<< <i>So all of you that voted counterfiet..........Please show me the coin it's a counterfiet of. >>
I still don't understand this argument. Just because the original is gone doesn't mean you can't make a copy. >>
Simple, a counterfiet is producing a copy of a coin or note that is legal tender in other words, it's been monetized. For example, if back in the early 1900ds I was making Barber Quarters out of a cheap whit metal and passing them as genuine silver quarters, that's counterfieting. Even if there were actual 1964 D Peace dollars, taking a 1922 and changing the date is still not counterfieting.
Need a Barber Half with ANACS photo certificate. If you have one for sale please PM me. Current Ebay auctions
<< <i>So all of you that voted counterfiet..........Please show me the coin it's a counterfiet of. >>
I still don't understand this argument. Just because the original is gone doesn't mean you can't make a copy. >>
Simple, a counterfiet is producing a copy of a coin or note that is legal tender in other words, it's been monetized. For example, if back in the early 1900ds I was making Barber Quarters out of a cheap whit metal and passing them as genuine silver quarters, that's counterfieting. Even if there were actual 1964 D Peace dollars, taking a 1922 and changing the date is still not counterfieting. >>
Ah, I see. The difference is in the terms "copy" and "counterfeit." So, could we say that the Carr dollar is a copy but not a counterfeit?
<< <i>So all of you that voted counterfiet..........Please show me the coin it's a counterfiet of. >>
I still don't understand this argument. Just because the original is gone doesn't mean you can't make a copy. >>
If it never existed, it would be a fantasy (kind of like me and Meg Ryan). But since it did exist (and possibly still exists), it's an obvious copy - even if none exist, it's still copy of a Peace dollar with a fantasy date. Either way, it's unarguably a copy. If it were a fantasy piece (meaning a copy of nothing) there would be little to no interest in the item. There's ONLY interest because it's a COPY of a 1964-D Peace dollar, there's profit to be made and it's controversial. >>
I mostly agree with you except for the "fantasy date" bit. There were 1964-D dollars, at least for a little while. Then again, if they were never monetized, were they just rounds?
<< <i>So all of you that voted counterfiet..........Please show me the coin it's a counterfiet of. >>
I still don't understand this argument. Just because the original is gone doesn't mean you can't make a copy. >>
Simple, a counterfiet is producing a copy of a coin or note that is legal tender in other words, it's been monetized. For example, if back in the early 1900ds I was making Barber Quarters out of a cheap whit metal and passing them as genuine silver quarters, that's counterfieting. Even if there were actual 1964 D Peace dollars, taking a 1922 and changing the date is still not counterfieting. >>
The dictionary disagrees with you: "an imitation intended to be passed off fraudulently or deceptively as genuine; forgery." When something is made to appear as something it's not, it IS a counterfeit, hence the requirement of the HPA to place 'COPY' on any counterfeit coins.
<< <i>So all of you that voted counterfiet..........Please show me the coin it's a counterfiet of. >>
I still don't understand this argument. Just because the original is gone doesn't mean you can't make a copy. >>
Simple, a counterfiet is producing a copy of a coin or note that is legal tender in other words, it's been monetized. For example, if back in the early 1900ds I was making Barber Quarters out of a cheap whit metal and passing them as genuine silver quarters, that's counterfieting. Even if there were actual 1964 D Peace dollars, taking a 1922 and changing the date is still not counterfieting. >>
Ah, I see. The difference is in the terms "copy" and "counterfeit." So, could we say that the Carr dollar is a copy but not a counterfeit? >>
That's better. copying something may or may not be illegal. Throwing the word counterfeiting around is dangerous, as counterfieting U.S. coins and currency IS illegal under any circumstance.
Need a Barber Half with ANACS photo certificate. If you have one for sale please PM me. Current Ebay auctions
<< <i>So all of you that voted counterfiet..........Please show me the coin it's a counterfiet of. >>
I still don't understand this argument. Just because the original is gone doesn't mean you can't make a copy. >>
Simple, a counterfiet is producing a copy of a coin or note that is legal tender in other words, it's been monetized. For example, if back in the early 1900ds I was making Barber Quarters out of a cheap whit metal and passing them as genuine silver quarters, that's counterfieting. Even if there were actual 1964 D Peace dollars, taking a 1922 and changing the date is still not counterfieting. >>
The dictionary disagrees with you: "an imitation intended to be passed off fraudulently or deceptively as genuine; forgery." When something is made to appear as something it's not, it IS a counterfeit, hence the requirement of the HPA to place 'COPY' on any counterfeit coins. >>
So, intent is important here. We all know Mr. Carr has not tried to deceive.
