Focus on Irresponsible metal detecting: "Mindset" or Straightforward Logic?

On the topic of artefact hunting on known archaeological sites, UK metal detectorist Andy Baines said...

I believe the answer to that question Paul is a matter of opinion obviously you and the people with the same mindset as you will think that it is not ethical. However on the other hand we as detectorists may not see it as being unethical and see it as having a higher chance of being able to dig up coins and artifacts of a greater historical importance. I know for a fact none of the detectorists I know and associate with would dig on a protected site but I don't think there are many of us who would turn down the opportunity to dig on a site that isn't protected but has had a good amount of history to it.

Blogger Paul Barford replied, with reference to the dismissive tone:

[...] "the people with the same mindset as you" are not collectors, they are preservationists and value the archaeological record for more than what collectables for their own personal entertainment and profit they can extract from it. The problem is that a site once one of your lot has hoiked their way across it no longer has "a good amount of history in it" for anyone else. In my book, responsible detecting would indeed entail saying 'no' to deliberately trashing known archaeological sites, no matter what the personal gain.

What is there here not to understand?
 
TAKE A GOOD LOOK at this behaviour, for these are precisely the sort of people the PAS wants to grab more and more millions of public quid to make into the "partners" of the British Museum, archaeological heritage professionals and to whom they want us all to entrust the exploitation of the archaeological record. Take a good look and decide what you think about that as a "policy".