To ask, or not to ask...

[AugustMoose87]

So when I started detecting last year, I would have said you ask for permission to detect every time, just to be safe. Even in Parks and stuff, because by asking first, you can avoid trouble. Now that I've been at it a while, I absolutely see how there are some times you should ask (someone's front yard) and others that asking will only stir the pot (public Parks). However, I am wondering about the grey area, and how everyone approaches those. Like churches, cemeteries, and even some schools - most of them are open to the public, but not really for recreation purposes. My gut (or maybe my internal Park Ranger) says asking is the way to go, but I'm curious to hear others thoughts.

When do you ask first, and when do you just start swinging?

 

[TheHunterGT]

hunter-GT, thanx for being a good-sport and letting me pick your brain. We may not convert each other's stances, but .... it's interesting to see how each side of an issue thinks.

I can think of a few demolition sites (at public sites, no less, like sidewalk or school demolition, etc...) where someone asked and got a "no". Yes I realize that you say "no problem, I'll just detect somewhere else". But you can only imagine the .... uh .... "odd situation" that arises when later, that md'r who got a "no", bumps into other md'rs who are showing them handfuls of silver from that location. Ok, you tell me, if you were the md'r who got that "no", yet saw others md'ing there and it was quite clear that no one cared, wouldn't you be a bit miffed ? And then put yourself in the shoes of those md'ing there, now being told by their fellow md'r "the city doesn't allow that". Huh ? Since when ? Does that mean we have to stop now ? And if I now got booted, you can bet one part of me would be thinking in the back of my mind "I wonder if this isn't happening because the other guy [bless his little heart] went and swatted a hornet's nest ? Such that the pencil pusher, when he NOW sees another md'r, thinks "aha! there's one of *them*!" and starts booting others.

Not saying this happens all the time, just saying I've seen it happen.

As for the innocuous parks in Cincinnati that a) rule that says no md'ing, yet b) it's not posted. Ok, do you know of anyone who has really been "fined" for that ? I'm going to guess it was someone being obnoxious, couldn't take a warning, being a nuisance/mess, etc.... Perhaps I'm wrong, and there's examples of someone getting "roughed up" in a sanbox somewhere, jailed, fined, etc.... But I can't help but think that there's normally more to such stories. Versus the the "sky is falling" takeway that such stories are meant to portray.

I probably would not be terribly upset no. If I get a no it is the law as I am asking PD and Sheriff and not anybody else. I call and ask "what is the law on MDing public property" and leave it at that. They either tell me "there is no law" or they tell me "municipal code X.XX.X says this and that".

If fellow MDers I run into want to go do it and get their silvers more power to them. I would have no issues telling them the police told me no because law X.XX.X says no MDing. I'm not swatting their nest so I would tell them to take ride on a sharp object if they directed anger at me for getting clarification on a law for my personal safety. I would tell them go have fun. If they thought the law was there because of me...I would sleep just fine that night since I know 100% that is not the case. No law has been written by simply asking about said law....ever.

Laws are however made because those MDer types you just mentioned that go detect there anyways ARE breaking the law "if" said law is in place.

My friend has not returned my call from Cincy yet....but let me tell you there is nothing innocuous about that city park on most days....especially after dark!

 

[Tom_in_CA]

..... If I get a no it is the law as I am asking PD and Sheriff and not anybody else. I call and ask "what is the law on MDing public property" and leave it at that. They either tell me "there is no law" or they tell me "municipal code X.XX.X says this and that".........

Ah but if it were just that simple. I wish it were just those 2 answers. And that the answers would be based on specific laws. (lest it be nothing more than their whimsical feelings). But how about these wonderful answers from a sheriff's or PD:

1) "We would prefer you didn't". But they cite no actual law. Like as if you had just asked their opinion, rather than "what is the law?". Do you correct their misinterpreation and pin them back to the "where is it written?" type phrasing ?

2) "No because of holes". Yet you NEVER mentioned "holes" or "dig". Does this now constitute a law in your mind, or .... do you now debate them on the issue that you plan to leave zero trace?

3) "yes but you can't take anything". Hmmmm, does this constitute a "no"? I suppose it'll have to, unless you intend to rebury everything you find? This is where some cop genius realizes your question violates "harvest and remove" clauses. But hey, you're glad you asked now, right ?

4) Sure go ahead! Yet you get to the park, only to have a gardener accost you and gripe. You proudly whip out your "permission" from the cops. Whereupon the gardener gets on his cell-phone, calls to the police dept, and says "but he's tearing the place up !" (which isn't true, of course). Then guess what happens to your permission?

But let's say you do carefully phrase it in such a way that you're *specifically* and *only* asking for them cite actual chapter and verse that truly said "no detecting" (and you do not construe words like "alter" and "remove", etc... to necessarily equate to that). Ok, I can see that logic. But that only begs the question: If you are only going to be convinced by an actual written prohibition (versus silly arbitrary no's based on things that have no bearing), then pray-tell, why couldn't you just look that up for yourself ? Certainly city and municipal codes, laws, rules, are no secret from the public right? Isn't the city's code there for public viewing somewhere ?