I would like to see a DCarr forum so the fans of those silver rounds can all talk about them 24/7 and the rest of us don't have to skip 1/2 the threads on page one.
I don't know if this viewpoint has been said, but I can not read through any more DCarr threads to find out-this one included.
I think at this point DCarr has a large following and the POUNDING of threads about this piece are just alienating many others.
<< <i>I would like to see a DCarr forum so the fans of those silver rounds can all talk about them 24/7 and the rest of us don't have to skip 1/2 the threads on page one.
I don't know if this viewpoint has been said, but I can not read through any more DCarr threads to find out-this one included.
I think at this point DCarr has a large following and the POUNDING of threads about this piece are just alienating many others.
For DCarr's sake guys,,,slow down a bit >>
Right now on my screen there are 25 threads on the top page. 8.33% are on DCarr (3 out of 25). One of these, is this thread! Easy to skip over and move on if you ask me. If people want to talk (within rules of this forum and our host), let them. If and most likely when interest dies down, then the threads will too.
<< <i>JRocco, I never open 2/3 of the threads posted here and of the threads I do open, 75% of them I never open a second time. what's so difficult? --Jerry >>
Hey Jerry, This is the US coin forum on the Collectors Universe website. These never ending DCarr promotional threads are for a piece that is not a US coin. Is that difficult to understand?
edited to add Please don't even answer Jerry, I don't want to have to re-open this thread to read the response.
<< <i>So all of you that voted counterfiet..........Please show me the coin it's a counterfiet of. >>
One does not necessarily have to produce an original to make a case that an object is a clear counterfeit. For example, there are old masters paintings that have subsequently been lost or destroyed or otherwise not producible for various reasons, but it's well known what they looked like. If someone creates a modern day counterfeit of such, it is still a counterfeit even though the original cannot be produced.
I think all of this 64-D Peace Dollar hype is a well-managed promotion, and I rarely read any of it, other than to study the promotion so that I may better recognize the next one, when it is less obvious.
<< <i>I think all of this 64-D Peace Dollar hype is a well-managed promotion, and I rarely read any of it, other than to study the promotion so that I may better recognize the next one, when it is less obvious. >>
I highly doubt Daniel Carr thought that his 1964-D Peace Fantasy Bucks would generate all the hoopla that has abound on the forum!!! As to Dimeman, I highly doubt he thought that his OP would generate more of said hoopla!!!!
<opinion> The differences between these coins and genuine 1964-D Peace dollars (should they actually exist) are deliberate and well documented. We here are a community who promotes a "buyer beware" mentality- if you spent a lot of $$ on a coin and didn't take the time to learn about the series, you are partially to blame if the coin you bought ends up being fake. I see this is in thread after thread here, but then we criticize these because we worry someone will buy one thinking its the real deal. These aren't fake coins in fake slabs from China. They're like a lot of the restrikes made throughout numismatic history, IMHO. Stop worrying so much! </opinion>
You Suck! Awarded 6/2008- 1901-O Micro O Morgan, 8/2008- 1878 VAM-123 Morgan, 9/2022 1888-O VAM-1B3 H8 Morgan | Senior Regional Representative- ANACS Coin Grading. Posted opinions on coins are my own, and are not an official ANACS opinion.
I wish certain whiney forum members would go poof.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>I wish certain whiney forum members would go poof. >>
Ah, Perry, we'd miss you!!!!!
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
<< It is plain and simple if you use common sense. If the mint does not make it and it is made by a man outside the mint......IT'S COUNTERFIET !!!! >>
Wrong on so many levels.
while i don't necessarily agree with DimeMan's point i at least understand where he's coming from. would you care to please explain the multiple levels at which he is wrong??
