Why is He So Popular?

LOL

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Who? Why His Royal Lowness RWB himself, who is on record bragging that for the right fee, he’ll testify under oath to nearly anything you want him to. He has ZERO ethics.

 

Expert witnesses testify as to the facts and evidence in a case. The facts are not disputed. They have no say as to questions of statutory interpretation and questions of law which are left for the judge. Now it is possible to write an amicus brief to advocate a legal position and the ANA may very well choose to do so, but that brief isn't automatically afforded any more weight than anyone else's including that of a plaintiff or defendant. Those briefs and opinions are persuasive (or not) at best.

As it stands, there is no active court case so discussions of legal procedure are largely pointless; however, discussing the merits of the laws and even technical aspects of his pieces (whether pro or con) is not frivolous. Removing Carr from this completely, discussions of this nature can be productive when it comes to formulating new policy. In a year or two, the FTC should be soliciting comments again for proposed regulations issued under the Hobby Protection Act. Threads like this are a great opportunity to think through ideas and make more thoughtful comments.

 

No, you’re absolutely WRONG here. An expert witness is someone certified BY THE COURT as someone whose OPINION is ITSELF evidence, per se. That’s why becoming certified as one is appropriately difficult.

 

RWB has done far more for this hobby than either you or the ANA. Before anyone asks, I am not Roger.

 

The ANA may be qualified to testify as to its opinion about whether his pieces could fool an average person (the legal standard for establishing a piece as a counterfeit), but its opinion as to the interpretation of statutes drafted by legislatures doesn't carry much if any real weight. The legal interpretation, not the facts, is what is truly disputed here.

 

No one else WANTS to be, so he has to.

 

Yes, it IS a legal interpretation rich and factual dispute poor issue. Note I did not say “case”, because there is none.

We have an adversarial system of justice, which means until someone with legal standing sues, all is fine. The courts don’t run debating societies.

 

The impact of the posts saying how legally DC is counterfeiting, blah, blah, blah.

 

Why this will never come to court:

“Standing, sometimes referred to as standing to sue, is the name of the federal law doctrine that focuses on whether a prospective plaintiff can show that some personal legal interest has been invaded by the defendant. It is not enough that a person is merely interested as a member of the general public in the resolution of the dispute. The person must have a personal stake in the outcome of the controversy.”

What Dan does is victimless. No one can obtain standing.

“Once a federal court determines that a real case or controversy exists, it must then ascertain whether the parties to the litigation have standing. The Supreme Court has developed an elaborate body of principles defining the nature and scope of standing. Basically, a plaintiff must have suffered some direct or substantial injury or be likely to suffer such an injury if a particular wrong is not redressed. A defendant must be the party responsible for perpetrating the alleged legal wrong.”

Good luck with that, Carr haters. The alleged “harm” must be concrete, particularized, and imminent, and is NOT PERMITTED TO BE SPECULATIVE.

 

Time to lead the charge against 20 cent, 3CN, 2 cent, 3CS, Half Dimes, 2.5 gold, large cents, half cents, 3 dollar gold, patters, and token as well as others as every single one of those would fool the average person as the average person has no idea they ever existed.

 

DING! DING! DING! Please don’t call in on that question during my radio thing tomorrow. I’m going to be asking trivia questions on the show for the prize of a 1 year ANA membership paid by ME. One is going to be about obsolete non-gold denominations. Reading is an old very poor city. Gold coins will freak the locals. But some might have a 2c or a 3c nickel in a dish somewhere.

 

If you’re going to step up, at least muster the self-respect to do so intelligently.

 

Not that you’ll be able to respond, but....

Yes, Kurt; I would say it’s somewhat compelling - not definitive - but if you cared to go back to what has long been the heart of my argument you’d understand it’s meaningless. Personally, I couldn’t care less if they’re legal or not. My problem is with the rank hypocrisy endlessly displayed by the clown patrol here who eagerly apply a different standard to Carr’s copying than they do everything and everyone else. If it’s okay for Carr it’s okay for everyone else. If not okay for Carr, it’s not okay for everyone else. I don’t care which; it’s the hypocrites who need to make up their mind.