<< <i>If any y'all want to pay $20 for an ounce of silver, I can supply you with as many American Silver Eagles at that price as you like. >>
I don't think that's the issue. The issue is whether they will redeem it at face value and whether merchants will accept it at face value. >>
I'm sure you'd be able to redeem ASEs at face value ... >>
There's some truth to the argument that NCLTs aren't "real money" Lately, I've started to think of NCLTs more as medals with a nominal face value.
Because some people try to spend ALDs at face value, I actually consider them more as "real money" than ASEs which are not spent at face value, except possibly by mistake.
<< <i> And I agree with others, this guy should be locked up. >>
When I see this guy selling "$1,000 face value," 1-oz gold rounds for about 50% over spot, I have to agree. >>
As long as someone is willing to pay that much for them and they are able to make the choice then what is the problem? It is not as if people are forced to buy or accept Liberty Dollars
I am shocked that people who frequent these boards give any credibility to these rounds.
Answer me this:
If the rounds are so good and FRNs are so bad, why will they sell the rounds at a discount, and accept FRNs in Payment?? Clearly this is for the profit--earned in good old spendable FRNs--of the seller.
<< <i>Correct me if I am wrong, but they have inflated values put on them (ie...they don't have value of what 1 oz of silver would be, but rather $20 or whatever) and they have no true backing other than what someone will accept for them or the value of the silver in them, right?
People may not like the US coins/paper money, but so far, I don't believe that we have defaulted on any payment for them, right? So, if something says it costs $20, then handing an OFFICIAL piece of paper with $20 on it (ie...20 dollar bill US Treasury made) is valid.
With the liberty dollars, no one has to accept them nor are they easy to convert if you want to get something that is accepted. Go ahead, try to use them to pay a bill or credit card payment >>
The Treasury does the exact same thing. They put a $20 bill in circulation that cost them 4 cents to make. Ultimately, there is nothing backing a $20 except people's willingness to accept it (and the government's "promise to pay" which really doesn't mean anything).
At least Liberty Dollars have some intrinsic value to them >>
Intrinsic? You are right on the button yes, the do have a little bit of that. Just not as much as some people want.
<< <i>And in the event that silver hit $40 an ounce, I'm sure you would all gladly accept Liberty Dollars at face value >>
Sure, and by then von NutHouse will have redenominated the coins. He's already done it once -- the original Liberty Dollars had a face value of $10 -- but when silver got a little to high to sell that profitably, he redenominated them to $20.
<< <i>"and many are willing to accept Liberty Dollars." Just who? Certainly not me. >>
There are highly localized areas in the south where they are the central medium of exchange >>
Where? Let's hear the specifics. >>
I'm not fully aware of the town names, but there was a history channel presentation on the US Dollar a few years ago and they had a 10 minute long segment about Liberty Dollars included in the program. They named a few town names.
<< <i>If any y'all want to pay $20 for an ounce of silver, I can supply you with as many American Silver Eagles at that price as you like. >>
I don't think that's the issue. The issue is whether they will redeem it at face value and whether merchants will accept it at face value.
Think about all the Presidential dollars that are out there. They contain 5.8 cents of metal but people are perfectly happy paying a buck for them. The Mint is laughing all the way to the bank supplying people with as many at that price as they like. It has to do with redemption and acceptance, not face value vs. intrinsic value. >>
No, actually that IS the issue. This guy claims that the "coins" are backed by the metal contained in them. They are not. The $20 coins do not have $20 worth of silver in them. Therefore, they are not backed by the metal content and not worth the $20 worth of REAL GREENBACKS it takes to purchase one. The company does not accept payment for the "coins" in silver and does not take anything but the "dirty" money for which it supposedly has the distaste.
Jonathan
I have been a collector for over mumbly-five years. I learn something new every day.
<< <i>If any y'all want to pay $20 for an ounce of silver, I can supply you with as many American Silver Eagles at that price as you like. >>
I don't think that's the issue. The issue is whether they will redeem it at face value and whether merchants will accept it at face value.