DIMEMAN said: "It is plain and simple if you use common sense. If the mint does not make it and it is made by a man outside the mint......IT'S COUNTERFIET !!!!"
Based on your logic...
There are "counterfeit" coins in the Red Book? Does that get you mad?
The 1804 large cent restrike, the 1823 large cent restrike, the 1811 half cent restrike, were all struck outside of the mint? The 1827 quarter restrike (of which are 10) are suspected to be struck outside of the mint. Do they get you angry?
Oh my gosh! This one is in a PCGS slab and has a CAC sticker! Read the description. LINK
DIMEMAN said:"I don't think there is any place for this crap in numismatics!"
It's a matter not of IF, but WHEN these coins will reside in slabs and WHEN there will be no more controversy. You cannot contain the discussion now. The horse is already out of the barn. Have some historical perspective, will ya'?
There is no "AT" or "NT". We only have "market acceptable" or "not market acceptable.
<< <i><< It is plain and simple if you use common sense. If the mint does not make it and it is made by a man outside the mint......IT'S COUNTERFIET !!!! >>
Wrong on so many levels.
while i don't necessarily agree with DimeMan's point i at least understand where he's coming from. would you care to please explain the multiple levels at which he is wrong?? >>
Mickley restrikes SCD Hobo nickels Feuchtwanger Cent Hard times tokens
i don't have a dog in the fight, just wanting to know what the "levels" of wrongness alluded to are.
what you've shown are restrikes that were done before laws prohibiting them were enacted to prevent them from being made. can we agree that if the "1804 large cent restrike, the 1823 large cent restrike, the 1811 half cent restrike" were all struck outside of the mint today they would be illegal?? and no, i'm not angry, but i think if anyone wants to pile onto a member for making unfounded comments they should be held to the same standard. that applies to you, also, since the coins you used as examples aren't good comparisons due to the different era they came from. it seems clear to me that DimeMan was referring to stuff made outside the Mint in thecurrent era since the "Copy" laws went into effect. that is after all what this whole travesty is about-----the abscence of one four-letter word.
Mickley restrikes SCD Hobo nickels Feuchtwanger Cent Hard times tokens
All made privately out side the mint.
i can't make the link with these; evidentally the Mint was concerned enough about the Mickley's to go to the length of destroying the dies. as i replied above, they wouldn't be struck today because the dies would never be made available, so comparing different era's like this isn't reasonable(to me, at least, but i can't speak for DimeMan or anyone else). as for the others you listed, they aren't coins per se, so again i miss the connection, although it's interesting to note that quite a large number of SC$'s were struck on Mint presses by Mint employees, albeit outside the Mint(technically).
<< <i>It is plain and simple if you use common sense.
If the mint does not make it and it is made by a man outside the mint......IT'S COUNTERFIET !!!! >>
Is that based on anything other than your own, personal definition of "counterfeit"? It must not be, because I have never seen "counterfeit" defined that way, anywhere else.
>>>Mickley restrikes SCD Hobo nickels Feuchtwanger Cent Hard times tokens
All made privately out side the mint.<<<
What Keet's said...plus these listed above are not made to look like something from the mint. The Carr dollar is the Pease dollar, but not mint made and thus counterfiet and should say COPY on it.
<< <i>>>>Mickley restrikes SCD Hobo nickels Feuchtwanger Cent Hard times tokens
All made privately out side the mint.<<<
What Keet's said...plus these listed above are not made to look like something from the mint. The Carr dollar is the Pease dollar, but not mint made and thus counterfiet and should say COPY on it. >>
You better do your civic duty then and report them to the secret service. Be sure to let us all know how that works out for you. BTW it's peace dollar, not pease dollar. And counterfeit has the e before the i.
successful BST deals with Meltdown, Broadstruck, lordmarcovan, MisterTicToc, JINX86, BXBOY143, MBCOINS and others
<< <i>>>>Mickley restrikes SCD Hobo nickels Feuchtwanger Cent Hard times tokens
All made privately out side the mint.<<<
What Keet's said...plus these listed above are not made to look like something from the mint. The Carr dollar is the Pease dollar, but not mint made and thus counterfiet and should say COPY on it. >>
But based on your stated definition of "counterfeit" ("if the mint does not make it and it is made by a man outside the mint......IT'S COUNTERFIET !!!!)" the above are counterfeit. And that's even if they were not made to look like something from the mint. Have you changed your mind/definition already?
