I guess there’s some wiggle room with regards to intent and whether it could be argued that adding Nazi iconography (moreso than trump’s face as-is) to bills renders them unfit to be kept in circulation.
If my personal freedom was on the line here, I’m sticking with “idk it was like that when I got it - can I get a new one please?” vs “ooh come on, it’s fiiine, you can still spend this!” but interpreting the law isn’t my specialty, so grain of salt.
Then do the thing? Is super duper illegal different from regular illegal? Why are we bashing heads over the use of ‘super duper’ in NotTheOnion in the first place?
You ever see one of those souvenir penny stamp machines? It’s simply not illegal depending on your intent. People often think “intent” is just some weird “technicality” but it’s part of the law.
Why are you wrapping random words with quotation marks? It reads like it’s being spoken aloud by Dr. Evil. Anyway, gonna go with the wording of the law itself over a wiki article about it:
This one’s specific to coins. Anecdotally I was always told they were legal because pennies are explicitly an exception to that law. So, it’s either that or it’s in j-walking territory where it may be illegal, but no one gives a shit enough to enforce it.
…also coins aren’t really relevant here anyway - the conversation is about defacing paper bills if they decide to soil them with Trump’s traitorous image.
Except by the wording of the specific law in question. o_O
I’m not seeing the disconnect here. Nor the need for the disconnect in the first place: the first post I made here was to encourage people to deface prints of Trump. If you disagree that there’s a legal barrier to doing so, then cool - all the more reason to deface our traitor in chief.
YES. My suggestion was to mark Trump as the Nazi he is - currency with Nazi iconography on it is not fit to be reissued. It’s a petty protest, but the point is to make the proposed new bills inconvenient and convey a clear message until they’re inevitably pulled.
18 U.S. Code § 333 - Mutilation of national bank obligations
I guess there’s some wiggle room with regards to intent and whether it could be argued that adding Nazi iconography (moreso than trump’s face as-is) to bills renders them unfit to be kept in circulation.
If my personal freedom was on the line here, I’m sticking with “idk it was like that when I got it - can I get a new one please?” vs “ooh come on, it’s fiiine, you can still spend this!” but interpreting the law isn’t my specialty, so grain of salt.
We’re a long way from “super duper illegal” now aren’t we? Intent is everything. If you’re not attempting fraud nobody will care.
Then do the thing? Is super duper illegal different from regular illegal? Why are we bashing heads over the use of ‘super duper’ in NotTheOnion in the first place?
You ever see one of those souvenir penny stamp machines? It’s simply not illegal depending on your intent. People often think “intent” is just some weird “technicality” but it’s part of the law.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elongated_coin
Why are you wrapping random words with quotation marks? It reads like it’s being spoken aloud by Dr. Evil. Anyway, gonna go with the wording of the law itself over a wiki article about it:
18 U.S. Code § 331 - Mutilation, diminution, and falsification of coins
This one’s specific to coins. Anecdotally I was always told they were legal because pennies are explicitly an exception to that law. So, it’s either that or it’s in j-walking territory where it may be illegal, but no one gives a shit enough to enforce it.
…also coins aren’t really relevant here anyway - the conversation is about defacing paper bills if they decide to soil them with Trump’s traitorous image.
Which is not at all illegal by any standard you’ve provided yet.
Except by the wording of the specific law in question. o_O
I’m not seeing the disconnect here. Nor the need for the disconnect in the first place: the first post I made here was to encourage people to deface prints of Trump. If you disagree that there’s a legal barrier to doing so, then cool - all the more reason to deface our traitor in chief.
Are you intending to render the bill unfit to be reissued?
YES. My suggestion was to mark Trump as the Nazi he is - currency with Nazi iconography on it is not fit to be reissued. It’s a petty protest, but the point is to make the proposed new bills inconvenient and convey a clear message until they’re inevitably pulled.