’s TOO LATE for this mindset. This whole argument is predicated on the fact that someone went and asked, and was told “No”.
In this particular scenario, your notion that one should never ask for permission has gone the way of the Dodo. If I may paraphrase…”It has ceased to be! E’s expired and gone to meet ‘is maker. E’s stiff. Bereft of life, ‘e rests in peace! If you would just quit repeating it, ‘e’d be pushing up the daisies. “Is metabolic processes are now ‘istory” “E’s off the twig. E’s kicked the bucket, ‘e’s shuffled off ‘is mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin’ choir invisible. THIS IS A EX-ARGUMENT” (Thank You Monty Python).

Anyway, do you understand now? My post was based solely on the fact that someone asked and was told no. Then, either that person, or some other poor unfortunate soul, went md’ing anyway and received some sort of “legal citation”. If that happens, the only way to resolve the issue is to take it to court. It’s too late to “not ask”, since that ship has sailed.
Reply With Quote


  #24  
Old 07-09-2019, 02:38 PM
Tom_in_CA's Avatar
Tom_in_CA Tom_in_CA is offline
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 9,193
Default

Originally Posted by FliesOnly View post
....Who cares…the Genie is already out of the bottle. Someone went and asked and was told no. It’s irrelevant if no one used to care. Someone cares now, and that someone is a person of [some] authority. The only way to now resolve the issue is to take it to Court..
Aaahhh, ok, let's address this . To you, when/if someone "receives a no" or "gets a scram", then .... a "don't swat hornet's nest" pithy adage" is no longer relevant. Right ? Ie.: the mere fact that a "no" has been issued, or a scram has been stated, then : Therefore now "someone
DOES care". And thus : It *now* needs to be fought and/or clarified. Right ?

Please tell me if I've recapped you correctly. So that I'm not accused of saying things you didn't say. Or accused of "ranting", etc....

Assuming I've summarized correctly, here's my reply :

Even in cases like this, I still do not construe them as gospel law or rule. That must now therefore be fought or over-turned or clarified. Here's why:

There's been tons of cases, where random "no's" like this get issued by some pencil pusher (like the link example that I gave you, for instance). Yet .... nothing ever became of it. No one ever cared. So ... as you can see : If someone way-back-when had gone to "fight" it, they might well indeed have opened up a bigger mess.

I'll give another example in the post to follow.

But sure, by all means, if someone in authority tells you "scram", then sure, you don't defy the person . You don't thumb your nose and continue md'ing. You give lip service, and avoid that one person in the future (Assuming, of course, there's no actual rule that truly says 'no md'ing").
Reply With Quote


  #25  
Old 07-09-2019, 02:50 PM
Tom_in_CA's Avatar
Tom_in_CA Tom_in_CA is offline
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 9,193
Default

When I was young, in the early 1980s, our city used to have a club. Each month 20 or 30 guys gathered together to show & tell finds, have a raffle, talk about detectors, blah blah.

And at each meeting: If any first-time visitors were attending, they would be given time to introduce themselves. I recall one such meeting, where a new person in the audience was asked to introduce himself. He stood up, said he'd just moved into our city , having followed his job from some other state, to get stationed here or whatever.

Then later, when the show & tell time came up, the members routinely get up and show off whatever it is they want to enter into the find of the month contest. One member was up there, showing off some old silver coin "... found in central park ...".

The visitor raised his hand. The moderator recognized him, and he rose to speak :

"I thought metal detecting wasn't allowed in the parks here ?"

Several of us turned around, looked at him, and said things like "Since when ? " and "Who told you that ?"

Turns out, that ... upon moving to our town, he'd gone down to city hall and (drum-roll) ASKED. Someone there had told him "no". I have no idea how he phrased it, or who exactly he talked to.

Hence: Confusion erupted in the room. Because, up-till-then .... the parks here had always/ever been routinely detected. It never even occurred to us to ask, or that "there might be a rule". Some people thought "Oh no, there must be some new rule on the books". Yet other persons (oldtimer gruff-types) said: "Nonsense. Of COURSE you can detect the parks. That's silly." But the skittish types, in the audience replied "But gee, didn't you hear the fellow ? He got that answer straight from city hall. Thus we need to get this clarified and/or over-turned".

