You know what they say about wishing in one hand and sh!ting in the other. See which one fills up first.
Wishing and thinking these creations are counterfeit doesn't make them so. Not even close. And if so the Secret Service would have knocked on Daniel's door way before now and/or shut down the sales. After all they had plenty of time and I'm sure plenty of tattletails "diming' out Mr. Carr. The fact that even eBay has seen the light and is now allowing the sale of these coins after their over abundance of caution is another strike against the argument these are anything other than legitimate collectable coins.
<< <i>You know what they say about wishing in one hand and sh!ting in the other. See which one fills up first.
Wishing and thinking these creations are counterfeit doesn't make them so. Not even close. And if so the Secret Service would have knocked on Daniel's door way before now and/or shut down the sales. After all they had plenty of time and I'm sure plenty of tattletails "diming' out Mr. Carr. The fact that even eBay has seen the light and is now allowing the sale of these coins after their over abundance of caution is another strike against the argument these are anything other than legitimate collectable coins. >>
Implied facts aren't always actual facts... there is a significant difference, one only experience can reveal.
<< <i>You know what they say about wishing in one hand and sh!ting in the other. See which one fills up first.
Wishing and thinking these creations are counterfeit doesn't make them so. Not even close. And if so the Secret Service would have knocked on Daniel's door way before now and/or shut down the sales. After all they had plenty of time and I'm sure plenty of tattletails "diming' out Mr. Carr. The fact that even eBay has seen the light and is now allowing the sale of these coins after their over abundance of caution is another strike against the argument these are anything other than legitimate collectable coins. >>
Neither does wishing and thinking these creations legal make them legal. Until the Secret Service chimes in the question remains unanswered. The fact that they have not yet chimed in means nothing. They may not even have noticed us yet.
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.
Some of you are not paying attention. It's not me me not liking them and calling them counterfeit that makes them counterfeit. It's the fact that real dies that were used to strike real Peace dollars were used out side of the mint to strike coins that are exact copies of U.S. coins. That is counterfeit.
<< <i>Some of you are not paying attention. It's not me me not liking them and calling them counterfeit that makes them counterfeit. It's the fact that real dies that were used to strike real Peace dollars were used out side of the mint to strike coins that are exact copies of U.S. coins. That is counterfeit. >>
They were not "real" dies and they are not exact copies either. Host coin shows, and mint mark was altered at the very least. They are pretty, but looking closely and with an actual Peace Dollar side by side, you can tell the difference no problem.
Edited to add per D Carr's website:
There may be subtle differences between coins. Since they are over-struck on existing coins, there may be faint evidence of the original coin design showing since the overstrike is usually not perfectly aligned with the original strike. A die gouge to the right of the "D" mint mark provides a marker for future identification as to the source. Also note the fourth extra ray below "ONE", as seen on the original 1921 issue and on some of the 1935-S issue.
"Until the Secret Service chimes in the question remains unanswered. The fact that they have not yet chimed in means nothing. They may not even have noticed us yet.
They're not the keystone cops. Their lack of a response is a response.
And a year from now their 'response' will remain the same. A deafening sound of silence is all you will get.
yeah, i thought DCarr did a good job of explaining the subtle nuances, but as Bill pointed out many novices will be fooled. i bet it would be hard for most of us to discern the difference if it wasn't for the date.
<< <i>"Until the Secret Service chimes in the question remains unanswered. The fact that they have not yet chimed in means nothing. They may not even have noticed us yet.
They're not the keystone cops. Their lack of a response is a response.
And a year from now their 'response' will remain the same. A deafening sound of silence is all you will get. >>
You have never worked in a Federal capacity... it's quite obvious. Why do you continue to argue something when you're obviously unfamiliar with an agencies standard operating procedures?
<< <i>Some of you are not paying attention. It's not me me not liking them and calling them counterfeit that makes them counterfeit. It's the fact that real dies that were used to strike real Peace dollars were used out side of the mint to strike coins that are exact copies of U.S. coins. That is counterfeit. >>
Maybe you're the one not paying attention, to your own nonsensical definition of what constitutes a counterfeit:
<<If the mint does not make it and it is made by a man outside the mint......IT'S COUNTERFIET !!!! >>
<< <i>Some of you are not paying attention. It's not me me not liking them and calling them counterfeit that makes them counterfeit. It's the fact that real dies that were used to strike real Peace dollars were used out side of the mint to strike coins that are exact copies of U.S. coins. That is counterfeit. >>
I don't think you are paying attention. Let me repeat myself...
