Question about Daniel Carr offerings

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

There are many in the hobby that don't wish to get in the middle of it. Why give an opinion when some can't keep it civil. It's the same in every thread. Some on this forum that agree with Carr's work see the need to beat up and insult those that have a different opinion. Next they have to post 50 times in the same insulting manor trying to run the other member off. That should explain why so few care to voice an opinion.

 

I agree with you. I can purchase an actual gem 1921 Morgan for less than I paid for Dan's restrike anyway, so, only the people that appreciate Dan's work would buy it. If someone mistook one of Dan's for a real one, they wouldn't be getting ripped off, only problem would be misrepresentation, IMHO. Not saying that is ok, just that they wouldn't be buying a worthless counterfeit. As always, due diligence is needed, by all. You can't always be there to help the ones that buy before researching.

 

Where are you getting this? All I'm seeing in a Google search is a motion to dismiss in a federal district court in November, 2014 that was denied.

 

And we can say the exact same back at you except we have the actual evidence and can add that your ignorance of the law is astounding.

Let's start with

*18 U.S.C. 487


Whoever, without lawful authority, makes any die, hub, or mold, or any part thereof, either of steel or plaster, or any other substance, in likeness or similitude, as to the design or the inscription thereon, of any die, hub, or mold designated for the coining or making of any of the genuine gold, silver, nickel, bronze, copper, or other coins coined at the mints of the United States; or


Whoever, without lawful authority, possesses any such die, hub, or mold, or any part thereof, or permits the same to be used for or in aid of the counterfeiting of any such coins of the United States—


Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than fifteen years, or both.


18 U.S.C. 485


Whoever falsely makes, forges, or counterfeits any coin or bar in resemblance or similitude of any coin of a denomination higher than 5 cents or any gold or silver bar coined or stamped at any mint or assay office of the United States, or in resemblance or similitude of any foreign gold or silver coin current in the United States or in actual use and circulation as money within the United States....



Now lets address the defense that these are fantasy pieces. Would the average layperson or citizen without being a numismatist with specific knowledge of U.S. coin designs and mint dates and were handed one of these coins know that. Say a 1975 quarter or half dollar or $1 coin with the bicentennial design for instance. A coin that is in all ways identical to actual bicentennial coinage except the date be aware that the coin wasn't genuine U.S. mint coinage when nothing on it states that it isn't? No they wouldn't and the laws are designed to protect those people. And based on the old FTC case that even the new updated HPA cites as being the legal precdent on the matter the coins must be marked copy.

And lets take a look at the courts opinion


https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/f...july_-_december_1978pages_171-273.pdf#page=26

 

Yes, Dan's restrikes are very well done.

 

One thing that is consistent through all the debates on all the DC threads is the laws that are referenced are always interpreted to meet the opinions of both sides.

 

Again, I agree, tends to go that way, unfortunately. Same old story, same old song and dance.

 

Agreed yet again. Dan is getting free publicity, which could have cost a small fortune.

 

I don't always buy restrikes, but when I do, I choose Dansakis.

 

This is easy. There is no difference. The original coin is destroyed and is indistinguishable from any blank planchet that you could make in your basement (assuming you have the necessary equipment). There is case law cited here and elsewhere that shows that the original coin has lost all legal tender value/status. Anyone who tells you otherwise is full of it.

The selling point, as you phrase it, is merely a bogus argument to try to evade the HPA and counterfeiting statutes. It fails miserably.

 

I think it is fitting. He destroys coins with history, imparts them with new designs with counterfeit dies, and does it all to make a quick buck. There are many numismatic sacrifices made in the production of his "offerings."

 

You're using logic and making the same arguments I have all along. God save us all. Many of his supporters cannot or will not read and think for themselves. Apparently, when the FTC ruled that altering an original coin or producing a new coin with a fictitious date is sufficient enough to make an imitation numismatic item under the Hobby Protection Act such as to required it to be marked with the word "COPY," the FTC really meant everyone but Carr.

 

It is distinguishable because it is, in fact, a re-coining of money. Only the federal government has the power to coin and make money; not even the states possess that power. Hobo nickels, elongated cents, and the like do not involve making counterfeit dies with the same design, inscriptions, and other features of a real U.S. coin nor do the coins make the altered host piece look more like U.S. official issues or an issue other than the one that is being altered.

U.S. law expressly prohibits (1) making dies unauthorized by the government (i.e. without legal authority) that look like U.S. coins, 18 U.S.C. 487, and (2) making coins or items in the resemblance or similitude of any U.S. coin made as money, 18 U.S.C. 485. I do not understand how so many can be oblivious to the plain meaning of those statutes.

Edited to add: The last sentence is not directed to the poster I quoted.

 

That argument has already been rejected by at least one federal appeals court, and the U.S. Supreme Court denied the defendants' petition for writ of certiorari.

P.S. The court ruled that overstriking genuine coins with designs in the resemblance or similitude of U.S. coins could be charged as either a violation of 18 U.S.C. 331 or 18 U.S.C. 485, or both as the government may find appropriate. The court went as far as to suggest that destruction of the original coin violated 18 U.S.C. 331 and the re-striking with counterfeit dies constituted a violation of 18 U.S.C. 485.

 

The court issued a memorandum opinion in addressing many of the motions before it. Try using Google Scholar if you don't have access to West Law/LexisNexis and limiting the search to case law. It will make finding things easier. You could also create a PACER account and use the case number to pull up the original case docket sheet.

 

Yet again another ridiculous statement. All overstrikes show ghosting of the host coin to various degrees. Some are almost perfectly aligned and the ghosting is very slight yet others show strong offset to the host coin and you can even tell the original date or even date/mm of the host coin on some. Statements like that really hurt you and every other subsequent argument you make

 

Give it up

 

The same arguments proven false. He would be in jail right now. He adhears to the law. Like it or not

 

Sure, it would be recoining of money if he was using dates that previously existed for said series but he's not and will not. There is no intent to defraud. Deal with it