Daniel Carr's 2009 Proof ASE

D Carr is do a good job and marking each die type and making sure You know it is a copy on the 2009-DCarr AME & the 1964-D Copy of the Peace Dollar
plus
the Poorman token too but the asking $$$ is a tad bit high

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I love his stuff. I bought his 1964 Peace restrike.

 

ANYONE who does the slightest amount of research when offered a 1964-D Peace Dollar will come to 1 of 2 conclusions:

1) That this is a real 1964-D Peace Dollar and therefore illegal to own, or that it is a copy and not worth big $$$. Either way, if you are aware of 64-D Peace dollars, you can't possibly confuse this coin for an authentic one, or

2) you don't know that the US Government minted any silver dollars in 1964, and therefore a 64-D Peace Dollar would be no big deal.

In either case, not worth big bucks.

If you read the Hobby Protection Act it deals with imitation numismatic items which this coin is not one of. He also posts high resolution pics on his website that make his coins EASILY identifiable as his creation. Listen to his own words on this and then make a judgement. He is on record here, and on our podcast. He is remarkably consistent in what he says. The fact that the Secret service hasn't had a problem with them is a better indicator.

 

This restrike coin is easy to identify.
The D mintmark is in a slightly different place ... farther away from the tail feathers

 

Mike, is this a new statement of the Secret Service/Treasury or is it still just Carr's statement that he notified them and didn't receive an answer so assumed it was OK?

​

 

The fact that they haven't contacted Mr. Carr is what I am alluding to. They would never contact someone to say "no problem", you have to assume that when they don't call and they do know about it, that everything is ok. They haven't been slow about confiscating 1933 $20s and usually didn't give the owners a "heads-up" that they were coming.

While, yes, it is an assumption, it is also common knowledge that he is making these coins. The Secret Service is well aware.

 

You are approaching this from a standpoint of a dealer, of course you will be able to tell the difference. I am saying how much confusion and anger could this cause in 30 years when a family member finds it going through things. You state that this is not a imitation numismatic item, well then what is it? Why stamp it 1964 when coins WERE made with that date? Why not 1952, or 1973? It is simply BECAUSE it is an imitation numismatic item that anyone wants one, therefor to me falls under the Hobby Protection Act. To say that 1964 doesn't mean anything, or is not imitating a real coin that was in existence, is simply not true.

Lets get back to an earlier point, if Mr Carr struck a 1873s half dime 40 years ago before the authentic one was found, would that be ok? Can he strike a quarter now? If he does, what happens if a real 1873s quarter shows up? What happens today if real 1964 silver dolalrs show up and the government allows their sale? There are no absolutes as to what will happen, that is why the 1964 silver dollar to me is especially galling not being labelled COPY. Is it ok if Mr. Carr simply adds a mintmark to a coin, so we could have lovelies like a 1907s IHC, 1911d Nickel, 1862c half eagle, and all sorts of other things to collect? Where is the line of numismatic acceptable forgery?

He can make these all he wants, I just wish for the good of the hobby long term, he would simply stamp them COPY. I don't think its that much to ask.

Regarding Desertgems question, it is a good one. A non response from a government agency is not tacit permission, I am a CPA and know this very well from tax law cases. Non response from an agency is explicitly NO advice, and you cannot use a non response as a defense. This has been litigated and affirmed for more than 50 years.

 

I was under the impression that Mr. Carr had communicated with the US Government about these pieces and they had given him the ok.

 

Or that they are building a case against you and don't want to tip their hand.

Definition from the Hobby Protection Act

"The term “imitation numismatic item” means an item which purports to be, but in fact is not, an original numismatic item or which is a reproduction, copy, or counterfeit of an original numismatic item."

Well is sure seems to be doing a pretty good job of purporting to be a 1964-D Peace dollar, but it isn't one. And since 1964-D dollars did exist at least at one time I could definity see how this could be considered a reproduction or a copy. To me it definitely meets the definition of an Imitation Numismatic Item. And if so it is covered by the HPA and needs to be marked COPY.

