Just got the elusive 1916 Barber Half....

This is proof that stupid people exist contrary to the beliefs of some people on this forum. These are the people that the HPA and other statutes were meant to protect.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Excuse me, but I was under the impression that this has already been litigated and the outcome was otherwise.

 

Please Mr. Carr, make Lucille some more 47 Frankies, and if you ever decide to put some ugly mint mark somewhere, on mine please put HK, for HepKitty!

 

I feel some 1964 and later Franklin halves will be needed as props for any movie about what life would have been like had JFK survived. Sure would have been scads fewer of rolls of BU halves laying around for decades.

 

a 40% silver 65 Frankie would be very interesting.

 

I am trying to convince him to do a 1964 P Franklin half. Ben was a Philly guy after all.

 

His tomb is a two-minute stroll from the current Philly Mint.

 

Yes it would. But there are no existing 40% silver Franklin half dollars to over-strike.

 

NOBODY here is claiming that stupid people don't exist. Of course they exist.

The person in question got his money back. But he could have doubled his money fairly easily.

 

Daniel, do you try to match the orientation when you overstrike, or is it just random?

 

It's closer than that. When I go to the mint I usually park on the other side of the fence next to his grave. Depending how fast you walk photo taken Dec. 2, 2014

 

I mount the over-strike dies in the coin press with the same front-to-back orientation that the original coins have, on average. When performing the over-strike, I visually align the coin obverse with the over-strike obverse as close as possible. The reverse is hit or miss since the front-to-back orientation on the original coins can vary. So I do not change the rotation of the reverse over-strike die to match every coin.

 

Serious die crack in that slab. Lived in Philly from 2000-2005 and very close to that site.

Daniel: Ben is turning over in his grave with a D mintmark 1964 fantasy Franklin half. Give him some rest and make a 1964 P Franklin fantasy overstrike.

 

No, his pieces have never been the subject of litigation and the issues are far from resolved, either way, legally. To my knowledge, he is the only one who has attempted this method. Nothing is final unless and until there is an adjudication (if one ever occurs). The government has never pursued him, but at the same time, it has never approved of his work either. Carr's contact resulted in the government and its officers basically telling him that it does not give legal advice to citizens. And there is no passive consent - failure to pursue in the past does not mean that the government has waived the right to pursue the matter in the future. In fact, if the government were to adopt my interpretation of the law, the continuing offense doctrine would also toll the statute of limitations.

Bottom line: Whether you like his pieces (and believe the pieces are innocuous and legal) or whether you hate them (and see them as violating the law), there is no adjudication and the legal questions are far from settled. At this point, the best the parties of this debate can do in the absence of an adjudication is apply principles of statutory interpretation that courts use in reviewing statutory language. Some interpretations are more sound than others.

 

If Mr. Car can find a way to tone them and get them graded, I believe we can get another 40 or so pages.

 

Toning shouldn't be a problem, and ANACS will grade them....

 

You're right. Then we can test all of the theories espoused in other threads that any toning pattern can be convincingly reproduced and perfectly duplicated via artificial toning. This would be interesting for sure.

Textile toner anyone?

 

I find it bizarre that ANACS labels them as tokens. If the pieces retain legal tender status (as Carr and others contend and claim excuses noncompliance with the HPA), then these are not tokens at all. In fact, I agree that these are not tokens. And as a result, it is bizarre that an organization that prides itself on authentication and supposedly detecting problem coins fails to describe these coins as what Carr claims they are: Mutilated, tooled, grossly deformed, and damaged coins. Why are these not getting details grades?

 

Updated mintage for the issue: 378 so far.

Updated post count for this thread: 759 so far.

I wonder if we can achieve a 3:1 post-to-coin ratio?

I wonder if any single poster on this thread will contribute more posts than the total mintage?

Stay tuned for the next exciting chapter!

 

You seem to be taking a hyper-literal view of all the things you are talking about. That rarely works in the real world.