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>Some of you are not paying attention. It's not me me not liking them and calling them counterfeit that makes them counterfeit. It's the fact that real dies that were used to strike real Peace dollars were used out side of the mint to strike coins that are exact copies of U.S. coins. That is counterfeit. >>
I don't think you are paying attention. Let me repeat myself...
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'? >>
If you argue long enough, everyone will eventually quit arguing and you will "WIN". It's a sound tactic... it also appears to be learned behaviour!
<< <i>This NOT a post about the Carr dollar. This is a post how they shouldn't even be allowed and have NO place in numismatics or anywhere else as far as that goes >>
Oh and some of the other 100 or so were not about that??? lol
<< <i> Why can't we just accept reality and stop using the past to justify the present? >>
I could be wrong, but aren't most rules or laws based on or the result of a precedence or occurrence from the past? >>
Yes, and I believe most if not all of the examples were eventually prosecuted. Great point!
You also make a case for my other argument... use case law to argue the legality of the 64-d, not emotion. Another great point!
To answer your question, laws are based on contemporary cases which are the basis for case law (usually in a State or Federal Supreme court). I believe Precedence is what southerners say when they preface Barack Obama?
<< <i>If you argue long enough, everyone will eventually quit arguing and you will "WIN". It's a sound tactic... it also appears to be learned behaviour! >>
Sometimes I repeat myself. Sometimes I repeat myself.
There is no "AT" or "NT". We only have "market acceptable" or "not market acceptable.
<< <i> Why can't we just accept reality and stop using the past to justify the present? >>
I could be wrong, but aren't most rules or laws based on or the result of a precedence or occurrence from the past? >>
You are not wrong.
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.
If you want to look forward, send letters to Red Book to get these old "counterfeits" removed from the next edition. Call Heritage and ask them to stop listing these old "counterfeits". Finally, demand PCGS and CAC stop slabbing these old "counterfeits" and putting stickers on them. The future is now! Or is it tomorrow? I forget.
There is no "AT" or "NT". We only have "market acceptable" or "not market acceptable.
In his crystal clear world the OP should start his own forum where he is judge , jury and executioner. He would be great in that role. Happy Valentine's Day.................MJ
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Remember that the 1933 Double Eagle was floating around freely through the 1940s; it took many years before the government decided to clamp down on the legality of these pieces. I'm not saying that will happen here, but merely reminding folks that just because the government hasn't seen to cracking down on these *yet* is no guarantee it won't in the future. How long did it take to go after the Liberty Dollar? A few years if I recall.
If the fact that Mr. Carr's dies have subtle differences from the original dies makes his unmarked copies “legal” then I suppose the Chinese counterfeits are “legal” too. Doesn’t that logic appeal to those of you who are Mr. Carr’s staunchest defenders?
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>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. >>
No -- these threads are very entertaining, and having met Mr. Carr, I am not in the "hang im" camp. Dan is very intelligent, very knowledgeable in the field of metallurgy, and a valuable addition to numismatics.
There is something that needs to be addressed here... a number of posters (and I have been guilty of this as well) talk about the secret service as being responsible for the enforcement here. They cite the fact that the SS has not shut him down for counterfieting and that therefore, these products must be legal. The SS does not enforce the Hobby Protection Act. It is the Federal Trade Commission. The "fact" that no one has come knocking at the door *YET* does not mean that these products do not violate the HPA. What Mr. Carr should have done is write to the FTC and formally request a "No Action" letter and not produced these items until and unless he received such No Action letter. If he unkowningly made an inquiry to the wrong department and assumed that since he received no reply that everything was hunky-dory and that he had carte blanche to create and sell these items, then he was short-sighted and wrong.
The fact of the matter is that he is altering actual US coins to manipulate them to create the appearance of what would be THE key date coin in the series, a coin that is known to have been produced by the mint and is believed to still exist, even though all coins were recalled. Did Mr. Carr seek legal counsel regarding this endeavor? Did an attorney give him a written legal opinion that these items would not violate the HPA? If he came to me, I would have advised that they most likely would violate the HPA. I think that most lawyers would agree. He sent a letter and receiving no response, he acted. That course of conduct may well come back to bite him in the behind.
The other question to consider is this: if the FTC comes down on DC and requires him to disclose the owners/purchasers and they go after them, will the members here who bought these "coins" surrender them or hide them?
<< <i>Remember that the 1933 Double Eagle was floating around freely through the 1940s; it took many years before the government decided to clamp down on the legality of these pieces. I'm not saying that will happen here, but merely reminding folks that just because the government hasn't seen to cracking down on these *yet* is no guarantee it won't in the future. How long did it take to go after the Liberty Dollar? A few years if I recall. >>
The Wheel Of Justice Grind Slowly, But They Grind Exceedingly Fine.