<< <i>The 1804 large cent restrike, the 1823 large cent restrike, the 1811 half cent restrike, were all struck outside of the mint? The 1827 quarter restrike (of which are 10) are suspected to be struck outside of the mint. Do they get you angry? >>
I've not spent any time researching the 1827 quarter, as for the 1804 cent, 1823 cent and 1811 half cent "restrike" coins I have no respect for them and would not want them in my collection. I have this opinion of this material despite that fact that all of these pieces, especially the 1811 restrike half cent, sell for strong prices. This stuff was made from scrap U.S. mint coin dies, with at least some intention to deceive the unwary.
The flood of Chinese counterfeits in this country makes me very angry. It saddens me that we have to put up with a home grown copy maker in this country who flaunts the Hobby Protection law, who is now proposing to create more collector trash, like a 1975 quarter. Let the saps buy this junk. But if you keep encouraging this guy he's just going to make more and more of it. And if he keeps on makeing more fantasy pieces, eventually it will reach the point where this material will be used to take advantage of people who don't know any better.
As I've stated before if he put the word "copy" on the back of the piece or had some other indicator that it is not a U.S. mint product, I would have no problem with it. But when he makes stuff that is marked and looks like U.S. coins, or coins of any other legitimate nation, I do object to it.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
<< <i>i don't have a dog in the fight, just wanting to know what the "levels" of wrongness alluded to are. >>
Neither I. If you are a collector of coins and enjoy discussing them, we are good.
<< <i>...since the coins you used as examples aren't good comparisons due to the different era they came from. it seems clear to me that DimeMan was referring to stuff made outside the Mint in thecurrent era since the "Copy" laws went into effect. that is after all what this whole travesty is about-----the abscence of one four-letter word. >>
No, no, nope. He did not infer this at all. He was clear. Please re-read his posts. He has also chosen to ignore my examples of restrikes. He does not want to discuss. He wants people censored because he does not agree with what they have to say. This goes against the spirit here.
There is no "AT" or "NT". We only have "market acceptable" or "not market acceptable.
I've always enjoyed the... "someone got away with it in the past" argument. Even when we all know it's wrong in the present, we still use the same old argument. Why can't we just accept reality and stop using the past to justify the present?
Edited to add: Most of you know I've fought in three wars... could you imagine me arguing my actions based on the past war atrocities? It's the same argument most in favor of the fantasy 64-D Peace dollars use, albeit more extreme; I hope you can understand the analogy. If you really think they are lawful, use the law and not the violations from the past. Make it an intelligent discussion and not an emotional one.
<< <i>I've not spent any time researching the 1827 quarter, as for the 1804 cent, 1823 cent and 1811 half cent "restrike" coins I have no respect for them and would not want them in my collection. >>
So is there any room for "this crap in numismatics!? Would you like to see discussion of the coins go"POOF"?
Let's not lose site of the original post or DIMEMAN's clarification subsequently.
There is no "AT" or "NT". We only have "market acceptable" or "not market acceptable.
Comments
<< <i>
<< <i>So all of you that voted counterfiet..........Please show me the coin it's a counterfiet of. >>
I still don't understand this argument. Just because the original is gone doesn't mean you can't make a copy. >>
Simple, a counterfiet is producing a copy of a coin or note that is legal tender in other words, it's been monetized. For example, if back in the early 1900ds I was making Barber Quarters out of a cheap whit metal and passing them as genuine silver quarters, that's counterfieting. Even if there were actual 1964 D Peace dollars, taking a 1922 and changing the date is still not counterfieting.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>So all of you that voted counterfiet..........Please show me the coin it's a counterfiet of. >>
I still don't understand this argument. Just because the original is gone doesn't mean you can't make a copy. >>
Simple, a counterfiet is producing a copy of a coin or note that is legal tender in other words, it's been monetized. For example, if back in the early 1900ds I was making Barber Quarters out of a cheap whit metal and passing them as genuine silver quarters, that's counterfieting. Even if there were actual 1964 D Peace dollars, taking a 1922 and changing the date is still not counterfieting. >>
Ah, I see. The difference is in the terms "copy" and "counterfeit." So, could we say that the Carr dollar is a copy but not a counterfeit?
