Question about Daniel Carr offerings

Facts don't support that. They couldn't produce the evidence but you feel it was illegal so it is, got it.

I'm not confusing anything, just pointing out how you are confusing your opinion with facts

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Okay. So dealer/defendant "A" who sold crack did nothing illegal because a judge and/or jury failed to convict him. This is so even though we have a statute that says it is illegal to sell crack cocaine, and others have been convicted for the same or similar violations. Ok. Got it. That makes sense. (Not)

 

Your own hypotetical included they couldn't prove it. So you feel he did and have decided because your feelings are more important than actual facts. If you cannot prove something it is nothing more than your feelings/opinions/theory. This is what you have been missing the whole time. You aren't god, if you can't prove it factually it never happened you just feel/think/theorize that it did

 

I guess while we're talking about facts, here are some facts.

FACT: Dan Carr pieces are certified by ANACS, a major third party grading service.

FACT: ANACS does not certify "imitation numismatic items."

FACT: Dan Carr's pieces are recognized by many collectors as collectible items in their own right.

FACT: These pieces are sold openly at coin shows, online, and in dealer shops.

FACT: Dan Carr was adjudicated and found not guilty by the ANA for violating the ANA Code of Ethics which prohibits "sell[ing], exhibit[ing], produc[ing] or advertis[ing] a counterfeit, copy, re-strike or reproduction of any numismatic item if its nature is not clearly indicated by the word 'counterfeit', 'copy', 'restrike' or 'reproduction' incused in the metal or printed on the paper, with the exception of items generally accepted by numismatists and not in any way misrepresented as genuine." (Emphasis added).

FACT: Modifying a coin to restore its original design, and even modifying the date, are not illegal without fraudulent intent.

And, last, but not least:

FACT: Nobody who thinks he's violating the HPA as amended by the CCPA actually cares enough to do anything about it.

The HPA and CCPA gives anyone a right of private action against Dan Carr should they purchase one or more of his pieces. The CCPA even makes it easier to sue by allowing the aggrieved party to do so in any venue where the Moonlight Mint does business. I think he'd win that suit by bringing in a full set of ANACS certified pieces and a few ANACS employees. The ANA letter would just be icing on the cake.

Why is it people here say "collect what you want" unless it's Dan Carr tokens? You've got a right of private action; put up or shut up. These so called "legal" discussions are a waste of electrons.

I will admit, I'm not sure how his dies don't violate 18 U.S.C. 487, but I'm sure he's got a better lawyer than me to tell him that.

 

This is the last time I am going to respond to your question because you are intentionally misconstruing what has been said to fit your preconceived notions and to create a strawman argument. I never said everything is illegal unless proven legal. This is blatantly incorrect and intellectually dishonest.

Selling counterfeits coins or otherwise producing items in the "resemblance or similitude" of official U.S. coin designs issued as money is illegal just as selling crack cocaine is illegal. This is true regardless of whether the counterfeiter/drug dealer is convicted or there is a court order declaring the activity illegal. With this said, both the counterfeiter/drug dealer are presumed innocent in a court of law for the sole purpose of deciding whether they should be convicted and incarcerated. Period. That is not my opinion; that is the law.

 

Your logic stream ends at this conclusion when your feelings are all you need to convict someone even when the evidence can't.

In your opinion

 

Hey, I found @Coinchemistry 2012 on YouTube

 

False. The FTC ruled that novelty coins made to resemble official government issues except for changing the last digit of the date to a fictitious date (i.e. one never issued by the government) are imitation numismatic items, which must be marked. Carr's coins are imitation numismatic items.

The ANA never addressed the specific statutes or conducted an analysis other than to note that he had not yet been convicted or charged with wrongdoing.

Wrong. The HPA says that it is unlawful not to mark an imitation numismatic item with the word "COPY." Imitation numismatic items include original numismatic items altered to look like a different original numismatic item. Under the In re Gold Bullion Int'l case, the FTC ruled that novelty coins with fictitious dates (those never issued by a government authority) are imitation numismatic items. There is no intent element in the Hobby Protection Act.

A federal appeals court has held that overstriking a genuine numismatic item with the same design but changing the date is illegal and may be charged as counterfeiting (if all of the other elements are there). See the Wilson case that was discussed before in other threads. Subsequent case law demonstrates that intent to defraud is not required for conviction for counterfeiting under 18 U.S.C. 485 for the production of counterfeit coins. That is what the Von Nothaus court found in its memorandum opinion upon his attorney's motion to vacate the jury verdict that was denied. It is also the opinion of at least two federal appeals courts.

You do not know what may or may not be in the pipeline. Don't make assumptions.

ANACS and the ANA are irrelevant to the discussion. Congress and the federal courts decide what the law is not lay hobbyists.

You can collect Carr pieces if you wish, but please do not make misstatements of law. I have never criticized those who purchase the pieces with an understanding of what they are and take affirmative steps to make sure that the items are not misrepresented when selling them.

They do, and there is case law specifically stating that intent to defraud is not required under 18 U.S.C. 487.

 

Cool! And look... what luck! I found you and your buddies too!

 

Yup, that is WRONG

 

I've been asking you that for months. Please don't ask of others what you will not hold yourself too. You aren't the supreme court, you only post opinions but qualify them as factual law

 

Ooh. I see I have ignored content on this page. I bet books is saying something stupid again. Glad he's on a time out

You should not comment negatively on a member who is not participating in the thread currently. No more! Respect , ignore, or join him on an 'official' time out.

 

Why...they certainly are popular and they trade on the secondary market. People like them and collect them. IMHO, they are basically a collectible piece of art.

 

Was just trying to get back on topic, the D.C. restrikes. I guess it's in our nature to argue, even the same ones over and over, as if new.

 

Was attempting to get back on topic. The D.C. restrikes, remember ? I guess it's in our nature to argue, even the same old argument. As Einstein, and a earlier post stated, the meaning of insanity is to repeat something, and expect different results.

 

Hobby acceptance shows that these are not imitation numismatic items under the plain language of the statue.

Again, these items are accepted by the hobby. Therefore, they are not imitation numismatic items.

Oh, come on. You know Wilson doesn't apply for two reasons: one is that the coins were "blanked" by being struck with blank dies before being overstruck, and the other that the date on the final product was a date which exists on genuine US coins. Neither one of those is the case with these overstrike tokens.

It's true, I'm not privy to the inner workings of the Justice Department, but is anyone currently suing Dan Carr? Anyone planning to? I highly doubt it. I don't have a source for it, but I seem to recall that when he produced the 2009 DC Silver Eagle, the Secret Service(?) politely asked him to stop making them. I'm virtually 100% certain they'd rather go that route again than prosecute him.

We decide what real numismatic items are, by buying, selling, trading, and collecting them. And, we get to decide what "imitation numismatic items" are by exercising our right to sue under the HPA and CCPA.

 

I backed up my opinion with citations to the United States Code, case law, and the Code of Federal Regulations. It appears that several federal judges agree with me.... I guess it is true that great minds think alike.

 

Actually it's the legal statutes that determine this see below.

 

Thanks, as I respect yours. This works when people can maintain respect for others opinions, and not resort to name calling.

 

In your opinion. But you did finally reveal what it is and always has been about, your ego.