Just ask the Switt family.
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.
<< <i>Remember that the 1933 Double Eagle was floating around freely through the 1940s; it took many years before the government decided to clamp down on the legality of these pieces. I'm not saying that will happen here, but merely reminding folks that just because the government hasn't seen to cracking down on these *yet* is no guarantee it won't in the future. How long did it take to go after the Liberty Dollar? A few years if I recall. >>
Totally different situation. The government maintained that the 1933 Saints were never issued so those in private hands were stolen property.
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'd just like to inform all of my customers that there may be somewhat of a delay in the initial release of my fantasy $2 Red-Seal U.S. Notes. You see, I've got the scanner and the genuine notes to make the copies from, but darn if I still can't find the right paper! It looks like I'm just going to have to make my own paper, which, understandably, may take some time. That's principally because I've never made paper.
Anyway, the money you sent me to secure your orders is safe with me, I want you to rest assured in that. Nothing changed, there. For any new customers, I'm sorry to have to inform you, the prices just went up. That's, again, because I'm anticipating paper-processing costs, now. The $2 Notes are now $20 per, up from only $10 per. I know what many of you are thinking, that's still a bargain for these. Hey, I'm out to satisfy. Please place your orders, now!
Edited to correct sentence structure because I'm such a darn perfectionist and there's nothing anybody can do about it...
<< <i>I'd just like to inform all of my customers that there may be somewhat of a delay in the initial release of my fantasy $2 Red-Seal U.S. Notes. You see, I've got the scanner and the genuine notes to make the copies from, but, darn if I still can't find the right paper! It looks like I'm just going to have to make my own paper, which, understandably, may take some time. That's principally because I've never made paper.
Anyway, the money you sent me to secure your orders is safe with me, I want you to rest assured in that. Nothing changed, there. For any new customers, I'm sorry to have to inform you, the prices just went up. That's, again, because I'm anticipating paper-processing costs, now. The $2 Notes are now $20 per, up from only $10 per. I know what many of you are thinking, that's still a bargain for these. Hey, I'm out to satisfy. Please place order yours, now! >>
Hey, kurtdog, here's an idea... just get some real $1.00 or $2.00 notes and bleach the paper (you can call it "processing" it) and just print your notes on that paper. Since the paper is real US notes, its still real US tender and you can't be accused of counterfieting because its just an altered note! Don'tcha just love the logic?
<< <i>There is something that needs to be addressed here... a number of posters (and I have been guilty of this as well) talk about the secret service as being responsible for the enforcement here. They cite the fact that the SS has not shut him down for counterfieting and that therefore, these products must be legal. The SS does not enforce the Hobby Protection Act. It is the Federal Trade Commission. The "fact" that no one has come knocking at the door *YET* does not mean that these products do not violate the HPA. What Mr. Carr should have done is write to the FTC and formally request a "No Action" letter and not produced these items until and unless he received such No Action letter. If he unkowningly made an inquiry to the wrong department and assumed that since he received no reply that everything was hunky-dory and that he had carte blanche to create and sell these items, then he was short-sighted and wrong. >>
Two separate letters of inquiry (one sent via Fed-Ex) were delivered to the FTC. They chose not to reply.
<< <i>The fact of the matter is that he is altering actual US coins to manipulate them to create the appearance of what would be THE key date coin in the series, a coin that is known to have been produced by the mint and is believed to still exist, even though all coins were recalled. >>
"Believed" to exist ? The US Treasury doesn't think so, and that's what counts.
<< <i>The other question to consider is this: if the FTC comes down on DC and requires him to disclose the owners/purchasers and they go after them, will the members here who bought these "coins" surrender them or hide them? >>
<< <i>I'd just like to inform all of my customers that there may be somewhat of a delay in the initial release of my fantasy $2 Red-Seal U.S. Notes. You see, I've got the scanner and the genuine notes to make the copies from, but, darn if I still can't find the right paper! It looks like I'm just going to have to make my own paper, which, understandably, may take some time. That's principally because I've never made paper.