Think about all the Presidential dollars that are out there. They contain 5.8 cents of metal but people are perfectly happy paying a buck for them. The Mint is laughing all the way to the bank supplying people with as many at that price as they like. It has to do with redemption and acceptance, not face value vs. intrinsic value. >>
No, actually that IS the issue. This guy claims that the "coins" are backed by the metal contained in them. They are not. The $20 coins do not have $20 worth of silver in them. Therefore, they are not backed by the metal content and not worth the $20 worth of REAL GREENBACKS it takes to purchase one. The company does not accept payment for the "coins" in silver and does not take anything but the "dirty" money for which it supposedly has the distaste. >>
I did say redemption is an issue which you agree with. It seems like the issue is either:
(a) face value equal to intrinsic value, or (b) issuer will redeem at face value
One or the other. If (a) is true then (b) doesn't have to be true. If (b) is true then (a) doesn't have to be true. That's probably a better way of looking at it than switching issues which I may also be guilty of. In the case of ALDs, neither (a) nor (b) is true.
The other issue is whether ALDs are being sold as containing US$ face value worth of silver or gold. If this is being done, it should be stopped since it's just not true. However, if people recognize that they are paying a premium and willing to do it to get a higher intrinsic value, should they be allowed to do it?
I wonder if a dealer should educate Liberty Dollar proponents about 2006-W MS ASEs and Reverse Proofs. They are certainly a much more profitable way to buy silver if buying direct from the mint. Buying these ASEs, you might not care about how much value your dollar is losing anymore
<< <i>The Treasury does the exact same thing. They put a $20 bill in circulation that cost them 4 cents to make. Ultimately, there is nothing backing a $20 except people's willingness to accept it (and the government's "promise to pay" which really doesn't mean anything).
At least Liberty Dollars have some intrinsic value to them >>
Your "except" is the definition of money sir. You are trivializing the very thing that makes money money. Our acceptance. >>
And what if people are willing to accept Liberty Dollars. Money is based upon are exceptance, and if people are willing to accept Liberty Dollars (and many are willing) then is there any legitimate support that they cannot be used as money? >>
I like your thread and the issues it has raised in discussion, but I think you're simply ignoring what I reasonably believe to be a fact: that they are not legal tender. The "legitimate support" for this position is Federal and I believe Constitutional law. The ALD sellers like to quote a law or two out of context, but their arguments are prima facie frivolous. I give them as much creedence as I do the know-it-alls that argue that "paying taxes is voluntary,"
And if you want a one-ounce gold round, shop the US Mint for a far better deal. Their products have a fantasy face value as well. If you must spend them, just argue to your favorite merchant that your 2007 AGE proof has a $789.95 face value. No problem, right?
Has anyone ever tested a Liberty Dollar for silver content? What guarantee is there that there is actually 1 oz. of silver there? When Unca Sam stamps an ASE I know there is almost an ounce of silver there.
I don't trust VonNutHouse to deliver especially since he thinks 12 bucks worth of silver is worth $20. Anybody that would support the Liberty Dollar effort is ignoring a strong reality. That Von NutHouse only accepts FEDERAL RESERVE NOTES for payment, and that he turns a 20% profit on every coin sold (minus whatever it costs to machine them). Still a sweet profit. And the paper money??? GMAFB. You really believe there's a big warehouse full of Liberty Dollars waiting for your paper to be turned into?
Personally, I'm tickled to death his business is drying up. I hope he ends up in jail.
<< <i>I like your thread and the issues it has raised in discussion, but I think you're simply ignoring what I reasonably believe to be a fact: that they are not legal tender. >>
Lots of non-legal tender money have been used over the centuries but those generally had an intrinsic value equal to face value before fiat money came into vogue. Also, in the hyper-inflationary economy of pre-WWII Germany, some people placed more confidence in private paper currency issued by corporations that they viewed as stable more than money issued by the government which was losing value fast.
