Daniel Carr

Good to see you Mr. Carr!!! I knew you would show up and stand up for what it right, my hat is off you you!! Now I want to ask you a question. I see on ebay some dealers selling these 1/20th size coins that you supposedly minted. Problem is I've never noticed them on your website. Are they yours and when did you mint them? I would add a link but I don't have access to ebay at the moment.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Chris: I think many people would be thrilled to inherit a Daniel Carr overstrike coin. It might actually be worth much more than the common regular issue. Many people view these as works of art and are not duped into buying them. There is a big difference between inheriting a coin that turns out to be a worthless fake versus inheriting a fantasy coin by a former US Mint designer. If anything, it tells you that your ancestor appreciated the design, concept, etc. and thought well enough of you to pass it on. TC

 

Indeed. I would be thrilled to receive such a coin. I don't think I have ever seen a report anywhere about someone being deceived by a fantasy coin. If someone, who thinks this is a problem, would they please produce it. I'd be interested in seeing the details about it.

 

Sorry, but terms like "bless your Heart" and "dear heart" are quite often used by southerners to be the total opposite of endearment. The terms are often used to slyly tell someone they're an idiot or that they're incorrect. It can be used in a very condescending way, often to fool yankees into thinking that you're being nice. But I think you are already very aware of that.​

 

I agree 100% mike... and I think most members here do. And of course, the controversy is not limited to CT; it rages on other forums also, and seems to ignite a flame in more than just few people. But like jterry states, all artists are subjected to criticism. However, what I find hard to believe is that (currently) we have ten members who believe Carr's fantasy pieces are "counterfeit coins". I can't even begin to grasp the mentality that would lead anyone to this conclusion, as the definition of counterfeit requires no interpretation.

 

Just a point of clarification and defense of those people sir, (I did not vote).

Let me ask you a question. If someone in Bulgaria strikes a "Roman Coin' with a wolf and twins with a Chi Ro symbol, from the mint of Arles last week, is that a counterfeit?

If the same Bulgarian makes the same coin but the mint it Constantinople, is that a counterfeit?

Does it matter that a Chi Ro wolf and twins was only struck in antiquity in Arles, and not Constantinople?

Makes it a lot harder when you do not innately know the answer, huh?

My point being, does it MATTER that a Morgan dollar was not legally struck in 1905? Isn't the fact that someone is exactly copying a US coin MATTER when considering the question?

I am simply saying there is no need to insult those who may have a different opinion on this matter than you may have, or to question their intellect.

Chris

 

No offense but how is a 1964 Franklin Art? For starters, it isn't even an original idea. It clearly states in Walter Breen's complete encyclopedia of U.S. and Colonial coins that there are 64's in exisistance. Furthermore it labels them as "Counterfeits." I quote directly from page 416 "Nor has the coin shown up anywhere, nor has any counterfeit half dollar of this date been publicized, nor have authorities announced seizure (a probable fate in any event)." So these were the feelings about the 1964 Half Dollar 20-30 years ago. What exactly has changed? Even if this is only the feeling of one person, how on earth is this an original idea? Artists come up with original ideas, not marketing copycats.

 

I believe (only because this is what I do myself) that if someone is interested in owning a coin that they are unaware of then they should do some research about what they are purchasing. Why is it hard to say that in this instance but if we heard about someone in China buying beachfront property in Arizona we'd say they should've been more careful and paid more attention to what they were buying? And if anyone is offended by the generalization I'm using then I apologize, I don't intend to insult or offend anyone and perhaps I am just making an unfair assumption.

 

The majority of Roman Classical art was copied from the Greeks yet we don't call it counterfeit. And I was referring to his original work actually when I said that though I can see where the confusion is.

 

I've wanted to ask this question, and I don't think it's been addressed in this thread. My apologies if it has. Are the DC overstrikes still legal tender? Since they were struck over an authentic coin, would the government still consider them legal tender, or could the person spending such a coin be guilty of anything? I know this may never happen (but obviously could), and I just wonder about it. I have a feeling that since they are struck over legal tender that the only issue would be that some unknowing person spent an expensive fantasy piece at way below it's value.

 

It has nothing to do with opinion or intellect. It's merely a misinterpretation of the definition of the word "counterfeit". Your examples are ridiculous to say the least.

 

Indeed, with the way artist is being used with regard to the coins in these threads you would think that Carr is hand engraving his dies. With the technology available today it takes absolutely zero artistic ability to copy designs and create the dies used for his copy coins. Is he a skilled craftsman? Yes. Is he an artist? I don't know, we never see any threads on his original designs to make that judgement, for some reason.

 

I would argue that if we were talking about an overstrike of a coin that was issued as legal tender, then the overstrike does not change its legal tender status. According to the legal definition of legal tender in 31 USC 5103, only congress has this power. One can always take a "mutilated" (in their eyes) currency either to the US Mint or the US Bureau of Engraving who will do an examination and redeem it's face value. I would think it would be within the Mint's technical abilities to immediately see the overstruck coin was indeed one of theirs. Of course nobody will do this due to the numismatic value. Given this, I don't think the overstrike changes the legal tender status.

There is a law, 18 USC 333, that prevents such changes being made to bank notes, but it does not seem to apply to coins.

 

They are? Why is that sir? Are ancient coins not capable of being counterfeit?

What were your answer to my questions? I would like to know. If someone last week strikes a coin identical to an ancient roman coin, is that coin a counterfeit? What if there is a very slight change to the design, (enough that most would never know). Is that coin still a counterfeit.

It gets to the heart of the matter sir concerning the true nature of a counterfeit.

Chris

Edit: If it helps, try this one, (I simply used Roman coins to take you out of your comfort zone).

Lets say last month someone in China strikes identical copies of 1803 silver dollars. Are those counterfeits?

Ok, they do it again but accidentally place a dot on the reverse in the field. Is this a counterfeit?

Next, they leave the dot, but the second S in States accidentally gets changed to a 8. Is that counterfiet?

Next, they clean those two problems up, so its identical to an 1803 silver dollar again, but change the date to 1805. Is it a counterfeit?

The point being WHERE is the line where its counterfeit/not counterfeit. That is the question sir.

 

Fatima, I feel the same could be argued. I'd add to this, questioning, were the legal tender status of a counter-stamped coins ever in doubt when some shop keeper stamped his initials in the coins? Are they not collected by coin collectors and often sold well above face value? They are very much an area widely collected and researched, attributed by numismatists.

As well, what about the alterations to trade dollars altered by being "chop marked" repetitively?

If we are talking about paper money, Where's George stamped notes still circulate and are used until removed from circulation, replaced by the Fed or pulled aside by WG collectors, saved or bought/sold as collectibles.

 

After I posted I had later thought about the counterstamped coins, and the possibility that the overstrikes might be considered the same.

 

Any coin, ancient, modern or in between is capable of being counterfeited. That's not the point. The definition of counterfeit clearly states "with intent to defraud". If I make a coin on my homemade coin press and pass it or sell it as genuine, I am a counterfeiter and my coin is a counterfeit. However, the question originated by the OP clearly asks whether DC's "coins" are fantasy pieces or counterfeit. Now if Carr was "minting" these items to sell as genuine '64 Peace dollars (or whatever fantasy piece he manufactures), then I would vote "counterfeit". But he is not, and nowhere on his website or anywhere else is this insinuated. Therefore, there can be no other answer except "fantasy".

 

Heck. All you have to do is visit his website to see his artistic abilities, and that (website) has been mentioned on several occasions in threads on this site....