Anyway, the money you sent me to secure your orders is safe with me, I want you to rest assured in that. Nothing changed, there. For any new customers, I'm sorry to have to inform you, the prices just went up. That's, again, because I'm anticipating paper-processing costs, now. The $2 Notes are now $20 per, up from only $10 per. I know what many of you are thinking, that's still a bargain for these. Hey, I'm out to satisfy. Please place order yours, now! >>
Hey, kurtdog, here's an idea... just get some real $1.00 or $2.00 notes and bleach the paper (you can call it "processing" it) and just print your notes on that paper. Since the paper is real US notes, its still real US tender and you can't be accused of counterfieting because its just an altered note! Don'tcha just love the logic? >>
Removing ink from a bill is akin to removing metal from a coin. I never removed any metal from the coins I overstruck (I never added metal or melted or heated them either).
If you bleach a $1 bill and print something else on it to increase the face value, you have just created something that is not legally monetized. But if you take a $2 bill and over-print National Parks designs on them (without changing the face value), you can sell them on television.
I sure wish people would get their deffinitions straight.
Dan, alterered a coin that was already legal tender. He did not change the denomination of that coin or produce a new coin and try to pass it as a monetized coin.
I personally have no problem with the Carr dollar. I do have a problem with people calling it couterfeit and therefor calling Dan a counterfeiter. The coin is simply a genuine coin with an altered date and still worth one dollar face value as far as the U.S. government is concerned.
Need a Barber Half with ANACS photo certificate. If you have one for sale please PM me. Current Ebay auctions
<< <i>I'd just like to inform all of my customers that there may be somewhat of a delay in the initial release of my fantasy $2 Red-Seal U.S. Notes. You see, I've got the scanner and the genuine notes to make the copies from, but, darn if I still can't find the right paper! It looks like I'm just going to have to make my own paper, which, understandably, may take some time. That's principally because I've never made paper.
Anyway, the money you sent me to secure your orders is safe with me, I want you to rest assured in that. Nothing changed, there. For any new customers, I'm sorry to have to inform you, the prices just went up. That's, again, because I'm anticipating paper-processing costs, now. The $2 Notes are now $20 per, up from only $10 per. I know what many of you are thinking, that's still a bargain for these. Hey, I'm out to satisfy. Please place order yours, now! >>
Hey, kurtdog, here's an idea... just get some real $1.00 or $2.00 notes and bleach the paper (you can call it "processing" it) and just print your notes on that paper. Since the paper is real US notes, its still real US tender and you can't be accused of counterfieting because its just an altered note! Don'tcha just love the logic? >>
Great idea, Ray! And it's economical, too, given the cost of bleach!
<< <i>Two separate letters of inquiry (one sent via Fed-Ex) were delivered to the FTC. They chose not to reply. >>
OK, so send the IRS a letter asking if its OK if you don't pay your taxes this year and when you don't get a reply, don't pay your taxes. I guarantee that neither the IRS nor the US Tax Court would accept the defence of "I wrote to you and asked if it was OK and since you did not respond, I assumed that you were OK with it."
Who did you write to? Did you contact the FTC legal department and ask to whom your inquiry should be sent and what the proper form would be? Or did you just send a letter addressed to no one in particular to the general address of the FTC? Can you post the contents of that letter here? What, exactly was your inquiry? Did you consult with an attorney to make sure that you were doing things the right way?
<< <i>Two separate letters of inquiry (one sent via Fed-Ex) were delivered to the FTC. They chose not to reply. >>
OK, so send the IRS a letter asking if its OK if you don't pay your taxes this year and when you don't get a reply, don't pay your taxes. I guarantee that neither the IRS nor the US Tax Court would accept the defence of "I wrote to you and asked if it was OK and since you did not respond, I assumed that you were OK with it." >>
Write to the IRS with a very specific question about tax deductions. If they don't reply, file your taxes as you believe proper. If they come back later and audit you and nullify your deductions, you could likely avoid the penalties by documenting their non-response.
But I never claimed the FTC's non-response as a "defence". I only state that they didn't care enough to respond. So much for government serving the people.
<< <i>Who did you write to? Did you contact the FTC legal department and ask to whom your inquiry should be sent and what the proper form would be? Or did you just send a letter addressed to no one in particular to the general address of the FTC? Can you post the contents of that letter here? What, exactly was your inquiry? Did you consult with an attorney to make sure that you were doing things the right way? >>
<< <i>If you bleach a $1 bill and print something else on it to increase the face value, you have just created something that is not legally monetized. >>
Well, then, I guess I'm just going to have to go back to the idea of making my own paper. I mean, I'd hate to think I'm breaking the law.