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>So all of you that voted counterfiet..........Please show me the coin it's a counterfiet of. >>
I still don't understand this argument. Just because the original is gone doesn't mean you can't make a copy. >>
If it never existed, it would be a fantasy (kind of like me and Meg Ryan). But since it did exist (and possibly still exists), it's an obvious copy - even if none exist, it's still copy of a Peace dollar with a fantasy date. Either way, it's unarguably a copy. If it were a fantasy piece (meaning a copy of nothing) there would be little to no interest in the item. There's ONLY interest because it's a COPY of a 1964-D Peace dollar, there's profit to be made and it's controversial. >>
I mostly agree with you except for the "fantasy date" bit. There were 1964-D dollars, at least for a little while. Then again, if they were never monetized, were they just rounds?
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>So all of you that voted counterfiet..........Please show me the coin it's a counterfiet of. >>
I still don't understand this argument. Just because the original is gone doesn't mean you can't make a copy. >>
Simple, a counterfiet is producing a copy of a coin or note that is legal tender in other words, it's been monetized. For example, if back in the early 1900ds I was making Barber Quarters out of a cheap whit metal and passing them as genuine silver quarters, that's counterfieting. Even if there were actual 1964 D Peace dollars, taking a 1922 and changing the date is still not counterfieting. >>
The dictionary disagrees with you: "an imitation intended to be passed off fraudulently or deceptively as genuine; forgery." When something is made to appear as something it's not, it IS a counterfeit, hence the requirement of the HPA to place 'COPY' on any counterfeit coins.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>So all of you that voted counterfiet..........Please show me the coin it's a counterfiet of. >>
I still don't understand this argument. Just because the original is gone doesn't mean you can't make a copy. >>
Simple, a counterfiet is producing a copy of a coin or note that is legal tender in other words, it's been monetized. For example, if back in the early 1900ds I was making Barber Quarters out of a cheap whit metal and passing them as genuine silver quarters, that's counterfieting. Even if there were actual 1964 D Peace dollars, taking a 1922 and changing the date is still not counterfieting. >>
Ah, I see. The difference is in the terms "copy" and "counterfeit." So, could we say that the Carr dollar is a copy but not a counterfeit? >>
That's better. copying something may or may not be illegal. Throwing the word counterfeiting around is dangerous, as counterfieting U.S. coins and currency IS illegal under any circumstance.
<< <i>I guess this thread backfired on the original author. >>
no doubt
<< <i>
<< <i>I guess this thread backfired on the original author. >>
no doubt >>
Awesome.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>So all of you that voted counterfiet..........Please show me the coin it's a counterfiet of. >>
I still don't understand this argument. Just because the original is gone doesn't mean you can't make a copy. >>
Simple, a counterfiet is producing a copy of a coin or note that is legal tender in other words, it's been monetized. For example, if back in the early 1900ds I was making Barber Quarters out of a cheap whit metal and passing them as genuine silver quarters, that's counterfieting. Even if there were actual 1964 D Peace dollars, taking a 1922 and changing the date is still not counterfieting. >>
The dictionary disagrees with you: "an imitation intended to be passed off fraudulently or deceptively as genuine; forgery." When something is made to appear as something it's not, it IS a counterfeit, hence the requirement of the HPA to place 'COPY' on any counterfeit coins. >>
So, intent is important here. We all know Mr. Carr has not tried to deceive.
Successful BST Transactions!SIconbuster, Meltdown, Mission16, slothman2000, RGjohn, braddick, au58lover, allcoinsrule, commemdude, gerard, lablade, PCcoins, greencopper, kaz, tydye, cucamongacoin, mkman123, SeaEaglecoins, Doh!, AnkurJ, Airplanenut, ArizonaJack, JJM,Tee135,LordMarcovan, Swampboy, piecesofme, Ahrensdad,
<< <i>So, intent is important here. We all know Mr. Carr has not tried to deceive. >>
The HPA doesn't look at initial intent, they look at eventual effect.