<< <i>I wonder if a dealer should educate Liberty Dollar proponents about 2006-W MS ASEs and Reverse Proofs. They are certainly a much more profitable way to buy silver if buying direct from the mint. Buying these ASEs, you might not care about how much value your dollar is losing anymore >>
IMHO they're mildly interesting because of the controversy. But the verdict seems to be pretty apparent: Those of us in the numis-community, who are at least smoewhat familiar with the ideas of fiat currency, hard currency, precious metals, hyperinflation, etc., appreciate these for what they are: a half-baked MLM scheme fronted by tokens trading at an absurd value over melt.
To me they're pretty--about as pretty as Cook Island or Bahama made-for-collector pieces.
Pre-64 90% silver US coins do in fact what these tokens suggest they do in theory. And they do it much, much better. With known purity, divisibility, established ratios, ease of recognition, little premium, and a bonafide face value that won't get you jailed.
If we keep up the talk, though, they will become novelty collectibles within our community and their value will rise--especially when the man behind them is jailed for sedition or whatever else the IRS eventually nails him with.
We are like children who look at print and see a serpent in the last letter but one, and a sword in the last. --Severian the Lame
<< <i>If we keep up the talk, though, they will become novelty collectibles within our community and their value will rise--especially when the man behind them is jailed for sedition or whatever else the IRS eventually nails him with. >>
That's the kicker for me. I don't see any legal activity to stop ALDs or jail NotHaus the way CNMI Freedom Dollars were stopped almost immediately. If this is so illegal, you'd figure they'd be out of business already. Instead, it seems like the Mint is trying to kill ALDs through FUD.
I just ran across this new California Liberty Dollar on the bay. Originally Liberty Dollars had a common reverse but a few Liberty Dollar affiliates asked for varieties with their state name (I think Michigan was the first?). Now, there are Liberty Dollars that are not only marked for the state but also have different reverse designs.
I'm sure these will entice collectors that like collect these to buy more but will these locally themed reverses also increase desire for usage in those areas among the people who do like to use them?
It's interesting that the auction says: private currency (only Govt rounds are called coin). If they don't call it a "coin," is it still a coin? Is the US Government taking any action aside from strong words?
<< <i>I just ran across this new California Liberty Dollar on the bay. Originally Liberty Dollars had a common reverse but a few Liberty Dollar affiliates asked for varieties with their state name (I think Michigan was the first?). Now, there are Liberty Dollars that are not only marked for the state but also have different reverse designs.
I'm sure these will entice collectors that like collect these to buy more but will these locally themed reverses also increase desire for usage in those areas among the people who do like to use them?
It's interesting that the auction says: private currency (only Govt rounds are called coin). If they don't call it a "coin," is it still a coin? Is the US Government taking any action aside from strong words? >>
I bought a few Florida's and New Yorks although not from the seller you linked to. The seller I bought them from is in New Hampshire. The Fla seller that I spoke to in the Tampa area was a jerk.
<< <i>If I'm going to go to jail, it's not going to be because of spending a Liberty Dollar. That's not going to get me street cred. >>
Whatever happened to the people that were arrested for trying to spend Liberty Dollars? Were they treated the same as the people who were arrested for trying to spend $2 bills or was there a different outcome?
<< <i>If I'm going to go to jail, it's not going to be because of spending a Liberty Dollar. That's not going to get me street cred. >>
Whatever happened to the people that were arrested for trying to spend Liberty Dollars? Were they treated the same as the people who were arrested for trying to spend $2 bills or was there a different outcome? >>
People were arrested for spending $2.00 bills?
While it would not surprise me, I just haven't heard this one before.
<< <i>If I'm going to go to jail, it's not going to be because of spending a Liberty Dollar. That's not going to get me street cred. >>
Whatever happened to the people that were arrested for trying to spend Liberty Dollars? Were they treated the same as the people who were arrested for trying to spend $2 bills or was there a different outcome? >>
People were arrested for spending $2.00 bills?