You state that you believe that it is legal for you to produce these and purchasers (as well as secondary market purchasers) have relied upon your assertations that it is legal for you to produce these without the copy stamp. If you have not really done your homework, and have nothing more than the FTC's failure to respond to letters that may or may not have been properly addressed and may or may not have been in the proper format, can they really rely on your statement that it is legal to produce these coins? And the flippers who cite your assertions that the production of these items does not violate the Hobby Protection Act and sell on the secondary market, and those who rely on it to purchase on the secondary market... can they rely on your statements? Other than send these two letters (and Lord only knows what was in those letters), what did you do to ensure that it was legal for you to produce these coins without a copy stamp? Yeah, I know... none of my business.
<< <i>The only D Carr thread that I think should go poof is this one. It's not serving much purpose and starting to get a little too personal. >>
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>The fact of the matter is that he is altering actual US coins to manipulate them to create the appearance of what would be THE key date coin in the series, a coin that is known to have been produced by the mint and is believed to still exist, even though all coins were recalled. >>
"Believed" to exist ? The US Treasury doesn't think so, and that's what counts.
>>
The current existence of a genuine, mint-struck 1964-D Peace dollar has never been proven or disproven. The Mint has stated that none still exist, but some people do not believe that the Mint is always infallible or always truthful.
The only thing that can be said with certainty is that, at present. none are publicly known to exist.
TD
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.
Comments
<< <i> He did not infer this at all.
the reader infers, not the writer. as the reader i inferred what you pasted, if that makes sense!!
Wishing and thinking these creations are counterfeit doesn't make them so. Not even close. And if so the Secret Service would have knocked on Daniel's door way before now and/or shut down the sales. After all they had plenty of time and I'm sure plenty of tattletails "diming' out Mr. Carr.
The fact that even eBay has seen the light and is now allowing the sale of these coins after their over abundance of caution is another strike against the argument these are anything other than legitimate collectable coins.
<< <i>You know what they say about wishing in one hand and sh!ting in the other. See which one fills up first.
Wishing and thinking these creations are counterfeit doesn't make them so. Not even close. And if so the Secret Service would have knocked on Daniel's door way before now and/or shut down the sales. After all they had plenty of time and I'm sure plenty of tattletails "diming' out Mr. Carr.
The fact that even eBay has seen the light and is now allowing the sale of these coins after their over abundance of caution is another strike against the argument these are anything other than legitimate collectable coins. >>
Implied facts aren't always actual facts... there is a significant difference, one only experience can reveal.
<< <i>You know what they say about wishing in one hand and sh!ting in the other. See which one fills up first.
Wishing and thinking these creations are counterfeit doesn't make them so. Not even close. And if so the Secret Service would have knocked on Daniel's door way before now and/or shut down the sales. After all they had plenty of time and I'm sure plenty of tattletails "diming' out Mr. Carr.
The fact that even eBay has seen the light and is now allowing the sale of these coins after their over abundance of caution is another strike against the argument these are anything other than legitimate collectable coins. >>
Neither does wishing and thinking these creations legal make them legal. Until the Secret Service chimes in the question remains unanswered. The fact that they have not yet chimed in means nothing. They may not even have noticed us yet.
<< <i>Some of you are not paying attention. It's not me me not liking them and calling them counterfeit that makes them counterfeit. It's the fact that real dies that were used to strike real Peace dollars were used out side of the mint to strike coins that are exact copies of U.S. coins. That is counterfeit. >>
They were not "real" dies and they are not exact copies either. Host coin shows, and mint mark was altered at the very least. They are pretty, but looking closely and with an actual Peace
Dollar side by side, you can tell the difference no problem.
Edited to add per D Carr's website:
There may be subtle differences between coins. Since they are over-struck on existing coins, there may be faint evidence of the original coin design showing since the overstrike is usually not perfectly aligned with the original strike. A die gouge to the right of the "D" mint mark provides a marker for future identification as to the source. Also note the fourth extra ray below "ONE", as seen on the original 1921 issue and on some of the 1935-S issue.
They're not the keystone cops. Their lack of a response is a response.
And a year from now their 'response' will remain the same. A deafening sound of silence is all you will get.
<< <i>"Until the Secret Service chimes in the question remains unanswered. The fact that they have not yet chimed in means nothing. They may not even have noticed us yet.
They're not the keystone cops. Their lack of a response is a response.
And a year from now their 'response' will remain the same. A deafening sound of silence is all you will get. >>
You have never worked in a Federal capacity... it's quite obvious. Why do you continue to argue something when you're obviously unfamiliar with an agencies standard operating procedures?
