a use for '67 pennies

[Peckris 579]

I cannot believe you have wasted so many words on perpetuating an error! Sigh. Let me try and spend fewer words to explain it.

(1)No person shall, except under the authority of a licence granted by the Treasury, melt down or break up any metal coin which is for the time being current in the United Kingdom or which, having been current there, has at any time after 16th May 1969 ceased to be so.

Ok, let's break that down into little pieces.

1. (1)No person shall, except under the authority of a licence granted by the Treasury, melt down or break up any metal coin Shall we agree that part is clear enough?

2. which is for the time being That's legal terminology. It means not only "on the date the the Act was passed", but "on any date while this Act is in force." So, for example, you could insert today's date, and it still applies.

3. current in the United Kingdom We both agree that means "currency coins", yes?

4. This is the crucial part you're not getting. or which, having been current there, has at any time after 16th May 1969 ceased to be so. That's seems clear enough to me. But just in case, I will translate or paraphrase : "any coin that has been currency (in UK) but has been made non-currency since 16th May 1969." That doesn't include the farthing. However, it includes your penny, your halfpenny, your halfcrown, your threepenny bit, your decimal halfpenny, your large 50p, 10p, 5p coins ... all of which ceased to be currency AFTER 16th May 1969, but all of which have been currency at some time.

Sigh.

peckris I cannot believe you have wasted so many words on perpetuating an error! Sigh. Let me try and spend fewer words to explain it.

there are none so blind as those who wont see.........

the act of 1971 only applies to coins who were legal tender on the 31-8-1971.............thats it.

Show me the wording in the Act that says so? And show me the parts of the Act that have now been superseded in relation to melting or defacing coins?

The Act's wording SPECIFICALLY mentions the date 16th May 1969. It does NOT specifically mention the date 31st August 1971.

The words "wall" "fed" brick" "up" "I'm" "banging" "against" "a" "my" "with" and "head" come to mind. Rearrange those into a sentence. For now, I will leave you to your stubbornness. Sleep well.

[ski 1]

i dont need to show you peckris.......their in section 2 of this very act..........along with the note about the penny not being legal tender on this date.......................maybe you havent read it

i may be stubborn peckris,especially when i know what im saying is there in black and white for you to read, but im not rude............

enjoy youre sleep

[Sylvester 15]

Talk about the law being open to interpretation, hence so many unexpected convictions/or failed convictions!

[josie 8]

Penny farthing bike.

Just posting.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_tender#Commemorative_issues

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-circulating_legal_tender

Penny silver,penny copper,depositor from the bank 1860 to 1971 interest of just one old penny per year it could reach 240 pence in gold currency coin legal tender????.

Even there is no more old penny copper there is still maundy 1 penny,pennyweight,carat,troy ounce,ger rid of the one penny maundy is just like getting rid of the grain use in measuring the weight of silver and gold bullion,just a comment.

[Peckris 579]

i dont need to show you peckris.......their in section 2 of this very act..........along with the note about the penny not being legal tender on this date.......................maybe you havent read it

i may be stubborn peckris,especially when i know what im saying is there in black and white for you to read, but im not rude............

enjoy youre sleep

Thank you. Yes, a reasonable night's sleep. So, once more unto the fray...

I wish to make the following points :

ONE. I know perfectly well that the penny was demonetised on the 31st August 1971, along with the threepenny bit. That's never been an issue, so I'm not sure why you feel the need to raise it.

TWO. HOWEVER, it was current (legal tender) after the 16th May 1969 (until 31/8/71) and therefore falls within Section 10 of the Act. That is unquestionable and indisputable. The wording may be legalistic and a tad convoluted, but it is - when you dissect it - quite specific and clear.

THREE. The date of 31st August 1971 is irrelevant. The wording specifically refers to "current coins" at any time while the Act is in force; "OR WHICH" - very important legal clause signifying an exception to the previous statement, or an addition to it - "HAVING BEEN CURRENT THERE HAS AT ANY TIME AFTER 16TH MAY 1969, CEASED TO BE SO".

FOUR. That general wording, and that 1969 date, are extremely important legally. Without them, the Act would not apply to :

A) the decimal halfpenny (demonetised 1984)

the large 5 pence (demonetised 1990)

C) the large 10 pence (demonetised 1992)

D) the large 50 pence (demonetised 1997)

The Act also has to sweep up and include NEW current coins without having to specifically mention them :

E) 25 pence (1972)

F) 20 pence (1982)

G) £1 coin (1983)

H) £2 coins (passim, up to and including the bimetallic)

So, with all that in mind, let me walk you through the story of a fictional bag of 1967 pennies, melted down for copper.

• were they legal tender on 31/8/71? NO BUT

• had they been current at any time? YES

• had they ceased to be current after 16th May 1969? YES

Therefore the Act applies to them.

Quod Erat Demonstrandum

[josie 8]

I will just keep in mind this thread.

In the past cutting of silver penny to make a farthing or half penny is punishable.

Cannot cut up new halfpence to make 2 old halpenny,same with newpence that is 2.4 or 2d for one pence,and payment of multiple of new halfpenny and pence but the old halfpenny and penny is in the new halfpence in unit or amount only but the old coin penny itself???? just posting,maybe it is still legal tender only inside the new halfpence or pence till now,just a comment.

