Question about Daniel Carr offerings

Are you kidding me? Do you live in reality? And that's not meant as a jab but a real question. Another response that discredits all other responses you make on this matter.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Forget it then. No Stella no type set for me lol

 

Publicity comes with a cost. There is no way to pretend as if he doesn't know the law, and there is no plausible deniability as to liability if the government ever decides to pursue this. *fingers crossed*

There is still hope. Every time Dan produces a new coin, he tolls the statute of limitations. Enjoy!

 

A judicial declaration merely declares what the law is/already was. The law always is what it is. If they are subsequently adjudicated illegal, they are every bit as illegal now as when the shoe finally drops.

 

Oh wow...you've got to be joking. The HPA requires coins that are reproduction of real coins to be labeled copy. That way it protects collectors from being deceived. None of DC coins are reproductions of real coins...they are creations of coins that never existed. The date on the coin alone proves they are copies.

 

In your opinion

 

OK, we can disagree with each other on the law, but let's stop pretending like the ANA is a court and that its "rulings" (and I say that tongue in cheek) have any precedential value. The ANA is free to disregard its own charter and interpret it however it wishes. Courts are bound to the rule of law to include the plain meaning of the relevant statutes.

 

As usual there are more than one definition, and I was using the second one from your source
2.
a person who publicizes or praises something or someone for reasons of self-interest, personal profit, or friendship or loyalty.
verb (used without object).

And I am sure it applies to some posts we have seen regularly. I do admire your early tokens, but ones that copies 99%, US issues, I do not.

 

And everyone has opinions, right? That's how it goes? So, like, ergo, they're all equal...

And if that isn't the millennial mind, in a nut, I don't know what is.

 

Hey now. Mail order law degrees gives one the power to turn opinion into fact. Don't you know that baseball

 

I'm not an ANA fan by any means. The one that matters are prosecutors then the judges after that. However even the ANA saying its a whole lot of nothing would hold weight in court if it ever got there.

 

No, it applies to all reproductions, copies, and counterfeits. Through the guise of the last term, the FTC has correctly interpreted that merely changing the date or minor design elements is insufficient to remove the coin from counterfeit status (or status as reproduction/copy/whatever). This is the In re Gold Bullion Int'l case discussed before in this thread and others. The federal case law on counterfeiting statutes is clear that a counterfeit need not be exact in all respects to run afoul of the counterfeiting statutes. If it is a counterfeit, reproduction, etc., it is an imitation numismatic item that must be marked.

With all of this said, I agree that the HPA should change the marking requirement and allow words other than "COPY" which appear incongruous to those who are not familiar with the law/ case law. "COUNTERFEIT," "FAKE," "NOT GENUINE," "KNOCK-OFF," "IMITATION," etc., should be allowed in lieu of COPY. Regardless of how outrageous it may seem to you and others, the law plainly requires the items to be marked "COPY" as interpreted by the FTC. The HPA expressly delegates rule making authority to the FTC, and in interpreting those statutes/regulations, the FTC is given enormous latitude. Courts are loathe to overrule those interpretations. Google Chevron deference.

 

In your opinion

 

Based on what? The ANA held that Carr did not violate a provision of the ANA charter that would have allowed him to be expelled. It noted that federal authorities hadn't pursued him and no indictment/charges had been brought at the time of the petition. This says nothing about the merits of his pieces as the HPA and counterfeiting statutes are concerned.

Also, it is unclear to me why you think federal courts will care what non-lawyer hobbyists at the ANA think about Carr's pieces when it comes to the interpretation of federal statutes? Lawyers (and by extension judges, most of whom were attorneys prior to sitting on the bench) are trained to do this and don't need help from those oblivious to law.

 

So if a person likes to collect and talk about a particular type of thing, they are a "shill" ? I guess we are ALL "shills" then, including you.

You make it sound like I, at one point, abandoned doing my own tokens and medals and switched over to doing only fantasy-date over-strikes. That is not the case, not even close. Only about 30% of what I do now is fantasy-date over-strikes.

 

I don't have a "mail order law degree," but even a "mail order law degree" is better than no law degree at all.

 

Let me translate for you: He is saying that your posts (and those of some of your disciples) are full of self serving BS, and that people taking everything you say at face value as if your conflicted/self-interested statements are authoritative are naïve (okay maybe not the last part).

 

Google is wonderful isn't it. Judges at the federal level were lawyers first. If you don't understand why they wouldn't respect the opinion of the coin association of America when it comes to a coin issue I can't help you there

 

Well then my dealer friend Boombani Boombatzo and his brother and delivery man Bambino Boombatzo will be happy to know their $100 notes with issue dates that never existed aren't reproductions of United States notes, as they were sweating it out, there, for a time, I have to tell you, being plumb ignorant of the law.