<< <i>Some of you are not paying attention. It's not me me not liking them and calling them counterfeit that makes them counterfeit. It's the fact that real dies that were used to strike real Peace dollars were used out side of the mint to strike coins that are exact copies of U.S. coins. That is counterfeit. >>
Maybe you're the one not paying attention, to your own nonsensical definition of what constitutes a counterfeit:
<<If the mint does not make it and it is made by a man outside the mint......IT'S COUNTERFIET !!!! >>
<< <i>Some of you are not paying attention. It's not me me not liking them and calling them counterfeit that makes them counterfeit. It's the fact that real dies that were used to strike real Peace dollars were used out side of the mint to strike coins that are exact copies of U.S. coins. That is counterfeit. >>
I don't think you are paying attention. Let me repeat myself...
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>
<< <i>Some of you are not paying attention. It's not me me not liking them and calling them counterfeit that makes them counterfeit. It's the fact that real dies that were used to strike real Peace dollars were used out side of the mint to strike coins that are exact copies of U.S. coins. That is counterfeit. >>
I don't think you are paying attention. Let me repeat myself...
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'? >>
If you argue long enough, everyone will eventually quit arguing and you will "WIN". It's a sound tactic... it also appears to be learned behaviour!
<< <i> Why can't we just accept reality and stop using the past to justify the present? >>
I could be wrong, but aren't most rules or laws based on or the result of a precedence or occurrence from the past?
- Bob -
MPL's - Lincolns of Color
Central Valley Roosevelts
<< <i>This NOT a post about the Carr dollar. This is a post how they shouldn't even be allowed and have NO place in numismatics or anywhere else as far as that goes >>
Oh and some of the other 100 or so were not about that??? lol
<< <i>
<< <i> Why can't we just accept reality and stop using the past to justify the present? >>
I could be wrong, but aren't most rules or laws based on or the result of a precedence or occurrence from the past? >>
Yes, and I believe most if not all of the examples were eventually prosecuted. Great point!
You also make a case for my other argument... use case law to argue the legality of the 64-d, not emotion. Another great point!
To answer your question, laws are based on contemporary cases which are the basis for case law (usually in a State or Federal Supreme court). I believe Precedence is what southerners say when they preface Barack Obama?
<< <i>If you argue long enough, everyone will eventually quit arguing and you will "WIN". It's a sound tactic... it also appears to be learned behaviour!
Sometimes I repeat myself. Sometimes I repeat myself.
<< <i>
<< <i> Why can't we just accept reality and stop using the past to justify the present? >>
I could be wrong, but aren't most rules or laws based on or the result of a precedence or occurrence from the past? >>
You are not wrong.
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Thanks Dimeman!
....it will never end ...........will it ?
the feller wishes ALL the threads would go poof ; and then throws fire and brimstone onto the blaze like gasoline
<< <i>
<< <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. >>
camp. Dan is very intelligent, very knowledgeable in the field of metallurgy, and a valuable
addition to numismatics.
The fact of the matter is that he is altering actual US coins to manipulate them to create the appearance of what would be THE key date coin in the series, a coin that is known to have been produced by the mint and is believed to still exist, even though all coins were recalled. Did Mr. Carr seek legal counsel regarding this endeavor? Did an attorney give him a written legal opinion that these items would not violate the HPA? If he came to me, I would have advised that they most likely would violate the HPA. I think that most lawyers would agree. He sent a letter and receiving no response, he acted. That course of conduct may well come back to bite him in the behind.
The other question to consider is this: if the FTC comes down on DC and requires him to disclose the owners/purchasers and they go after them, will the members here who bought these "coins" surrender them or hide them?
Probably time for their own separate forum.
roadrunner
<< <i>Remember that the 1933 Double Eagle was floating around freely through the 1940s; it took many years before the government decided to clamp down on the legality of these pieces. I'm not saying that will happen here, but merely reminding folks that just because the government hasn't seen to cracking down on these *yet* is no guarantee it won't in the future. How long did it take to go after the Liberty Dollar? A few years if I recall. >>
The Wheel Of Justice Grind Slowly, But They Grind Exceedingly Fine.
Just ask the Switt family.
<< <i>Remember that the 1933 Double Eagle was floating around freely through the 1940s; it took many years before the government decided to clamp down on the legality of these pieces. I'm not saying that will happen here, but merely reminding folks that just because the government hasn't seen to cracking down on these *yet* is no guarantee it won't in the future. How long did it take to go after the Liberty Dollar? A few years if I recall. >>
Totally different situation. The government maintained that the 1933 Saints were never issued so those in private hands were stolen property.
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>Totally different situation. The government maintained that the 1933 Saints were never issued so those in private hands were stolen property. >>
But the "lessons" here are the same: Just because the government turns a blind eye to something at first doesn't mean it always will.
