Defendant Convicted of Minting His Own Currency

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

The minting of Liberty dollars also appears to be in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 486:

Whoever, except as authorized by law, makes or utters or passes, or attempts to utter or pass, any coins of gold or silver or other metal, or alloys of metals, intended for use as current money, whether in the resemblance of coins of the United States or of foreign countries, or of original design, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

So making coins is not illegal, but making coins that are .....intended for use as CURRENT MONEY, whether in the resemblance of coins of the United States or of foreign countries, OR OF ORIGINAL DESIGN...... is illegal.

Wow, do you have any idea what this means? Take a US quarter out of your pocket and ask ten random people if it resembles a United States coin. Ten out of ten people will say something like "Yes, it does resemble a United States coin." Now use that coin to buy a gumball. You are now a Felon under US law you cited which clearly states that any and all coins that resemble US coins are illegal to use as money under the law.

Or at least that would be the case, except for one very major point! The little snippet of law you present is out of a bigger section very clearly titled "Counterfeiting and Forgery". That title clearly places the context of the law to be counterfeiting and forgery, not currency markets.

If that really is the law used to convict Liberty Dollar then they obviously have a slam dunk appeal & subsequent vindication. The $20 Liberty piece does not resemble any specific US coin, even though it does have a similar style. The criminal syndicate known as the Federal Reserve very well may have some text on US law books that says competing with their monopoly scheme is illegal, but the citation you use is not it.

Originally posted by Frontkjemper
Umm... Because they're not in the U.S.? What this case goes on about isn't a copyright issue but rather one of counterfeit. Since the coins resemble the U.S. coins, they can be mistakenly used as legal tender.

They are so much more valuable than the pot metal us coinage I don't think the holder of the liberty dollars would accidentally use them.
.

Originally posted by civilchallenger


If that really is the law used to convict Liberty Dollar then they obviously have a slam dunk appeal & subsequent vindication. The $20 Liberty piece does not resemble any specific US coin, even though it does have a similar style. The criminal syndicate known as the Federal Reserve very well may have some text on US law books that says competing with their monopoly scheme is illegal, but the citation you use is not it.

You completely missed the point then.

The section makes it illegal to use the coin as currency - "current money" - regardless of whether it resembles "official" US currency or not.

My point was that it appears that the conviction is for making the coinage to be used as currency - presumably as payment for goods and services.

Not for it's bullion content being traded on markets as such.

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
The section makes it illegal to use the coin as currency - "current money" - regardless of whether it resembles "official" US currency or not.

My point was that it appears that the conviction is for making the coinage to be used as currency - presumably as payment for goods and services.

Not for it's bullion content being traded on markets as such.

Well you seem totally right that the conviction appears to be for minting the coins as currency.

You are totally wrong that the citation regarding forgery had anything to do with anything but counterfeiting and forgery. If the section was about printing original currency, it would have been labeled "printing an original currency". And if you totally ignore the context as you really want me to do apparently, then you are left with a law that makes using any and all coins of all types completely illegal, and does absolutely nothing to say that only coins used as currency would be illegal. It very clearly states anything resembling a US coin is not allowed.

US mint coins resemble US coins more than any other coin there is in existence. They are the very definition of a US coin. Therefore the people most obviously violating the law cited are very certainly people using genuine US coins. That is to say if you avoid the context completely.

If you look at the context then you are left with a law regarding forgery and counterfeiting, which I say again has zero to do with Liberty Dollar since they very clearly were not involved in those activities.

Originally posted by quackers

Originally posted by PETROLCOIN
What is the problem? Also, this man did nothing illegal. Where in the Constitution does it say that citizens cannot coin their own money?

A jury of his peers says otherwise. If he had not broken the law, he would not have been convited right? As for the constitution, freedom of the press is there, freedom of speech is there, the right to bare arms is there, but last time I checked the right to mint your own currency wasn't.

From the same article

Article I, section 8, clause 5 of the United States Constitution delegates to Congress the power to coin money and to regulate the value thereof. This power was delegated to Congress in order to establish and preserve a uniform standard of value and to insure a singular monetary system for all purchases and debts in the United States, public and private. Along with the power to coin money, Congress has the concurrent power to restrain the circulation of money which is not issued under its own authority in order to protect and preserve the constitutional currency for the benefit of all citizens of the nation. It is a violation of federal law for individuals, such as von NotHaus, or organizations, such as NORFED, to create private coin or currency systems to compete with the official coinage and currency of the United States.

edit on 19-3-2011 by quackers because: (no reason given)

Can someone Please tell me why BerkShares can exist then? What is the difference? BerkShares have been in use for about 6 years and millions of them have been circulated. How can they do it if this is so illegal?

www.berkshares.org...

en.wikipedia.org...