While it would not surprise me, I just haven't heard this one before. >>
I guess the $2 bill people I heard about weren't technically arrested, just interrogated by several layers of police officers before being let go. Were the people trying to spend Liberty Dollars that were approached by the police actually charged with a crime or also just given a strong talking to?
<< <i>PUT YOURSELF in Mike Bolesta's place. On the morning of Feb. 20, he buys a new radio-CD player for his 17-year-old son Christopher's car. He pays the $114 installation charge with 57 crisp new $2 bills, which, when last observed, were still considered legitimate currency in the United States proper. The $2 bills are Bolesta's idea of payment, and his little comic protest, too. For this, Bolesta, Baltimore County resident, innocent citizen, owner of Capital City Student Tours, finds himself under arrest.
Finds himself, in front of a store full of customers at the Best Buy on York Road in Lutherville, locked into handcuffs and leg irons.
Finds himself transported to the Baltimore County lockup in C***eysville, where he's handcuffed to a pole for three hours while the U.S. Secret Service is called into the case. >>
Comments
<< <i>
<< <i>If any y'all want to pay $20 for an ounce of silver, I can supply you with as many American Silver Eagles at that price as you like. >>
I don't think that's the issue. The issue is whether they will redeem it at face value and whether merchants will accept it at face value. >>
I'm sure you'd be able to redeem ASEs at face value
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>If any y'all want to pay $20 for an ounce of silver, I can supply you with as many American Silver Eagles at that price as you like. >>
I don't think that's the issue. The issue is whether they will redeem it at face value and whether merchants will accept it at face value. >>
I'm sure you'd be able to redeem ASEs at face value
There's some truth to the argument that NCLTs aren't "real money"
Because some people try to spend ALDs at face value, I actually consider them more as "real money" than ASEs which are not spent at face value, except possibly by mistake.
<< <i>
<< <i>
And I agree with others, this guy should be locked up. >>
When I see this guy selling "$1,000 face value," 1-oz gold rounds for about 50% over spot, I have to agree.
As long as someone is willing to pay that much for them and they are able to make the choice then what is the problem? It is not as if people are forced to buy or accept Liberty Dollars
Answer me this:
If the rounds are so good and FRNs are so bad, why will they sell the rounds at a discount, and accept FRNs in Payment?? Clearly this is for the profit--earned in good old spendable FRNs--of the seller.
<< <i>
<< <i>Correct me if I am wrong, but they have inflated values put on them (ie...they don't have value of what 1 oz of silver would be, but rather $20 or whatever) and they have no true backing other than what someone will accept for them or the value of the silver in them, right?
People may not like the US coins/paper money, but so far, I don't believe that we have defaulted on any payment for them, right? So, if something says it costs $20, then handing an OFFICIAL piece of paper with $20 on it (ie...20 dollar bill US Treasury made) is valid.
With the liberty dollars, no one has to accept them nor are they easy to convert if you want to get something that is accepted. Go ahead, try to use them to pay a bill or credit card payment
The Treasury does the exact same thing. They put a $20 bill in circulation that cost them 4 cents to make. Ultimately, there is nothing backing a $20 except people's willingness to accept it (and the government's "promise to pay" which really doesn't mean anything).
At least Liberty Dollars have some intrinsic value to them >>
Intrinsic? You are right on the button yes, the do have a little bit of that. Just not as much as some people want.
Loaded
<< <i>"and many are willing to accept Liberty Dollars." Just who? Certainly not me. >>
There are highly localized areas in the south where they are the central medium of exchange
<< <i>And if you want intrinsic value, collect your paycheck in good old US nickels!! >>
True dat. There's more "instrinsic value" in a nickel than in a Liberty Dollar
<< <i>
<< <i>"and many are willing to accept Liberty Dollars." Just who? Certainly not me. >>
There are highly localized areas in the south where they are the central medium of exchange >>
Where? Let's hear the specifics.