Anyway, the money you sent me to secure your orders is safe with me, I want you to rest assured in that. Nothing changed, there. For any new customers, I'm sorry to have to inform you, the prices just went up. That's, again, because I'm anticipating paper-processing costs, now. The $2 Notes are now $20 per, up from only $10 per. I know what many of you are thinking, that's still a bargain for these. Hey, I'm out to satisfy. Please place your orders, now!
Edited to correct sentence structure because I'm such a darn perfectionist and there's nothing anybody can do about it...
<< <i>I'd just like to inform all of my customers that there may be somewhat of a delay in the initial release of my fantasy $2 Red-Seal U.S. Notes. You see, I've got the scanner and the genuine notes to make the copies from, but, darn if I still can't find the right paper! It looks like I'm just going to have to make my own paper, which, understandably, may take some time. That's principally because I've never made paper.
Anyway, the money you sent me to secure your orders is safe with me, I want you to rest assured in that. Nothing changed, there. For any new customers, I'm sorry to have to inform you, the prices just went up. That's, again, because I'm anticipating paper-processing costs, now. The $2 Notes are now $20 per, up from only $10 per. I know what many of you are thinking, that's still a bargain for these. Hey, I'm out to satisfy. Please place order yours, now! >>
Hey, kurtdog, here's an idea... just get some real $1.00 or $2.00 notes and bleach the paper (you can call it "processing" it) and just print your notes on that paper. Since the paper is real US notes, its still real US tender and you can't be accused of counterfieting because its just an altered note! Don'tcha just love the logic?
<< <i>There is something that needs to be addressed here... a number of posters (and I have been guilty of this as well) talk about the secret service as being responsible for the enforcement here. They cite the fact that the SS has not shut him down for counterfieting and that therefore, these products must be legal. The SS does not enforce the Hobby Protection Act. It is the Federal Trade Commission. The "fact" that no one has come knocking at the door *YET* does not mean that these products do not violate the HPA. What Mr. Carr should have done is write to the FTC and formally request a "No Action" letter and not produced these items until and unless he received such No Action letter. If he unkowningly made an inquiry to the wrong department and assumed that since he received no reply that everything was hunky-dory and that he had carte blanche to create and sell these items, then he was short-sighted and wrong. >>
Two separate letters of inquiry (one sent via Fed-Ex) were delivered to the FTC. They chose not to reply.
<< <i>The fact of the matter is that he is altering actual US coins to manipulate them to create the appearance of what would be THE key date coin in the series, a coin that is known to have been produced by the mint and is believed to still exist, even though all coins were recalled. >>
"Believed" to exist ? The US Treasury doesn't think so, and that's what counts.
<< <i>The other question to consider is this: if the FTC comes down on DC and requires him to disclose the owners/purchasers and they go after them, will the members here who bought these "coins" surrender them or hide them? >>
The government is coming for your gold also.
Without this level of interest and controversy, I doubt they would be nearly as appreciated!
Miles
<< <i>
<< <i>I'd just like to inform all of my customers that there may be somewhat of a delay in the initial release of my fantasy $2 Red-Seal U.S. Notes. You see, I've got the scanner and the genuine notes to make the copies from, but, darn if I still can't find the right paper! It looks like I'm just going to have to make my own paper, which, understandably, may take some time. That's principally because I've never made paper.
Anyway, the money you sent me to secure your orders is safe with me, I want you to rest assured in that. Nothing changed, there. For any new customers, I'm sorry to have to inform you, the prices just went up. That's, again, because I'm anticipating paper-processing costs, now. The $2 Notes are now $20 per, up from only $10 per. I know what many of you are thinking, that's still a bargain for these. Hey, I'm out to satisfy. Please place order yours, now! >>
Hey, kurtdog, here's an idea... just get some real $1.00 or $2.00 notes and bleach the paper (you can call it "processing" it) and just print your notes on that paper. Since the paper is real US notes, its still real US tender and you can't be accused of counterfieting because its just an altered note! Don'tcha just love the logic? >>
Removing ink from a bill is akin to removing metal from a coin. I never removed any metal from the coins I overstruck (I never added metal or melted or heated them either).
If you bleach a $1 bill and print something else on it to increase the face value, you have just created something that is not legally monetized.
But if you take a $2 bill and over-print National Parks designs on them (without changing the face value), you can sell them on television.
Dan, alterered a coin that was already legal tender. He did not change the denomination of that coin or produce a new coin and try to pass it as a monetized coin.
