Just got the elusive 1916 Barber Half....

That is not a fair assumption. Look at the Norfed people. It doesn't take but one young government lawyer with an axe to grind or a reputation to build and things could change.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

In any event, back to the coin: Do all of his pieces have odd luster? It looks like a coin that has been whizzed.

 

If 18 U.S.C. 487 were the only consideration, every maker of every replica coin, Indian Head silver round, or any medal or token with "LIBERTY" on it (for example), could be in violation of the law.

But the Hobby Protection Act (HPA) was enacted after 18 U.S.C. 487. And the HPA allows numismatic replicas to be made and sold. Those replicas are typically made by using molds and dies in the likeness of US coins.

18 U.S.C. 485 does not appear to apply to altering and/or defacing coins when the alteration/defacement is not for fraudulent purposes.

The US Mint web site underlines the key word "fraudulently":
http://www.usmint.gov/consumer/18USC331.cfm

Clearly, the purpose of 18 U.S.C. was to protect the integrity of the aggregate circulating coinage base. Note the reference in 485 to foreign gold and silver coins which are "current" (meaning that they circulate as money). That has not been the case since 1857. 18 U.S.C. does not address non-circulating items like novelties, elongated cents, carved "hobo" nickels, coin jewelry, etc., as most of that type of thing didn't exist when 18 U.S.C. was enacted.

 

One of the pictures posted in this thread was taken with a camera that over-emphasizes every point of light. Here is perhaps a better (more natural) picture:

 

The NORFED situation was quite different. They had a distributor network set up and their endeavor was to place their tokens into circulation as legal tender. Stamping a blank anonymous piece of silver with a design that says "USA" and "$50", and then attempting to get people to accept it as $50 legal tender is a lot different than defacing an existing half dollar to make it look like a different kind of half dollar, and then selling it as such to collectors as a novelty item. I do not claim nor advocate any legal tender status or usage for the over-strikes.

 

Peace Dollars do circulate, even if only rarely. I have had a family member receive one in change. Ditto for Franklin halves.

 

Weather or not this is a better image is debatable but my camera doesn't over-emphasize every point of light, I have been a photographer for over 30 years and not sure where you invented this term from. My camera that I used in its MACRO settings does indeed pickup how the fields and the flow of metal truly look on this coin. Yes I can shoot from a little further away and then display a smaller image and get a result such as what you posted but rather I get very close to the coin and use a lot of depth of field to bring out such detail.

 

Here is the reverse and one can clearly see the die crack and the luster captured is indeed how it looks to the eye but at great detail, in hand the coin looks excellent even with the die crack which one can argue adds some character.

Make sure to click on the coin to get the larger sized image for a better view.

 

Who put that bright idea into your head? You're in violation of 18 U.S.C. 487 and they can pinch you and shut you down under it whenever they want. They just don't want. Count your lucky stars for that.

 

I like the coin, it looks very well made unlike some of the poor fantasy pieces I see.

 

Zackly!

Chris

 

It's a perfect COPY!

Chris

 

Look at the number of people that come to the forums with fake Continental Currency coins. Same with plated 1943 cents. Same with all types of other altered coins. Folks buy this garbage thinking they have found something really valuable.
It's just a matter of time before dcarr stuff starts creating problems.

dcarr is not going to do the right thing. His actions are not good for this hobby and he will never understand that because he does not care about the hobby.

Those that feel the same need to get together and start reporting what he is doing to every government agency possible. With enough complaints one of these agencies will take notice and get involved.

I was staying neutral on this issue until seeing how dcarr is handling things on all the coin forums. It's time he understands what is right and wrong.

 

He's trying his best to make me look bad here and on NGC. I just have to laugh because he is just making himself look more and more like a jerk.

By the way, Larry, did you notice that the only time he shows up anywhere is when someone speaks negatively about his stuff. He's been here since December, 2005 and only has 288 posts. The numbers are about the same on the NGC forums. I guess he just doesn't enjoy talking about numismatics in general. Do you think he thinks he is better than everyone else?

Chris

 

There are plenty of folks that don't agree with his practices on CU (PCGS) as well but they can't speak freely because of the rules.

 

Chris, I like you, and agree with 90% of your numismatic observations. You are an experienced Morgan collector, and we are brothers-in-arms in that regard. However, I disagree with you-- Daniel Carr isn't trying to make you look bad; you are doing a pretty good job of that yourself. I understand your position that you don't approve of Mr. Carr's undertakings-- however, enough is enough. You're being personal in your arguments with him. I know all about that, as I have done that myself in certain contexts here. If you don't like his work, just back off, and don't buy his coins, please. The argument needs to end.

 

I've always considered you a nice guy, too, and that won't change. I'm sorry that my opinion of DC is upsetting to you, but I'm staunchly opposed to this sort of stuff. DC has tried and tried to play on his terms, and I don't care what he says about me because the more he keeps it up the worse it will look for him.

Stay healthy, my friend!

Chris

 

ok

 

My camera tends to make lusterous coins look more "pebbled" than they really are. That is where I notice the point-light overemphasis, which seems to be the case with most or all digital cameras. I haven't been able to take a picture that I actually like of one of these coins. Matte-finish coins seem a lot easier to get a good picture of. Your picture is better than any of mine when using a fully brilliant piece. But for the picture I posted here, the coin I used was dulled by light handling before I took the picture, and so that is why I said it perhaps looked more "natural" (but others may disagree with that).

 

Let me ask you this:
The HPA allows replicas of US coins to be manufactured and sold. How are those replica coins manufactured ?