<< <i>
<< <i>And if you want intrinsic value, collect your paycheck in good old US nickels!! >>
True dat. There's more "instrinsic value" in a nickel than in a Liberty Dollar
Good point!
<< <i>And in the event that silver hit $40 an ounce, I'm sure you would all gladly accept Liberty Dollars at face value >>
Sure, and by then von NutHouse will have redenominated the coins. He's already done it once -- the original Liberty Dollars had a face value of $10 -- but when silver got a little to high to sell that profitably, he redenominated them to $20.
<< <i>And in the event that silver hit $40 an ounce, I'm sure you would all gladly accept Liberty Dollars at face value >>
I gladly accept all pre-1964 quarters at face value!
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>"and many are willing to accept Liberty Dollars." Just who? Certainly not me. >>
There are highly localized areas in the south where they are the central medium of exchange >>
Where? Let's hear the specifics. >>
I'm not fully aware of the town names, but there was a history channel presentation on the US Dollar a few years ago and they had a 10 minute long segment about Liberty Dollars included in the program. They named a few town names.
<< <i>
<< <i>If any y'all want to pay $20 for an ounce of silver, I can supply you with as many American Silver Eagles at that price as you like. >>
I don't think that's the issue. The issue is whether they will redeem it at face value and whether merchants will accept it at face value.
Think about all the Presidential dollars that are out there. They contain 5.8 cents of metal but people are perfectly happy paying a buck for them. The Mint is laughing all the way to the bank supplying people with as many at that price as they like. It has to do with redemption and acceptance, not face value vs. intrinsic value. >>
No, actually that IS the issue. This guy claims that the "coins" are backed by the metal contained in them. They are not. The $20 coins do not have $20 worth of silver in them. Therefore, they are not backed by the metal content and not worth the $20 worth of REAL GREENBACKS it takes to purchase one. The company does not accept payment for the "coins" in silver and does not take anything but the "dirty" money for which it supposedly has the distaste.
Jonathan
The Mysterious Egyptian Magic Coin
Coins in Movies
Coins on Television
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>If any y'all want to pay $20 for an ounce of silver, I can supply you with as many American Silver Eagles at that price as you like. >>
I don't think that's the issue. The issue is whether they will redeem it at face value and whether merchants will accept it at face value.
Think about all the Presidential dollars that are out there. They contain 5.8 cents of metal but people are perfectly happy paying a buck for them. The Mint is laughing all the way to the bank supplying people with as many at that price as they like. It has to do with redemption and acceptance, not face value vs. intrinsic value. >>
No, actually that IS the issue. This guy claims that the "coins" are backed by the metal contained in them. They are not. The $20 coins do not have $20 worth of silver in them. Therefore, they are not backed by the metal content and not worth the $20 worth of REAL GREENBACKS it takes to purchase one. The company does not accept payment for the "coins" in silver and does not take anything but the "dirty" money for which it supposedly has the distaste. >>
I did say redemption is an issue which you agree with. It seems like the issue is either:
(a) face value equal to intrinsic value, or
(b) issuer will redeem at face value
One or the other. If (a) is true then (b) doesn't have to be true. If (b) is true then (a) doesn't have to be true. That's probably a better way of looking at it than switching issues which I may also be guilty of. In the case of ALDs, neither (a) nor (b) is true.
The other issue is whether ALDs are being sold as containing US$ face value worth of silver or gold. If this is being done, it should be stopped since it's just not true. However, if people recognize that they are paying a premium and willing to do it to get a higher intrinsic value, should they be allowed to do it?
<< <i>Most of the guys who like NORFED "Liberty Dollars" are probably living in cabins in Montana. >>
I Doubt It. I Have the $1 $2 $5 $10 & $20
<< <i>I Doubt It. I Have the $1 $2 $5 $10 & $20
As a collectible, I also think they are cool.