<< <i>>>>If these forums were a democracy, I think this post would go poof.<<<
These forums are NOT a "democracy" , and I am in line with how PCGS stands on this!
I don't really care if this post goes poof. I just wanted to see how others feel about this.
I know I am not the only one against this crap!!! >>
Happy Valentine's day to you too. Sorry you're having such a bad day. --Jerry
about them 24/7 and the rest of us don't have to skip 1/2 the threads on page one.
I don't know if this viewpoint has been said, but I can not read through any more DCarr threads to find out-this one included.
I think at this point DCarr has a large following and the POUNDING of threads about this piece are
just alienating many others.
For DCarr's sake guys,,,slow down a bit
I never open 2/3 of the threads posted here and of the threads I do open, 75% of them I never open a second time. what's so difficult? --Jerry
<< <i>I would like to see a DCarr forum so the fans of those silver rounds can all talk
about them 24/7 and the rest of us don't have to skip 1/2 the threads on page one.
I don't know if this viewpoint has been said, but I can not read through any more DCarr threads to find out-this one included.
I think at this point DCarr has a large following and the POUNDING of threads about this piece are
just alienating many others.
For DCarr's sake guys,,,slow down a bit >>
Right now on my screen there are 25 threads on the top page. 8.33% are on DCarr (3 out of 25). One of these, is this thread! Easy to skip over and move on if you ask me. If people want to talk (within rules of this forum and our host), let them. If and most likely when interest dies down, then the threads will too.
<< <i>JRocco,
I never open 2/3 of the threads posted here and of the threads I do open, 75% of them I never open a second time. what's so difficult? --Jerry >>
Hey Jerry,
This is the US coin forum on the Collectors Universe website.
These never ending DCarr promotional threads are for a piece
that is not a US coin.
Is that difficult to understand?
edited to add
Please don't even answer Jerry, I don't want to have to re-open this thread to read the response.
If you don't like the subject, don't open the thread. Pretty simple.
I think chopped trade dollars are post-mint damage, but who am
I to demand others not post about them.
Sheesh...get a friggin life, will ya.
<< <i>So all of you that voted counterfiet..........Please show me the coin it's a counterfiet of. >>
One does not necessarily have to produce an original to make a case that an object is a clear counterfeit. For example, there are old masters paintings that have subsequently been lost or destroyed or otherwise not producible for various reasons, but it's well known what they looked like. If someone creates a modern day counterfeit of such, it is still a counterfeit even though the original cannot be produced.
<< <i>I rather enjoy the DCarr threads. Keep up the good work, folks! >>
Me too.
<< <i>I think all of this 64-D Peace Dollar hype is a well-managed promotion, and I rarely read any of it, other than to study the promotion so that I may better recognize the next one, when it is less obvious. >>
I highly doubt Daniel Carr thought that his 1964-D Peace Fantasy Bucks would generate all the hoopla that has abound on the forum!!!
As to Dimeman, I highly doubt he thought that his OP would generate more of said hoopla!!!!
<opinion>
The differences between these coins and genuine 1964-D Peace dollars (should they actually exist) are deliberate and well documented. We here are a community who promotes a "buyer beware" mentality- if you spent a lot of $$ on a coin and didn't take the time to learn about the series, you are partially to blame if the coin you bought ends up being fake. I see this is in thread after thread here, but then we criticize these because we worry someone will buy one thinking its the real deal. These aren't fake coins in fake slabs from China. They're like a lot of the restrikes made throughout numismatic history, IMHO. Stop worrying so much!
</opinion>
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
Anything not produced by the mint is a counterfiet...plain and simple!!!
<< <i>>>>So all of you that voted counterfiet..........Please show me the coin it's a counterfiet of. <<<
Anything not produced by the mint is a counterfiet...plain and simple!!! >>
Plain and simple, you are dead wrong about that. Please show us a credible source upon which you base that assertion?
<< <i>
<< <i>>>>So all of you that voted counterfiet..........Please show me the coin it's a counterfiet of. <<<
Anything not produced by the mint is a counterfiet...plain and simple!!! >>
Plain and simple, you are dead wrong about that. Please show us a credible source upon which you base that assertion? >>
Dimeman, you're in trouble now.....Det. Columbo is now on the case!!!