So if you're asking the cops to get "what does the law say" (as opposed to "what is your princely whim?"), then I don't understand why a person can't just look up those laws for themselves?

 

[TheHunterGT]

Ah but if it were just that simple. I wish it were just those 2 answers. And that the answers would be based on specific laws. (lest it be nothing more than their whimsical feelings). But how about these wonderful answers from a sheriff's or PD:

But it is just that simple as those are the only to answers (yes or no) I have received in 20-25 calls to local PD and Sheriffs in the various towns/counties I go detect here in Colorado.

1) "We would prefer you didn't". But they cite no actual law. Like as if you had just asked their opinion, rather than "what is the law?". Do you correct their misinterpreation and pin them back to the "where is it written?" type phrasing ?

Never once have they given me there preference or opinion...and I would absolutely ask for the law/code if they did. They have given me a yes or no answer as I am asking simply if there are any MD laws I should know about if I come to town to visit. They are to the point.

2) "No because of holes". Yet you NEVER mentioned "holes" or "dig". Does this now constitute a law in your mind, or .... do you now debate them on the issue that you plan to leave zero trace?

Has never happened so another "what if" I will be waiting for to happen. IMO it never will happen because most people have enough common sense and realize MDers dig the beeps.

3) "yes but you can't take anything". Hmmmm, does this constitute a "no"? I suppose it'll have to, unless you intend to rebury everything you find? This is where some cop genius realizes your question violates "harvest and remove" clauses. But hey, you're glad you asked now, right ?

The only person to tell me I had to turn in my finds (or not take anything) was the State Park manager...who in Colorado you MUST get permission from to dig the State Park. I declined to dig there. I have yet to meet a cop genius so I am glad I asked and will continue.

4) Sure go ahead! Yet you get to the park, only to have a gardener accost you and gripe. You proudly whip out your "permission" from the cops. Whereupon the gardener gets on his cell-phone, calls to the police dept, and says "but he's tearing the place up !" (which isn't true, of course). Then guess what happens to your permission?

I'm not getting permission in writing and really not sure why the gardener would not call "whoever" if I had asked permission or not. If he is pissed he is likely to call anyways whether I state I have permission or not. I would not say I have permission anyways so it's a moot point....I would say there is no law stating I cannot be here so off you go park boy.

But let's say you do carefully phrase it in such a way that you're *specifically* and *only* asking for them cite actual chapter and verse that truly said "no detecting" (and you do not construe words like "alter" and "remove", etc... to necessarily equate to that). Ok, I can see that logic. But that only begs the question: If you are only going to be convinced by an actual written prohibition (versus silly arbitrary no's based on things that have no bearing), then pray-tell, why couldn't you just look that up for yourself ? Certainly city and municipal codes, laws, rules, are no secret from the public right? Isn't the city's code there for public viewing somewhere ?

I'm sure it is there but that would entail me going and looking at the books and records and really I don't have time for that in each place I visit. I can however place a simple time-saving call and get the same answer without stirring any "what if" pots.

So if you're asking the cops to get "what does the law say" (as opposed to "what is your princely whim?"), then I don't understand why a person can't just look up those laws for themselves?

See above

My replies are in bold Tom....makes it easier for me to reply to each question.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Well you are doing good then. And you're right: You're more bound to get a legal answer (ie.: is there an actual law), from the police (who have bigger fish to fry), then a park's dept. or city-type personnel. And you appear to have avoided the scenarios I typed out. Each of those comes from case examples on the net, and are not made up. So while it's true that the "silly answers" are less likely to come from cops, yet .... it can/has happened. Or how about this one answer some have received from L.E.O. offices:

"Uh, for that question, you'd have to talk to the park's dept. They're down the street and to the left".

Doh! So what do you do? Do you THEN go to the city offices people as the cops said ? Because if so, I think we both agree that that's where the silly answers are more probable.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Hunter GT, you are doing good to have always avoided having the person give a whimsical "no" (as if you'd just asked their permission or something). And this is exactly why many folks on md'ing forums, point out that it's important (as you probably already do) to phrase it:

"Are there any law/rules in city code that deal with , or prohibit, the use of metal detectors?"

Because by phrasing it that way, you're putting the burden on them to CITE any such law or rule, if one existed. And so far, you seem to be doing good at keeping people on-point. And you said that if they changed subject, and started give some sort of whimsical opinion you would indeed re-direct them to the specific question. You say:

"Never once have they given me there preference or opinion...and I would absolutely ask for the law/code if they did."


So with that in mind, here's a true story that occurred in that situation. A man asked a city clerk (yes, I know, his first mistake, but the principle *could* happen with an LEO). The clerk said "no you can't". The man re-directed the gal back to his question by saying "where is that written? ". The lady looked to & fro through her rule books, and had to concede there was nothing that specific. So the man left, and that was that.