I personally have no problem with the Carr dollar. I do have a problem with people calling it couterfeit and therefor calling Dan a counterfeiter. The coin is simply a genuine coin with an altered date and still worth one dollar face value as far as the U.S. government is concerned.
<< <i>
<< <i>I'd just like to inform all of my customers that there may be somewhat of a delay in the initial release of my fantasy $2 Red-Seal U.S. Notes. You see, I've got the scanner and the genuine notes to make the copies from, but, darn if I still can't find the right paper! It looks like I'm just going to have to make my own paper, which, understandably, may take some time. That's principally because I've never made paper.
Anyway, the money you sent me to secure your orders is safe with me, I want you to rest assured in that. Nothing changed, there. For any new customers, I'm sorry to have to inform you, the prices just went up. That's, again, because I'm anticipating paper-processing costs, now. The $2 Notes are now $20 per, up from only $10 per. I know what many of you are thinking, that's still a bargain for these. Hey, I'm out to satisfy. Please place order yours, now! >>
Hey, kurtdog, here's an idea... just get some real $1.00 or $2.00 notes and bleach the paper (you can call it "processing" it) and just print your notes on that paper. Since the paper is real US notes, its still real US tender and you can't be accused of counterfieting because its just an altered note! Don'tcha just love the logic? >>
Great idea, Ray! And it's economical, too, given the cost of bleach!
<< <i>Two separate letters of inquiry (one sent via Fed-Ex) were delivered to the FTC. They chose not to reply. >>
OK, so send the IRS a letter asking if its OK if you don't pay your taxes this year and when you don't get a reply, don't pay your taxes. I guarantee that neither the IRS nor the US Tax Court would accept the defence of "I wrote to you and asked if it was OK and since you did not respond, I assumed that you were OK with it."
Who did you write to? Did you contact the FTC legal department and ask to whom your inquiry should be sent and what the proper form would be? Or did you just send a letter addressed to no one in particular to the general address of the FTC? Can you post the contents of that letter here? What, exactly was your inquiry? Did you consult with an attorney to make sure that you were doing things the right way?
<< <i>
<< <i>Two separate letters of inquiry (one sent via Fed-Ex) were delivered to the FTC. They chose not to reply. >>
OK, so send the IRS a letter asking if its OK if you don't pay your taxes this year and when you don't get a reply, don't pay your taxes. I guarantee that neither the IRS nor the US Tax Court would accept the defence of "I wrote to you and asked if it was OK and since you did not respond, I assumed that you were OK with it." >>
Write to the IRS with a very specific question about tax deductions. If they don't reply, file your taxes as you believe proper. If they come back later and audit you and nullify your deductions, you could likely avoid the penalties by documenting their non-response.
But I never claimed the FTC's non-response as a "defence". I only state that they didn't care enough to respond. So much for government serving the people.
<< <i>Who did you write to? Did you contact the FTC legal department and ask to whom your inquiry should be sent and what the proper form would be? Or did you just send a letter addressed to no one in particular to the general address of the FTC? Can you post the contents of that letter here? What, exactly was your inquiry? Did you consult with an attorney to make sure that you were doing things the right way? >>
That is not your business.
<< <i>If you bleach a $1 bill and print something else on it to increase the face value, you have just created something that is not legally monetized. >>
Well, then, I guess I'm just going to have to go back to the idea of making my own paper. I mean, I'd hate to think I'm breaking the law.
<< <i>No. I'm with Dan. >>
Congratulations! I always thought you two would make a great couple!
<< <i>The only D Carr thread that I think should go poof is this one. It's not serving much purpose and starting to get a little too personal. >>
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>The only D Carr thread that I think should go poof is this one. It's not serving much purpose and starting to get a little too personal. >>
Is this really a DCarr thread... isn't this more of an anti-DCarr thread? I'm so confused!
OK...everyone who approves of these fantasy pieces, this side of the forum...everyone who is opposed, this side.
There, stay in your respective corners until the bell rings.
"Keep your malarkey filter in good operating order" -Walter Breen
<< <i>
<< <i>The fact of the matter is that he is altering actual US coins to manipulate them to create the appearance of what would be THE key date coin in the series, a coin that is known to have been produced by the mint and is believed to still exist, even though all coins were recalled. >>
"Believed" to exist ? The US Treasury doesn't think so, and that's what counts.
>>
The current existence of a genuine, mint-struck 1964-D Peace dollar has never been proven or disproven. The Mint has stated that none still exist, but some people do not believe that the Mint is always infallible or always truthful.
The only thing that can be said with certainty is that, at present. none are publicly known to exist.
TD