<< <i>I wish certain whiney forum members would go poof. >>
Ah, Perry, we'd miss you!!!!!
If the mint does not make it and it is made by a man outside the mint......IT'S COUNTERFIET !!!!
<< <i>It is plain and simple if you use common sense.
If the mint does not make it and it is made by a man outside the mint......IT'S COUNTERFIET !!!! >>
Wrong on so many levels.
I knew it would happen.
<< <i>I'm thinking of changing my avatar from a toner Roosie to a 64-DC Peace Dollar.....
~ Andrew Smith
If the mint does not make it and it is made by a man outside the mint......IT'S COUNTERFIET !!!! >>
Wrong on so many levels.
while i don't necessarily agree with DimeMan's point i at least understand where he's coming from. would you care to please explain the multiple levels at which he is wrong??
If the mint does not make it and it is made by a man outside the mint......IT'S COUNTERFIET !!!!"
Based on your logic...
There are "counterfeit" coins in the Red Book? Does that get you mad?
The 1804 large cent restrike, the 1823 large cent restrike, the 1811 half cent restrike, were all struck outside of the mint? The 1827 quarter restrike (of which are 10) are suspected to be struck outside of the mint. Do they get you angry?
Oh my gosh! This one is in a PCGS slab and has a CAC sticker! Read the description. LINK
DIMEMAN said:"I don't think there is any place for this crap in numismatics!
It's a matter not of IF, but WHEN these coins will reside in slabs and WHEN there will be no more controversy. You cannot contain the discussion now. The horse is already out of the barn. Have some historical perspective, will ya'?
<< <i><< It is plain and simple if you use common sense.
If the mint does not make it and it is made by a man outside the mint......IT'S COUNTERFIET !!!! >>
Wrong on so many levels.
while i don't necessarily agree with DimeMan's point i at least understand where he's coming from. would you care to please explain the multiple levels at which he is wrong?? >>
Mickley restrikes
SCD
Hobo nickels
Feuchtwanger Cent
Hard times tokens
All made privately out side the mint.
- Bob -

MPL's - Lincolns of Color
Central Valley Roosevelts
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>>>>So all of you that voted counterfiet..........Please show me the coin it's a counterfiet of. <<<
Anything not produced by the mint is a counterfiet...plain and simple!!! >>
Plain and simple, you are dead wrong about that. Please show us a credible source upon which you base that assertion? >>
Dimeman, you're in trouble now.....Det. Columbo is now on the case!!!
I believe I am the original Lt. Columbo here.
Eric
i don't have a dog in the fight, just wanting to know what the "levels" of wrongness alluded to are.
what you've shown are restrikes that were done before laws prohibiting them were enacted to prevent them from being made. can we agree that if the "1804 large cent restrike, the 1823 large cent restrike, the 1811 half cent restrike" were all struck outside of the mint today they would be illegal?? and no, i'm not angry, but i think if anyone wants to pile onto a member for making unfounded comments they should be held to the same standard. that applies to you, also, since the coins you used as examples aren't good comparisons due to the different era they came from. it seems clear to me that DimeMan was referring to stuff made outside the Mint in thecurrent era since the "Copy" laws went into effect. that is after all what this whole travesty is about-----the abscence of one four-letter word.
Mickley restrikes
SCD
Hobo nickels
Feuchtwanger Cent
Hard times tokens
All made privately out side the mint.
i can't make the link with these; evidentally the Mint was concerned enough about the Mickley's to go to the length of destroying the dies. as i replied above, they wouldn't be struck today because the dies would never be made available, so comparing different era's like this isn't reasonable(to me, at least, but i can't speak for DimeMan or anyone else). as for the others you listed, they aren't coins per se, so again i miss the connection, although it's interesting to note that quite a large number of SC$'s were struck on Mint presses by Mint employees, albeit outside the Mint(technically).
<< <i>It is plain and simple if you use common sense.
If the mint does not make it and it is made by a man outside the mint......IT'S COUNTERFIET !!!! >>
Is that based on anything other than your own, personal definition of "counterfeit"? It must not be, because I have never seen "counterfeit" defined that way, anywhere else.