As an alternative currency, not so much.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>The Treasury does the exact same thing. They put a $20 bill in circulation that cost them 4 cents to make. Ultimately, there is nothing backing a $20 except people's willingness to accept it (and the government's "promise to pay" which really doesn't mean anything).
At least Liberty Dollars have some intrinsic value to them >>
Your "except" is the definition of money sir. You are trivializing the very thing that makes money money. Our acceptance. >>
And what if people are willing to accept Liberty Dollars. Money is based upon are exceptance, and if people are willing to accept Liberty Dollars (and many are willing) then is there any legitimate support that they cannot be used as money? >>
I like your thread and the issues it has raised in discussion, but I think you're simply ignoring what I reasonably believe to be a fact: that they are not legal tender. The "legitimate support" for this position is Federal and I believe Constitutional law. The ALD sellers like to quote a law or two out of context, but their arguments are prima facie frivolous. I give them as much creedence as I do the know-it-alls that argue that "paying taxes is voluntary,"
And if you want a one-ounce gold round, shop the US Mint for a far better deal. Their products have a fantasy face value as well. If you must spend them, just argue to your favorite merchant that your 2007 AGE proof has a $789.95 face value. No problem, right?
Edit: clarity
I don't trust VonNutHouse to deliver especially since he thinks 12 bucks worth of silver is worth $20. Anybody that would support the Liberty Dollar effort is ignoring a strong reality. That Von NutHouse only accepts FEDERAL RESERVE NOTES for payment, and that he turns a 20% profit on every coin sold (minus whatever it costs to machine them). Still a sweet profit. And the paper money??? GMAFB. You really believe there's a big warehouse full of Liberty Dollars waiting for your paper to be turned into?
Personally, I'm tickled to death his business is drying up. I hope he ends up in jail.
John
Never view my other linked pages. They aren't coin related.
<< <i>I like your thread and the issues it has raised in discussion, but I think you're simply ignoring what I reasonably believe to be a fact: that they are not legal tender. >>
Lots of non-legal tender money have been used over the centuries but those generally had an intrinsic value equal to face value before fiat money came into vogue. Also, in the hyper-inflationary economy of pre-WWII Germany, some people placed more confidence in private paper currency issued by corporations that they viewed as stable more than money issued by the government which was losing value fast.
<< <i>I'm bummed that there still aren't any pics of liberty dollars in this thread....
Maybe no one is willing to admit they have one
<< <i>I wonder if a dealer should educate Liberty Dollar proponents about 2006-W MS ASEs and Reverse Proofs. They are certainly a much more profitable way to buy silver if buying direct from the mint. Buying these ASEs, you might not care about how much value your dollar is losing anymore
I Bought a boat laod of them
<< <i>I'm bummed that there still aren't any pics of liberty dollars in this thread....
edited: (note - these are NOT mine, images are lifted from the web).
--Severian the Lame
<< <i>
<< <i>I'm bummed that there still aren't any pics of liberty dollars in this thread....
They ARE cool, No bought a dought it
To me they're pretty--about as pretty as Cook Island or Bahama made-for-collector pieces.
Pre-64 90% silver US coins do in fact what these tokens suggest they do in theory. And they do it much, much better. With known purity, divisibility, established ratios, ease of recognition, little premium, and a bonafide face value that won't get you jailed.
If we keep up the talk, though, they will become novelty collectibles within our community and their value will rise--especially when the man behind them is jailed for sedition or whatever else the IRS eventually nails him with.
--Severian the Lame
<< <i>If we keep up the talk, though, they will become novelty collectibles within our community and their value will rise--especially when the man behind them is jailed for sedition or whatever else the IRS eventually nails him with. >>
That's the kicker for me. I don't see any legal activity to stop ALDs or jail NotHaus the way CNMI Freedom Dollars were stopped almost immediately. If this is so illegal, you'd figure they'd be out of business already. Instead, it seems like the Mint is trying to kill ALDs through FUD.
