Wait….So, there were reasons to believe the gun under the porch was less than on the level????

I sense a tad of sarcasm but in the event you are serious then a big YES.

Just the circumstances, the obvious dryness of the earth it was found in and the wet mud that was caked on it inside the box throws up red flags. The nice condition of the gun was another. Besides that if you remember the story surrounding the gun then you would know the trouble they would all be in for not turning it in to check on the story and his transporting the gun back to CT.

Sorry if you're a fan but the show reeks of falsehoods.

Wait….So, there were reasons to believe the gun under the porch was less than on the level????

Reignstorm, they did have a pretty logical explanation for it being found buried under the house. It was a house that was up on blocks (raised above the ground, not an inground basement). Since they have bad storms with lots of water, they believe that the gun was moved under their house and deposited there rather than hidden by the owner of the house.

I know, my thoughts exactly. He is taking these objects to fill up his museum, so that alone shows that he is benefitting (sp?) from his clients. I guess if the client feels better, then he is helping them but it just seemed a bit smarmy for him to keep the objects and put it in his museum. Plus, I am pretty disappointed that he didn't take the gun to the police station to try to solve the crime.

Well the thing is – a good con knows how to 'talk their clients' into the 'con' … In this case he preys and builds on their fears and builds on them so they want to give it up.

I know, my thoughts exactly. He is taking these objects to fill up his museum, so that alone shows that he is benefitting (sp?) from his clients. I guess if the client feels better, then he is helping them but it just seemed a bit smarmy for him to keep the objects and put it in his museum. Plus, I am pretty disappointed that he didn't take the gun to the police station to try to solve the crime.

First it sounds like these people are taking items off the "supposidly scared" people they go and see in order to ease their pain or fears? Arethey paying these people for these items? I'm a little in the dark since I haven't seen the show. I hope these people are getting some compensation. Geesh it would be a shame if th ey are forced to sign a waiver not to collect any money or fame from the collector coming there.

Oh by the way I have a nice bridge to sell. It connects Manhattan and Brooklyn. Only one owner and it was used by a little old lady to go to church on Sunday.

I don't think they said anything about compensating the clients but maybe they put a plaque describing the object and the owner who "donated" the item to the museum. If I find out, I'll let you know.

Wait…now I am confused. Are we talking about Haunted Collector or TAPS/Ghost Hunters? /wink.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=';)' /> /cool.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='B)' />

But thanks in advance for letting me know.

Haunted Collectors -

Here is something a friend brought up .. How is it that these things are "Haunted" until they get into the museum? I would think that Museum would be the MOST HAUNTED PLACE IN AMERICA!" ….

Amazing, simply amazing that Sy-Fy would allow such a scam .. when they would no way allow John Edwards to continue. (which they were right in X'ing that guy out.)

That is PRECISELY what I first thought. Supposedly John Zaffis(as did his uncle Ed Warren) warns people to not touch ANYTHING in the museum or else bad things will happen to them. If John is looking to have a paranormal show- then it should take place right in his basement. Surely with all of those haunted items SOMETHING is bound to happen on camera….right? /wink.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=';)' />

I specifically remember the stories Ed would tell at his Halloween lectures of people taunting the Raggedy Ann doll and then getting into car accidents afterwords. However, there are also the people who say that as soon as John Zaffis's back is turned they touch everything they possibly can like a naughty little kid….and they have lived to tell the tale with no curses yet to speak of /wink.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=';)' />

Anybody mind if I play devils advocate for a sec? /wink.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':unsure:' />

Is it possible that if he convinces the homeowners that these artifiacts are causing the issues and he takes the objects away that it could create a psychosomatic effect in that the issues will stop because the homeowner believes they will stop?

I haven't seen the show yet, Im going to download it now, and it doesnt mean I agree with the tactics, but just wanted to throw that thought out there.

I totally understand where you are coming from .. and understand that people can allow themselves to get so totally pysched out .. that the best move is to remove the item.

At that point two things should be talked about: What to do with the item.

A. Sell it and give the money to the person.

B. Distroy it.

It seems terribly wasteful to destroy an item, especially when it's been proven that there is no paranormal activity associated with it.

If the person doesn't want the item anymore even after activity is disproven, then I think it should be up to the owner to do with it as they choose. IMO they have the right to choose to give it to the investigators or to anyone else they please.

If I were the owner of an item I believed to be haunted, I wouldn't feel comfortable selling it or passing it on to an innocent third party. I'd be relieved to find someone who was willing to take the dang thing. I'd just want it out of my house. I wouldn't want money for it. A museum of the paranormal would seem like the perfect answer to me.

That's just me, though. Everyone is different.

Well since I have yet to see any compelling evidence that an object is and/or can be 'possesed' or 'haunted' … Every case I've seen and read/looked at is where the person got themselves PSYCHED OUT … even when the evidence has been clear and honest that it was normal – mudane 'cause/effect' ….

Yes sometimes it is best just to remove the object .. I totally understand and accept this answer. But .. if the person who removed the object did it by feeding the persons fears and such, that person has ZERO integrity, period. Did they take the time to actually investigate with credibility and such …? Just because they said they did, ..> Can they back it up with verifiable proof?

We had one house that we 'set up' to prove this local Psychic was a fraud. A first year Paranormal Investigator would have known to 'look' and 'check' .. this idiot walked through the house and was giving us all sorts of 'readings' and 'feelings' and 'experiences' --> Based on the 'canned' – 'mechinical' and rigged 'paranormal' sights and sounds. He was convienced he experienced the 'real ghosts' and such of the home….until …. the 'reveal' was done … He was, how shall I … pi … ed and threatened legal action against us. EXCEPT that one of our team members is/was a lawyer and the agreement he signed was 'tight'. (oops, he didn't even bother to read the agreement.)

Anyways .. I think you get the point.