Question about Daniel Carr offerings

This example is completely irrelevant.

First, it implies that the pieces that DC produces are of a different denomination than the coins he overstrikes. I personally don't know if that really matters in a legal sense...but you are implying that there is an increase in face value which there is not.

Secondly (and frankly most importantly)...the pieces DC produces do not replicate coins that circulate today. Yes, they COULD and every once in a long while one pops up...but the reality is they are obsolete and are not used in commerce today. They are collector pieces. $100 bills still circulate...they are used in commerce.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I'm not a very good photographer of coins or metals, but there is no way I would mistake Daniel Carr's fantasy Morgan for one that the government struck. When I received it in the mail I couldn't believe what a great job he did.



There appears to be at least one attorney out there that continues to claim the illegality of Daniel's work. I'm not an attorney, so I can't site case law, but I wonder how many people on this form would like to be put under a microscope the way they are doing to Daniel? This is a coin forum we should be discussing his strikes, not the law,

Early there was a reference to Bernard von Nothaus, he made the mistake of striking a "coin" with a $10 value on it, that's why the government confiscated the minted "coins" and his bullion. From what I read, they kept the "coins" and returned the bullion. I also read that it was legal for a collector who may have one of the coins in their collection to retain it. He is now making a Trump metal (I guess he learned his lesson) that has an ounce of silver sandwiched between two half ounces of gold. He put $2,000 on the metal, but below the $2,000 he put MSRP. I guess this was his attempt to sidestep minting his own coins and just putting a suggested retail price on his metals. Comparing von Nothaus to Carr is comparing apples to pears, but them, I'm not an attorney.

 

By the way, the auction show that sells coins is selling a proof 1964 Morgan Dollar certified by their own made up certification company. I don't hear anyone complaining about them and they have a wider exposure than Daniel with their TV Show.

 

VonNothaus: Intentionally marketed their wares as legal tender, or as a better alternative to legal tender.

GBI: Intentionally marketed their pieces as "German Mint restrikes", even though they were not.

Westminster: This case was settled prior to trial.

Delmarco / National Collectors Mint / Freedom Tower Silver Dollar: NCM intentionally and deceptively marketed this as a government-issue legal-tender silver dollar and also carefully worded their ads to give the impression that they were solid WTC recovery silver, even though most were only silver plated.

 

No I'm not. I'm saying I'd prefer an increase in face value. Wouldn't you? And I'll use plates for old $100 notes, if that's a problem. Besides, with the security on the current $100 notes, they'd be much easier for me to print, and they'd hold down my operating costs, too. But if I can print them over $1 notes, that'd reduce my gross margin by a whopping $99/note! That's why I'm asking.

 

But how is that even relevant...since that is not what he is doing?

 

I don't understand. So you're saying I'd have to print them over $100 notes? Really, I want to know if I'm missing something.

 

I don't understand what the argument you are trying to make is.

 

He's just ing now....

 

If I were to use my dies to strike virgin planchets and then offer those for sale while claiming that they were US Mint products, that could be akin to the GBI situation. That is why I don't sell fantasy-date strikes on anything other than genuine original coins of that same type, nor do I claim that anything I produce is a US Mint product.

A lot of the pieces that I produce are struck on virgin blanks, made of copper, silver, gold, etc. But those are not fantasy-date coins. They are coin club medals, silver rounds, Clark Gruber brand bullion pieces, etc.

Only perhaps 30% of what I do is fantasy-date over-strikes. The rest are coin club medals, Clark Gruber bullion pieces, etc. Most of those are of my own original design.

 

The picture lacks resolution, but on the actual coin, the original denticles clearly show (on the reverse especially).

 

Just because I'm curious...lets say you decided to strike some of your fantasy pieces (lets say you decided to make a 1963 Morgan) on fresh virgin 90% silver planchets. But, you marketed them as collector fantasy pieces that were in no way products of the US Mint. Would there really be in legal difference?

Personally, I think the overstrikes on real coins sorta adds to the story...but I personally wouldn't think the overstriking of real coins would make much difference. Am I missunderstanding something? If there really a benefit legally to doing them as overstrikes...or is it more of a convenient way to get the planchets?

 

Why is it everything that challenges you SJWs to think characterized by you as "trolling?" Ever notice that?

 

Slander, libel, whatever you wish to call it, opinion is not a defense. Ultimately aside from the legal aspect, I believe it is in violation of the board rules anyhow. You are not supposed to be name calling and accusing people of criminal acts I believe?

I have no problem with the possibility that the legal angle may be visited at some point, in which case the issue would be clarified.

 

I posted above:
" Earlier there was a reference to Bernard von Nothaus, he made the mistake of striking a "coin" with a $10 value on it, that's why the government confiscated the minted "coins" and his bullion. From what I read, they kept the "coins" and returned the bullion." He was minting a coin as an alternative to U.S. Coins.

Daniel can speak for himself, but IMHO he is not making an alternative coinage he is making a fantasy piece that is made to be collected, not spent. he fantasy pieces are a small percentage of what he makes.

Again, I'm not an attorney, but the way I read the Constitution, only Congress, through the U.S. Mint, has the right to mint coinage. von Nothaus, by putting $10 on his "coins" was in violation of the constitution. On the other hand, anyone can print currency, Bucks County in Pennsylvania prints it own currency to encourage people to shop within the county.

 

Why don't you report all his posts, then, and see if the mods agree with you. @desertgem? What say ye?

 

The mods are all biased against Carr if you haven't noticed

 

Sorry, not a challenge for me. I thought it only obvious that it would illegal to turn $1.00 bills into $100 bills.

 

By over-striking genuine original coins, I am not producing new coins, I am altering existing genuine coins. There is a legal distinction there.

It is actually MORE difficult and LESS convenient to use genuine original coins to strike on, compared to using virgin blanks. Gunk and tarnish have to be cleaned off the old coins. That takes more time and is harder to do that it might sound, especially when there are hundreds of coins involved. And each one has to be carefully positioned when striking so that the over-strike lines up fairly closely with the existing design. So over-striking existing coins takes much longer than striking on virgin blanks.

 

But you're not claiming them to be mint products, so why can't you use virgin planchets, strike them and then sell them as fantasy pieces?

Ignoring all the drama here and going back to my original question, why don't/won't/can't you produce your fantasy silver coins on new planchets?