SCD
Hobo nickels
Feuchtwanger Cent
Hard times tokens
All made privately out side the mint.<<<
What Keet's said...plus these listed above are not made to look like something from the mint. The Carr dollar is the Pease dollar, but not mint made and thus counterfiet and should say COPY on it.
<< <i>"People fear what they don't understand and hate what they can't conquer."
~ Andrew Smith >>
That's confusing... I love women; then your quote makes it sound like it would be impossible for me to love women?
<< <i>>>>Mickley restrikes
SCD
Hobo nickels
Feuchtwanger Cent
Hard times tokens
All made privately out side the mint.<<<
What Keet's said...plus these listed above are not made to look like something from the mint. The Carr dollar is the Pease dollar, but not mint made and thus counterfiet and should say COPY on it. >>
You better do your civic duty then and report them to the secret service.
Be sure to let us all know how that works out for you.
BTW it's peace dollar, not pease dollar.
And counterfeit has the e before the i.
<< <i>>>>Mickley restrikes
SCD
Hobo nickels
Feuchtwanger Cent
Hard times tokens
All made privately out side the mint.<<<
What Keet's said...plus these listed above are not made to look like something from the mint. The Carr dollar is the Pease dollar, but not mint made and thus counterfiet and should say COPY on it. >>
But based on your stated definition of "counterfeit" ("if the mint does not make it and it is made by a man outside the mint......IT'S COUNTERFIET !!!!)" the above are counterfeit. And that's even if they were not made to look like something from the mint. Have you changed your mind/definition already?
<< <i>The 1804 large cent restrike, the 1823 large cent restrike, the 1811 half cent restrike, were all struck outside of the mint? The 1827 quarter restrike (of which are 10) are suspected to be struck outside of the mint. Do they get you angry? >>
I've not spent any time researching the 1827 quarter, as for the 1804 cent, 1823 cent and 1811 half cent "restrike" coins I have no respect for them and would not want them in my collection. I have this opinion of this material despite that fact that all of these pieces, especially the 1811 restrike half cent, sell for strong prices. This stuff was made from scrap U.S. mint coin dies, with at least some intention to deceive the unwary.
The flood of Chinese counterfeits in this country makes me very angry. It saddens me that we have to put up with a home grown copy maker in this country who flaunts the Hobby Protection law, who is now proposing to create more collector trash, like a 1975 quarter. Let the saps buy this junk. But if you keep encouraging this guy he's just going to make more and more of it. And if he keeps on makeing more fantasy pieces, eventually it will reach the point where this material will be used to take advantage of people who don't know any better.
As I've stated before if he put the word "copy" on the back of the piece or had some other indicator that it is not a U.S. mint product, I would have no problem with it. But when he makes stuff that is marked and looks like U.S. coins, or coins of any other legitimate nation, I do object to it.
<< <i>i don't have a dog in the fight, just wanting to know what the "levels" of wrongness alluded to are. >>
Neither I. If you are a collector of coins and enjoy discussing them, we are good.
<< <i>...since the coins you used as examples aren't good comparisons due to the different era they came from. it seems clear to me that DimeMan was referring to stuff made outside the Mint in thecurrent era since the "Copy" laws went into effect. that is after all what this whole travesty is about-----the abscence of one four-letter word. >>
No, no, nope. He did not infer this at all. He was clear. Please re-read his posts. He has also chosen to ignore my examples of restrikes. He does not want to discuss. He wants people censored because he does not agree with what they have to say. This goes against the spirit here.
Edited to add: Most of you know I've fought in three wars... could you imagine me arguing my actions based on the past war atrocities? It's the same argument most in favor of the fantasy 64-D Peace dollars use, albeit more extreme; I hope you can understand the analogy. If you really think they are lawful, use the law and not the violations from the past. Make it an intelligent discussion and not an emotional one.
the reader infers, not the writer. as the reader i inferred what you pasted, if that makes sense!!
<< <i>I've not spent any time researching the 1827 quarter, as for the 1804 cent, 1823 cent and 1811 half cent "restrike" coins I have no respect for them and would not want them in my collection. >>
So is there any room for "this crap in numismatics!? Would you like to see discussion of the coins go"POOF"?
Let's not lose site of the original post or DIMEMAN's clarification subsequently.