Daniel Carr Overstrikes - *is It Legal*

As would be any 1964 Peace dollars, but it doesn't mean they don't exist.




And now you officially make no sense.

My point is this, he's made coins that in fact did, and may, still exist. History has proven without a doubt that just because coins are ordered destroyed doesn't mean they are.

Let's forget about coins.

Let's assume for just a minute that a specific type of widget is being manufactured at Widget International Inc. The government orders them all destroyed and not to be released for whatever reason. Some guy buys an old widget machine at a surplus sale, and alters it to make copies of the "government ordered destroyed" widgets in his garage using previous model widgets melted down. Then starts selling them to the public. Shut him down or no?

I promised myself I wouldn't get dragged into this but it looks like I failed. I have two questions for the people who support/defend the fantasy pieces by Mr. Carr. We all know there are many fakes on ebay that are dated(or mint marked) years those coins were not minted. Do you support/defend the manufacturers of those fantasy pieces? If not can you explain how that's a different situation?

Good questions, ones that I have been afraid to ask, because I would be extremely disappointed if the difference is merely his nationality.

IMO his Peace dollar production is over the line, and needs to be stamped "COPY." Beyond that, though, could you explain what a 1964 Franklin half, or a 1909-O Morgan, is a counterfeit of?

Would a 1939 Australian Crown qualify?

Any coin minted outside the mint and without direct approval of the mint, Regardless of its denomination and country of origin is a fake,counterfeit or fantasy coin and should be marked as such.

As none of Mr Carrs coins are marked in this manner it is IMHO an attempt to deceive some of the more naive collectors out there.

If he gets away with the 64 Peace dollar what is next on the agenda
The 1933 Double Eagle may be the next new offering.

While the Government claims that all the 1964d Peace dollars were destroyed, and the Government also claiming that all the 1933 Double Eagles were also destroyed, useing weight instead of actually counting them all, never realized that Isreal Swift back in 1933 traded over 2 dozen pre 1933 Double Eagles for the new 1933 dated coins. I strongly believe that some 1964d Peace dollars escaped the melting pot with some trading of earlier Peace dollars, and security back then was nothing like today. Also, in 1964 Silver Dollars were all over the place, not to mention still available at your local bank and used as change from higher denomination currency at the 1964 Worlds Fair in NYC.

Back to Daniel Carr ~ I posted that I had a Washington D.C. State Quarter from him. I was wrong when I mentioned that he produced it, he Designed it for the National Collectors Mint in 2004, and they struck this garbage. I was also wrong in believing it was struck over a genuine Quarter (I confused this with other overstrikes)..

Please don't ask why I have this (and other garbage from the collectors mint) as I still have a bitter taste in my mouth everytime I look at it.

Ironically, that "51st State Quarter" would be worth a lot more if Daniel Carr had minted them himself...

People have asked what the difference between what Mr. Carr is doing and what the Chinese counterfeiters are doing and have even questioned whether the only difference is that they are Chinese and he isn't.

I'm curious what people would think about the Chinese counterfeiters if they stated right up front that their coins were replicas? Would it matter that somewhere down the line somebody else may try to see the replicas as legitimate coins as long as the counterfeiters themselves were being upfront about it and not trying to deceive anybody?

I guess what I'm saying is that some people seem to defend Mr. Carr's actions because he supposedly doesn't have an "intent" to deceive, regardless of whether or not he is creating items that could end up deceiving people down the road. Does that make what he is doing right, though? Or is it less about intent to deceive and more about simply creating counterfeit coins and putting them into the marketplace?

Or does it all hang on the slender thread that the coins he produces aren't "technically" counterfeit because of some slight difference such as the date or that he starts out with an original coin that he then alters? Again, some of the counterfeit Chinese coins that we have seen also could be considered "fantasy" pieces because the dates are wrong or the design is off, but I don't see anybody coming to their defense on the grounds that "any knowledgeable collector would know that it's not real."

Just some thoughts...