Comment to medoraman, you mean to be talking about the 1870-S half dime and quarter. The 1873-S half dime and quarter are common coins. The 1870-S half dime is unique and the 70-S quarter is unknown today but at least one was known to have been struck for the mint cornerstone.

I was under the impression he never heard anything back saying don't do it.

 

These Carr creations are nothing more than coins with altered surfaces. Much like AT coins, but with the understanding up front, that these are not authentic.

The 64-D Peace dollar is as non-existent as a 1907-D IHC (as far as anyone can prove).

I am not looking at it from a dealer's perspective, quite the contrary, I am looking at it as a knowledgeable collector. These coins are easy to distinguish as what they are. Anyone who google searches 64-D Peace Dollar will find at least 1 article describing Mr. Carr and his coins. Anyone else who thinks it is genuine has two choices: 1) turn it in to secret service at which time they will be told it is not genuine. or 2) try to do something with the coin clandestinely. If they do the right thing, they will be safe, it they try to do other, then the law will take care of itself.

the point is clear: if you try want to authenticate this coin, it is simple and its provenance as a fantasy piece is obvious.

the argument of whether or not he should make them is a moral one and therefore is more a personal judgment than a legal matter

 

Only if your name is Daniel Carr could you get away with that and I expect him to join the conversation sometime soon, or maybe not!

 

You are right, sorry relying on my US coin memory. Of course I meant the unique 1870s whihc was unknown to the hobby until the 70's I believe.

 

should i place my order today??.. :devil:

IMO...this is B.S. somebody should be thrown in jail.

 

It's wrong to be doing this with US coins IMHO...

 

i think it's great ... where else can i get a a coin that looks exactly like a 1964-D Peace Silver dollar in MS-68 condition for $165.
i've seen common date 1922 and 1923 Peace dollars one grade lower, in MS-67 condition, for $5000 (who can afford that?).

yes, i know it's not genuine ... who cares.
there are no genuine 1964-D coins remaining (as far as anybody knows) ... they were all melted down.

if this is as close as i can get to owning one of these cool "story coins" ... that's fine with me!

 

I have no issue with what Carr is doing. He isn't trying to commit fraud and the appeal of his coins are going to be limited to a relatively small number of collectors. Any collector has a responsibility to themselves to understand what they are buying. IMO, Carr creates interest in coins and their history which isn't a bad thing.

Contrast this to such outfits as the National Collector's Mint which produces very cheap reproductions of high value coins from the Mint and produces advertising that suggests you can pay $19.99 to get a coin that is worth 100s or 1000s of dollars These are the true leeches that do harm to the collectors community.

 

+1

Besides, these are not the Chinese counterfeits that make (now collectible and existing) coins we are afraid of collecting because of the amount of counterfeits sent here. Mr. Carr is making "coins" that many collectors (like me) would like. They are creative and beautifully designed pieces and holding a 1964-D Peace in hand is a wow factor IMO. He is not counterfeiting like the Chinese and so it is NOT harming our hobby.

 

I will allow Conder101 to be my personal spokesperson, he makes the most sense out of this debacle.

 

I personally decided to buy a 2009 proof ASE DC. I will post a pic as soon as I get it.

 

If you take that definition I think that the interpretation of what is an imitation numismatic item is the point of contention.

This is not an imitation item. An imitation US coin is one made by someone other than the US Mint. Technically, Carr is not manufacturing the coins, but rather altering them.

The stock that he uses ARE numismatic items. They are Peace Dollars. They have had the surfaces obliterated to look like 64-D Peace Dollars, but they never ceased being Peace Dollars. They are not reproductions, nor are they copies or counterfeits of Peace dollars. They ARE Peace Dollars.

They fail those both of those two tests and therefore don't need to be marked copy.