Wait so was that struck on a blank planchet correct? Curious what the defense is on why these don't need a copy mark despite being in likeness and similitude to U.S. coinage as the 'over struck on a genuine coin' defense doesn't work here.
You guys keep replying to this thread and I keep getting exciting when "Daniel Carr" keeps popping up in my email thinking it's my shipping notification!
Do you know what 'in likeness or similitude' means? That obverse is certainly close enough to be considered in likeness. I'm just curious what the defense for no copy mark is here as the over struck on an actual coin doesn't apply here. But I'm not getting my hopes up that you or anyone else will provide a real arguable defense on why this is magically exempt from the HPA.
I couldn't possible disagree more. That is likeness in the way that a 737 is like a 380 because they are both planes. Massive overwhelming differences with the medals
No actually this is a bit different there is no 'it was over struck on a real coin' defense with this one. I'm generally curious how or what defense is claimed that allows these to be exempted from being marked is?
Just do a search of Daniel Carr in the forums. It'll pop up. Then settle in for a long winter's evening of reading.
I'm just curious, not that I care what others people's opinion on the matter is. I like his stuff and I will continue to buy his stuff this is no different then melting the old silver coins down for scrap.
Here is one thread that is more recent: https://www.cointalk.com/threads/question-about-daniel-carr-offerings.287595/ And another: https://www.cointalk.com/threads/new-daniel-carr-morgan-dollar.284856/ These should be enough to keep one busy reading for now