The debate went back and forth. I was only a young lad at the time, and wasn't in the discussion. Just an observer. But I distinctly recall one wise long-time md'r cautioning the people: (paraphrased) "Do NOT go seeking to clarify this. It can just cause a chain reaction we don't want. The facts are : You can detect till you're blue in the face. "

The matter just died. Nothing was ever done. That was 35-ish years ago. And ... to this day, you can detect central park in our city (so long as you're not being a sore-thumb) and ... no one cares.

So as can see, the mere fact of a "no" from some pencil pusher, does not, in my opinion, mean A) Someone "cares", and thus B) It needs to be fought.
Reply With Quote


  #26  
Old 07-09-2019, 02:55 PM
Tom_in_CA's Avatar
Tom_in_CA Tom_in_CA is offline
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 9,193
Default

Upon further reflection, let me re-phrase about the whether or not "someone cares" :

Ok , sure: Arguably, the person who tells someone else "no", will therefore now "care". Ok, granted. But ask yourself : What preceded that ? Ie.: Why does he/she "CARE" ?

It's the classic case of : "No one cared ... UNTIL you asked".
Reply With Quote


  #27  
Old 07-09-2019, 07:19 PM
Martin_V3i's Avatar
Martin_V3i Martin_V3i is offline
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: North DFW, TX
Posts: 3,363
Default

Originally Posted by Tom_in_CA View post
Upon further reflection, let me re-phrase about the whether or not "someone cares" :

Ok , sure: Arguably, the person who tells someone else "no", will therefore now "care". Ok, granted. But ask yourself : What preceded that ? Ie.: Why does he/she "CARE" ?

It's the classic case of : "No one cared ... UNTIL you asked".
Parkers who call in care(sarcasm) in their odd way, and then Barney Fife exhibits that the public land of the park cares, even without an actual ordinance. Who ends up actually leaving in the end?

Imagine for a minute that "SuspectA" just stays, or decides to return at the same time the next day, and "Parker#1" is there again.

If we detectors are "allowed" to use the park as a tax paying citizen, and we were not arrested nor cited, the day before....who will win in front of a judge?

SuspectA was just as legal each time, right? It is either LEGAL or it AIN'T. Why should a possible senior citizen who has invested tons of taxes into public grounds over years, served his country in many cases, and then be hassled by "nobodies?"

We deserve damages and restitution in dollars if we ever get before a judge. This is stupid!
Reply With Quote


  #28  
Old 07-09-2019, 07:49 PM
Tom_in_CA's Avatar
Tom_in_CA Tom_in_CA is offline
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 9,193
Default

Originally Posted by Martin_V3i View post
Parkers who call in care(sarcasm) in their odd way, and then Barney Fife exhibits that the public land of the park cares, even without an actual ordinance. Who ends up actually leaving in the end?

Imagine for a minute that "SuspectA" just stays, or decides to return at the same time the next day, and "Parker#1" is there again.

If we detectors are "allowed" to use the park as a tax paying citizen, and we were not arrested nor cited, the day before....who will win in front of a judge?

SuspectA was just as legal each time, right? It is either LEGAL or it AIN'T. Why should a possible senior citizen who has invested tons of taxes into public grounds over years, served his country in many cases, and then be hassled by "nobodies?"

We deserve damages and restitution in dollars if we ever get before a judge. This is stupid!
Martin-V3i : Regarding the text, in your post, that I put in bold :

Here is where the "devil is in the details " : Let's just grant that ... for some reason, an md'r either just got told "no" (because he waltzed in and asked if he could detect), or .... simply got a "scram" from a park worker or whatever. Then .... it's not really so clear that there wasn't an ordinance that they could rely on, to substantiate their position.

Because, remember, they can simply say it falls afoul of some ANCILLARY ordinance. Ie.: Harvest & Remove. Alter or Deface. Lost & Found issues, etc....