But I guess the lady must've had images of yahoos with shovels in the park. Because GUESS WHAT WAS ON THE NEXT WEEK'S CITY COUNSEL AGENDA? : The proposal to make a rule forbidding detectors in that city's parks. Hmmm, I wonder what caused them to all of the sudden think "let's invent a rule!". Obviously it was the persons in there with the un-mistakable challenge attitude of "be prepared to show me chapter and verse, if you plan to say no".

Anyhow, in the old days, it was probably true that city codes/laws would have been hard to find. You'd have had to go into city halls, legal library, etc... asking for a dusty binder that's kept somewhere at city hall, blah blah. But nowadays, it seems that nearly all cities (except perhaps very small podunk towns) have their laws/rules/charters/codes on their city websites. And if they didn't, you could always still ask the live person: "where can I find the public codes available for public viewing?". If they change the subject and say "what is it that you wanted to know?" I'd repeat the question "where can I view all public laws, permits available, codes, etc...". It HAS to be somewhere for public viewing.

 

[FindsBuddy]

I don't like to ask neither have ppl near me asking what i am looking for, so for that reason i mainly hunt at night.

 

[TheHunterGT]

Hunter GT, you are doing good to have always avoided having the person give a whimsical "no" (as if you'd just asked their permission or something). And this is exactly why many folks on md'ing forums, point out that it's important (as you probably already do) to phrase it:

"Are there any law/rules in city code that deal with , or prohibit, the use of metal detectors?"

Because by phrasing it that way, you're putting the burden on them to CITE any such law or rule, if one existed. And so far, you seem to be doing good at keeping people on-point. And you said that if they changed subject, and started give some sort of whimsical opinion you would indeed re-direct them to the specific question. You say:

"Never once have they given me there preference or opinion...and I would absolutely ask for the law/code if they did."


So with that in mind, here's a true story that occurred in that situation. A man asked a city clerk (yes, I know, his first mistake, but the principle *could* happen with an LEO). The clerk said "no you can't". The man re-directed the gal back to his question by saying "where is that written? ". The lady looked to & fro through her rule books, and had to concede there was nothing that specific. So the man left, and that was that.

But I guess the lady must've had images of yahoos with shovels in the park. Because GUESS WHAT WAS ON THE NEXT WEEK'S CITY COUNSEL AGENDA? : The proposal to make a rule forbidding detectors in that city's parks. Hmmm, I wonder what caused them to all of the sudden think "let's invent a rule!". Obviously it was the persons in there with the un-mistakable challenge attitude of "be prepared to show me chapter and verse, if you plan to say no".

Anyhow, in the old days, it was probably true that city codes/laws would have been hard to find. You'd have had to go into city halls, legal library, etc... asking for a dusty binder that's kept somewhere at city hall, blah blah. But nowadays, it seems that nearly all cities (except perhaps very small podunk towns) have their laws/rules/charters/codes on their city websites. And if they didn't, you could always still ask the live person: "where can I find the public codes available for public viewing?". If they change the subject and say "what is it that you wanted to know?" I'd repeat the question "where can I view all public laws, permits available, codes, etc...". It HAS to be somewhere for public viewing.

I think most places do have the info online...but I know in my small town it is like 500 pages that are hardly sorted in a format I want to sift through for hours. I cannot imagine sifting through pages of PDF's in a larger city. I honestly jusy don;t have time to look at every code. By the time I found it my eyes and brain would be so tired I might very well just pass it up. Placing a call to the guys that enforce those pages of codes/laws seems a much faster alternative for myself. With the batting percentage I am hitting on a personal level I really can't see any reason to abandon it and spends hours looking at webpages or PDF's.

I feel confident I could attend my city council meeting and deteriorate any old ladies grounds for banning metal detecting. Even if I had to invite the council to come to the park and look at the plugs and show them how fast they regrow etc. I could probably even start an online petition to show them how my support outweighs her....look at all these votes you would be losing guys.....vs just this one ladies.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

..... that are hardly sorted in a format I want to sift through for hours. I cannot imagine sifting through pages of PDF's in a larger city. I honestly jusy don;t have time to look at every code.... . and spends hours looking at webpages or PDF's.....

Here's the trick when that happens. If there isn't a fill-in-the-box "search" function on such pages, you merely do this:

Hit "Ctrl F " (stands for control find) That brings up a search box near the bottom footer. Type in various words. Like "metal" or "detector", etc.... If any variety of the word "metal detector" or "metal detecting" come up in the body of that web page or PDF, it will immediately bring you to it.

 

[TheHunterGT]

Here's the trick when that happens. If there isn't a fill-in-the-box "search" function on such pages, you merely do this:

Hit "Ctrl F " (stands for control find) That brings up a search box near the bottom footer. Type in various words. Like "metal" or "detector", etc.... If any variety of the word "metal detector" or "metal detecting" come up in the body of that web page or PDF, it will immediately bring you to it.

Excellent info...thanks man.