I'm sure these will entice collectors that like collect these to buy more but will these locally themed reverses also increase desire for usage in those areas among the people who do like to use them?
It's interesting that the auction says: private currency (only Govt rounds are called coin). If they don't call it a "coin," is it still a coin? Is the US Government taking any action aside from strong words?
<< <i>I just ran across this new California Liberty Dollar on the bay. Originally Liberty Dollars had a common reverse but a few Liberty Dollar affiliates asked for varieties with their state name (I think Michigan was the first?). Now, there are Liberty Dollars that are not only marked for the state but also have different reverse designs.
I'm sure these will entice collectors that like collect these to buy more but will these locally themed reverses also increase desire for usage in those areas among the people who do like to use them?
It's interesting that the auction says: private currency (only Govt rounds are called coin). If they don't call it a "coin," is it still a coin? Is the US Government taking any action aside from strong words? >>
I bought a few Florida's and New Yorks although not from the seller you linked to. The seller I bought them from is in New Hampshire. The Fla seller that I spoke to in the Tampa area was a jerk.
They're pretty neat little rounds.
Coin's for sale/trade.
Tom Pilitowski
US Rare Coin Investments
800-624-1870
<< <i>If I'm going to go to jail, it's not going to be because of spending a Liberty Dollar. That's not going to get me street cred. >>
Whatever happened to the people that were arrested for trying to spend Liberty Dollars? Were they treated the same as the people who were arrested for trying to spend $2 bills or was there a different outcome?
<< <i>
<< <i>If I'm going to go to jail, it's not going to be because of spending a Liberty Dollar. That's not going to get me street cred. >>
Whatever happened to the people that were arrested for trying to spend Liberty Dollars? Were they treated the same as the people who were arrested for trying to spend $2 bills or was there a different outcome? >>
People were arrested for spending $2.00 bills?
While it would not surprise me, I just haven't heard this one before.
Coin's for sale/trade.
Tom Pilitowski
US Rare Coin Investments
800-624-1870
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>If I'm going to go to jail, it's not going to be because of spending a Liberty Dollar. That's not going to get me street cred. >>
Whatever happened to the people that were arrested for trying to spend Liberty Dollars? Were they treated the same as the people who were arrested for trying to spend $2 bills or was there a different outcome? >>
People were arrested for spending $2.00 bills?
While it would not surprise me, I just haven't heard this one before. >>
I guess the $2 bill people I heard about weren't technically arrested, just interrogated by several layers of police officers before being let go. Were the people trying to spend Liberty Dollars that were approached by the police actually charged with a crime or also just given a strong talking to?
Coin's for sale/trade.
Tom Pilitowski
US Rare Coin Investments
800-624-1870
<< <i>Zoins, would you by chance have a link to the news story about the $2.00 bill people being detained? >>
Apparently the $2 bill guy WAS arrested. Here's an officer.com forum article has a copy of the Baltimore Sun article. The Baltimore Sun URL referenced doesn't seem available anymore. Sometimes reproducing a copyrighted article is useful. Here's the beginning:
<< <i>PUT YOURSELF in Mike Bolesta's place. On the morning of Feb. 20, he buys a new radio-CD player for his 17-year-old son Christopher's car. He pays the $114 installation charge with 57 crisp new $2 bills, which, when last observed, were still considered legitimate currency in the United States proper. The $2 bills are Bolesta's idea of payment, and his little comic protest, too.
For this, Bolesta, Baltimore County resident, innocent citizen, owner of Capital City Student Tours, finds himself under arrest.
Finds himself, in front of a store full of customers at the Best Buy on York Road in Lutherville, locked into handcuffs and leg irons.
Finds himself transported to the Baltimore County lockup in C***eysville, where he's handcuffed to a pole for three hours while the U.S. Secret Service is called into the case. >>