Found a few wheat pennies, modern coins, an old gilded brooch and my first ever "3 Merry Widows" lid.

It is a common find among dirt fishers but up to yesterday I had never found one myself.

For those of you who don't know…3 Merry Widows was a condom company in the 20's and 30's that sold their product in a small tin canister. You can google for an image.

I always thought the company name was…IDK, kinda wild…

Like this?

Tested???

You want to be sure don't you?

Haha
That is the exact match

OnlyForNow said:

---

Just asking… so you're going on property you don't own (and isn't public) and taking property that doesn't belong to you?

---

Yawn..... Fun police have arrived.... Thread is now closed

No, thanks for your concern though.

I have tried an overflow grass parking lot once (used to have several homes on it) that Schlitterbahn rarely, if ever, uses and was kicked off by security but even he was cool about it and curious about what I was finding.

My buddy and I knock on house doors and talk to owners and try to get permission. Some say no, most say yes.

Believe me, there are MANY properties in town that we would love to hunt but don't…

OnlyForNow said:

---

Just asking… so you're going on property you don't own (and isn't public) and taking property that doesn't belong to you?

---

stfu

Quote:

---

This round tin held three Merry Widow condoms. During the early twentieth century, the term "Merry Widow" was commonly used to imply a sexually experienced and independent woman (the term "merry" traditionally had a sexual connotation). This Merry Widow tin names the three "Merry Widows" as "Agnes, Mabel, [and] Beckie." During the 1920s and 1930s, the Merry Widow brand was so popular that the term "Merry Widow" became slang for a condom.
Merry Widow condoms were tested to ensure that they had no tears or holes. Because testing was an expensive process, a tin of three Merry Widow condoms sold for a dollar. In contrast, untested condoms were often sold on the street for pennies.

---

KRamp90 said:

---

And that's how Canyon managed his brood!

---

My maternal grandparents married in 1918, 'their first child (my aunt) was named Mabel.

I guess that can failed the test

CanyonAg77 said:

---

Quote:

---

(the term "merry" traditionally had a sexual connotation).

---

---

Let's all remember this come December.

The Sun said:

---

OnlyForNow said:

---

Just asking… so you're going on property you don't own (and isn't public) and taking property that doesn't belong to you?

---

stfu

---

If you or anyone else didn't think this is a legit question, then I don't want anything to do with you. If that makes me uncool or worse, fine. I can more than live with that.

If you're bothered by a QUESTION, you really have something wrong with you. Sorry to be the one to break it to you, but this is a fact.

Higher end detectors certainly are able to discriminate out ferrous metals from non-ferrous but if there was a detector that ONLY hit on precious metals, I would be first in line.

PI or Pulse Induction detectors pick up all metals and are not able to distinguish between different metals as well as a VLF (very low frequency) detector.

I currently use a Minelab Equinox 900 (VLF) and it is a pretty sophisticated machine but the problem is that aluminum and gold can and will give the same tone and VDI number many times. Pull tabs will hit around 30ish on mine and unfortunately, 10k rings hit right around that number also.

Aluminum foil will hit in the low teens and so do very thin engagement rings.

Silver registers low 90's every time and I can almost guarantee you a silver ring when I see the right VDI combined with the right tone.

So you simply have to learn your machine and unfortunately, you will have to dig the trash to dig the treasure, as they say.

The Garrett AT Pro is an excellent mid-level, user friendly machine and is waterproof for the river as well.

91AggieLawyer said:

---

The Sun said:

---

OnlyForNow said:

---

Just asking… so you're going on property you don't own (and isn't public) and taking property that doesn't belong to you?

---

stfu

---

I don't want anything to do with you.

---

Likewise, lawyer.

91AggieLawyer said:

---

The Sun said:

---

OnlyForNow said:

---

Just asking… so you're going on property you don't own (and isn't public) and taking property that doesn't belong to you?

---

stfu

---

If you or anyone else didn't think this is a legit question, then I don't want anything to do with you. If that makes me uncool or worse, fine. I can more than live with that.

If you're bothered by a QUESTION, you really have something wrong with you. Sorry to be the one to break it to you, but this is a fact.

---

A lawyer teaching us about ethics???

Queso1 said:

---

You'd be surprised how often ethical decisions must be made as an attorney. People are often surprised by our ethical boundaries. People often confuse the random scumbag lawyer with those of us that advocate for our clients and uphold our ethical duties.

And, yes this is an interesting moral/legal question. Can a person just go on someone's property and remove property?

---

This one even talks like one on the internet where he doesn't have to. It's a college message board, you can be human here.

StayGolden05 said:

---

Queso1 said:

---

You'd be surprised how often ethical decisions must be made as an attorney. People are often surprised by our ethical boundaries. People often confuse the random scumbag lawyer with those of us that advocate for our clients and uphold our ethical duties.

And, yes this is an interesting moral/legal question. Can a person just go on someone's property and remove property?

---

This one even talks like one on the internet where he doesn't have to. It's a college message board, you can be human here.

---

But he already identified as a lawyer.

91AggieLawyer said:

---

The Sun said:

---

OnlyForNow said:

---

Just asking… so you're going on property you don't own (and isn't public) and taking property that doesn't belong to you?

---

stfu

---

If you or anyone else didn't think this is a legit question, then I don't want anything to do with you. If that makes me uncool or worse, fine. I can more than live with that.

If you're bothered by a QUESTION, you really have something wrong with you. Sorry to be the one to break it to you, but this is a fact.

---

It is a legit question but it was foremost a weak "gotcha" attempt

Exactly.

He automatically assumed that he knew the situation and circumstances (he didn't) and wanted to criticize.

I have read football postings for years but never commented on any Texags forum until recently. My gosh…it seems some people wake up in the morning and simply can not wait to find fault with other people, justified or not.

I simply posted about a humorous find that I bet many folks didn't know about…

Queso1 said:

---

You'd be surprised how often ethical decisions must be made as an attorney....

---

You're damn right I would......

91AggieLawyer said:

---

The Sun said:

---

OnlyForNow said:

---

Just asking… so you're going on property you don't own (and isn't public) and taking property that doesn't belong to you?

---

stfu

---

If you or anyone else didn't think this is a legit question, then I don't want anything to do with you. If that makes me uncool or worse, fine. I can more than live with that.

If you're bothered by a QUESTION, you really have something wrong with you. Sorry to be the one to break it to you, but this is a fact.

---

Words mean things barrister. That wasn't a genuine question. It was a veiled accusation.

If you're bothered by my response to such, so much so that you feel you need to interject yourself to white knight for him, something is wrong with you.

91AggieLawyer said:

---

The Sun said:

---

OnlyForNow said:

---

Just asking… so you're going on property you don't own (and isn't public) and taking property that doesn't belong to you?

---

stfu

---

If you or anyone else didn't think this is a legit question, then I don't want anything to do with you. If that makes me uncool or worse, fine. I can more than live with that.

If you're bothered by a QUESTION, you really have something wrong with you. Sorry to be the one to break it to you, but this is a fact.

---

I mean, it's a question, sure.

But I kinda assumed right off the bat that the OP had permission to go on the place he was detecting. Maybe I'm just nave to think that most of the posters here aren't intentionally doing something like trespassing without a care in the world.