And whether or not you "Pay taxes" has nothing to do with it. Because it's entirely within the powers-that-be say-so, to create laws for the public good. (eg.: speed limits, curfews, etc...). And it's also within their power to interpret grey area laws/rules to "fit situations" that-may-arise.

Because, for example, it's impossible to create rules for every single conceivable thing that might arise in-the-field. That's why there's "catch-all" laws, to apply-as-conditions merit. Eg.: laws that forbid "annoyances", etc.... Yes, I know it sounds arbitrary and capricious. But it's simply impossible to make laws for any and all things that *could* come up.

Does this mean that we should all therefore inquire ahead of time to make sure that no one objects ? OF COURSE NOT ! Does it mean that if someone says "scram" or "no", that it now constitutes Law ? OF COURSE NOT.

In the example you gave, where some singular individual sees you (or another) md'r @ the park soon-after a "no" or "scram", here's what I have to say about that : This is exactly why I hunt nice-manicured turfed parks at night these days. So peaceful. So serene.

But ... seriously ... Each case is different . You can kind of tell if such things are "flukes", that aren't bound to repeat. Eg.: A cop who is simply responding to miss-lookie-lou. Or you were there on lawn-mowing day, which is easy enough to avoid on subsequent visits, etc....
Reply With Quote


  #29  
Old 07-09-2019, 07:51 PM
Tom_in_CA's Avatar
Tom_in_CA Tom_in_CA is offline
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 9,193
Default

I even had one park guy, one time, try to scram a buddy and I. But after some casual chit-chat and jovial conversation, he said : "When I get off work, what I don't see doesn't bother me" . My buddy quickly asked: "What time do you get off work". He says "5pm".

We looked at the time, and noticed it was about 4:45pm. So we simply went and sat at a park bench for 15 minutes, shooting the breeze. Sure enough, at 5pm, off in the distance , we could see him closing his shed, and driving away in his city truck. Whereupon we resumed md'ing
Reply With Quote


  #30  
Old 07-09-2019, 08:38 PM
Martin_V3i's Avatar
Martin_V3i Martin_V3i is offline
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: North DFW, TX
Posts: 3,363
Default

"We deserve damages and restitution in dollars if we ever get before a judge."

How about that? Going to city hall is a personal cost.

Maybe I missed that part of your last response Tom ;-)

False arrest
Reply With Quote


  #31  
Old 07-09-2019, 09:38 PM
KeyaPaha KeyaPaha is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 42
Default

Once you push the "scram" issue to where you become obnoxious enough to get a ticket, because nothing is posted or written in "the rules", you start the ball rolling. Then, when you go to court you are making waves for the powers that be. The Powers That Be hate waves. Whether you win or lose.....everyone loses that MD's. Because, once the Powers That Be have had their boat rocked, they do something to stop the rocking. A LAW, RULE OR REGULATION now results and ALL MDing is now prohibited.
I know it is hard for some on here to walk away from some weasel butted, pimple faced kid, but that is the wise move for yourself and all other MDers. JUST DO IT!
Reply With Quote


  #32  
Old 07-09-2019, 09:56 PM
Tom_in_CA's Avatar
Tom_in_CA Tom_in_CA is offline
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 9,193
Default

Originally Posted by KeyaPaha View post
Once you push the "scram" issue to where you become obnoxious enough to get a ticket, because nothing is posted or written in "the rules", you start the ball rolling....
keyapaha, I'm curious where you're getting this "obnoxious" notion from ?

Read what I have written (if not here, then on other posts @ the topic), and you will see that I firmly maintain that we md'rs should give lip service. Not argue. Not defy, etc..... So I don't know where you're getting the notion that I promote defiance or to be obnoxious.

I agree with you, that if an md'r argues and grandstands and continues to detect/defy, then you're right : Someone will make it an official rule. So I'm in agreement with you.

Better to avoid that one individual in the future. Kind of like nose-picking: Rather than trying to get everyone to approve of you, or to get their permission .... sometimes it's wiser just to practice discretion of timing. Some people might call this "sneaking around". Ok, fine then: Sneak around. You're simply not going to get every last person on earth to love and adore your hobby.
Reply With Quote


Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:14 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.