reply
I have never known anyone who has asked permission to metal detect a public park get a YES.
Actually, there's been many people who have posted proudly that they "got permission" to detect a their park, or their school, or whatever. So it's not 100% no's. Not sure whether the success ratio is 50/50, or whatever. But no matter even if someone has a 50% batting ratio, it still begs the question: "why risk a no, if there's no rules saying 'no detecting', and perhaps no one would ever have cared or noticed?"
When it comes to the question of whether permission is needed for certain places to begin with, then the fact of someone "getting permission", does not .... to me .... lend itself to the question of whether or not permission was needed, in the first place. But in their mind, it works like this: When someone "gets permission", then in their mind, they say to themselves "
gee it was a good thing I asked". Or even if they get a "no", then they likewise say to themselves: "
gee it was a good thing I asked, or else I could have been arrested". So you see,
no matter what the answer, (either a "yes" or a "no"), they feel that
either answer confirms that, therefore, "asking" was necessary. Because I guess in their mind, if permission had not been needed, then the person answering would have said something like: "
that's a silly question. Why are you asking me? You don't need permission to do that if there's no rule saying you can't". No. It never works like that. Never will someone in authority give you that type of answer. Instead they will bestow on your their princely "yes" or their princely "no". Afterall, you asked. And that merely presumes it's something that needs their permission (lest why would you be asking?).
Therefore when someone comes on a post with an example of "how they got permission" at their park, school, or whatever, I do not take that to mean that "therefore, permission was necessary".