The Chip Board
Custom Search
   


The Chip Board Archive 03

The language in the statute ...

... applicable to political items does not imply government production, John. The two provisions are separate and can be interpreted separately.

>> Do you think "only" those political items mentioned would be
>> included/considered if such false material other than what's noted
>> were to be challenged in court regarding authenticity?

Yes, I consider it quite likely, for the same reason I stated in my other post regarding numismatic items. When the statute spells out with such specificity what is covered, courts are very reluctant to include other things which are not included in the statutory list. You (and others) may think that doesn't make much sense (and I wouldn't disagree with you), but that's the way it works.

The problem with reliance on numismatic "experts" is this, John. A judge will hear from an expert what something means only when the statute itself requires interpretation. When the law includes an exclusive list of what constitutes the subject matter covered (such as this one does), the court can and probably should refuse to allow the parties to put on expert evidence for the purpose of interpreting the statute. The judicial response could well be, "I don't need an expert to tell me what a numismatic item is, because the legislature has already done it."

As for chips being considered "tokens", I don't agree. The only definition of "token" which is potentially applicable in this situation is "a piece resembling a coin". In my opinion, a chip do not "resemble" a coin ("a usually flat piece of metal issued by governmental authority as money").

>> I would think that if a judge were to ask in a court if a casino chip
>> is considered numismatic material, most every person he would ask would
>> answer yes.

If a judge were to ask in court if a casino chip is considered numismatic material, most people he asked wouldn't be able to answer because they'd have no idea what "numismatic" means at all. I'd be amazed if 25% of the people in this country could tell you that "numismatics" has something to do with coins. Hell, I'll bet that half the people in this country who collect coins don't know that they are "numismatists"!

Can we find a subject that we agree on for a change? <g> ----- jim o\-S

Messages In This Thread

Would this be wrong??? Don't Even Answer!
Re: Would this be wrong??? Don't Even Answer!
Re: I'll answer, anyway.
What do the Candidates say about Hobby Protection?
Re: What do the Candidates say about Hobby Protect
BIG "IMPORTANT" CORRECTION ? (Good Stuff
John, I'd be interested in ...
Re: John, I'd be interested in ...
Re: John, I'd be interested in ...
Re: John, I'd be interested in ...
"In exchange" means ...
Re: "In exchange" means ...
No "sides" here, JB ...
Re: No "sides" here, JB ...
Re: No "sides" here, JB ...
Re: No "sides" here, JB ...
Re: "In exchange" means ...
Re: "In exchange" means ...
I'd still rather hear from a legal ...
Glad that we heard from a Numismatist Expert.
This is a laudable purpose ...
Re: Sounds.....
Here's why the HPA does not apply ...
Re: Here's why the HPA does not apply ...
The government of Nevada cannot ...
Re: John, I'd be interested in ...
What the ANA considers "numismatic" ...
Re: Thank you for your interest, Gentlemen...
The successful use by David Ganz ...
Re: The successful use by David Ganz ...
"HOBBY PROTECTION ACT"
Re: The successful use by David Ganz ...
Thanks for sharing this information ...
Re: Thanks for sharing this information ...
Re: Thanks for sharing this information ...
Re: Thanks for sharing this information ...
There is a problem with your theory ...
Re: The successful use by David Ganz ...
Re: The successful use by David Ganz ...
Re: The successful use by David Ganz ...
The surest way for a lawyer to get ...
Re: The surest way for a lawyer to get ...
Re: The surest way for a lawyer to Jimmied
Re: The surest way for a lawyer to Jimmied
Re: The surest way for a lawyer to Jimmied
Re: The surest way for a lawyer to Jimmied
Re: The surest way for a lawyer to Jimmied
I don't doubt that there are ...
Re: I don't doubt that there are ...
A fake chip on a "wrong" color blank ...
It would be a whole different thing ...
Even better ...
Re: Even better ...
Re: Even better ...Peter
Superfluous statutory language ...
Re: Superfluous Me
And just exactly what depradations ...
Re: There wouldn't be depredations....
Ah, but think how easy harvesting ...
Re: Superfluous statutory language ...
Our Conflicts of Laws class was ...
Re: Superfluous statutory language ...
Are you sure Carl and Mel are not ...
Re: Jim + Gene, Please read the lead post...
If the chip was not "issued" by ...
The partial list of things I don't know ...
"inquire into the issue of lobbying"????
I feel like Brer Rabbit, with the HPA ...
Re: Thanks, Jim. You've made that very clear.
A very "lawyerly" choice of words ...
This is exactly what David Ganz said:
Now you're starting to get it, John ...
Re: Thanks for walking me through it.
The HPA also covers political pins ...
Actually more than just pins ...
Re: Actually would "include" a lot more
The language in the statute ...
Re: John, I'd be interested in ...
"Stretching the limits" ...
Re: "Stretching the limits" ...
Yes Mr. Borland... WRONG, WRONG, WRONG...

Copyright 2022 David Spragg