[ski 1]

So, with all that in mind, let me walk you through the story of a fictional bag of 1967 pennies, melted down for copper.

fictional bags of pennies can be melted down, because pennies are not covered by this act.

the date of 31-8-1971 is very revelant to everything associated with this act as, thats when it commenced!.

i agree with you peckris about new coins and the subsequent demonitization of other coins as you ve listed. indeed i wrote just that in my first post.....maybe you missed that. yes there are bills passed through the houses of parliment all the time and i read one just a few weeks ago about the royal mints request to make a new coin for the 2012 olympics whech fell outside of the 1971 acts dimensions and weights criteria for a coin of legal tender, the bill was passed.

Now that we agree peckris, that you can melt down fictional bags of pennies, and break them up.

Moving back to the penny farthing bike........the question was asked was it illegal to drill a hole in the penny?

clearly not.

and that ma lord is the case for the defence

[Sylvester 15]

C) the large 10 pence (demonetised 1992)

D) the large 50 pence (demonetised 1997)

The large 10p was demonetised at the end of June 1993, I have a faint recollection (but I may be wrong) that the large 50p was demonetised in 1998.

[ski 1]

the bill i was refering to in my previous post has now moved onto the house of lords and has completed 2 readings.

you can read here... http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2010-11/coinagemeasurement.html

a coin or coins of 1kg or more.....were gonna need bigger pockets

[davidrj 194]

the bill i was refering to in my previous post has now moved onto the house of lords and has completed 2 readings.

you can read here... http://services.parl...easurement.html

a coin or coins of 1kg or more.....were gonna need bigger pockets

Oh dear!

I stand my belief that it's not a coin if I can't use it to buy a bottle of milk from the local shop

David

Edited August 16, 2011 by davidrj

[josie 8]

Not exceeding 1 kg, in the past now it might exceed to one kg,that is 2.2lbs or more for a sinlge coin??? or number of smallest coin they can produce per 1 kg. or more cartwheel???

[Peckris 579]

So, with all that in mind, let me walk you through the story of a fictional bag of 1967 pennies, melted down for copper.

fictional bags of pennies can be melted down, because pennies are not covered by this act.

Not true. I've already explained it to you in detail. I'm not going to waste my energies again.

the date of 31-8-1971 is very revelant to everything associated with this act as, thats when it commenced!.

Which therefore makes the date of 16th May 1969, SPECIFICALLY mentioned in the Act, completely irrelevant, of course. By the way, did you know that Acts can be retrospective? Oh, you didn't? Oh, well then. Let me tell you - they can be. Especially those that refer to dates that predate the coming into force of the Act. Oh! As this one does!!!! Well!

i agree with you peckris about new coins and the subsequent demonitization of other coins as you ve listed. indeed i wrote just that in my first post.....maybe you missed that. yes there are bills passed through the houses of parliment all the time and i read one just a few weeks ago about the royal mints request to make a new coin for the 2012 olympics whech fell outside of the 1971 acts dimensions and weights criteria for a coin of legal tender, the bill was passed.

Now that we agree peckris, that you can melt down fictional bags of pennies, and break them up.

You can do what the **** you like with fictional bags of pennies. Mine were just illustrating the facts and implementation of the Act to you in a simple and logical way. Real pennies cannot be melted down, of course, since they ceased to be legal tender AFTER 16th May 1969. It's there in the Act. How many times have I pointed this out to you? More times than I have the energy for.

Moving back to the penny farthing bike........the question was asked was it illegal to drill a hole in the penny?

clearly not.

We agreed on that a long time ago. As 'drilling a hole' appears not to be covered by the Act, unlike the penny which is. (If you care to read and analyse it.)

and that ma lord is the case for the defence

I've had enough of arguing with you ski. I've tried to explain the meaning of the Act to you, in every way I can think up. You can't or won't understand. So be it. I don't want to seriously fall out with you, so I'm going to retire from this. I've said my last word on the matter, but I'm not yielding truth to you. If you want to interpret my ensuing silence as giving way, then be my guest. It's not so, but I have no more energy to give to this.

Edited August 16, 2011 by Peckris

[ski 1]

mr peckris sir.....my posts here have never meant to in any way offend. ive not tried to offend in any way, if however they have.....please accept my apologies.

please may i also add, whilst we each have our own view on this subject, i do respect your view, its great that we have such a forum for enjoying such debate.........and ive enjoyed debating this with you.

youre original comment regarding the penny farthing bycycle was something along the lines off " it deserved more attention than that"..........well i guess weve both contributed to giving it some attention. youre right its now time to move on.

like all good debate, when it finishes, whether in agreement or not, its good if both parties can accept the hand of friendship, and whilst i also finish now, i do so with the hand of friendship. thank you.

i read all your posts with a great deal of interest and have learnt a lot from your knowledge of coins, i hope that continues ...................SKI.

Oh dear!

I stand my belief that it's not a coin if I can't use it to buy a bottle of milk from the local shop

David

i think by 2012, some scientist or government minister will have decided milk isnt safe to drink and tescos will have forced all local shops out of business.

[£400 for a Penny ? 0]

Is there an executive summary (no more than 20 words) of what this spat was about - to see if it's worth reading in full ?

[Colin G. 147]

Is there an executive summary (no more than 20 words) of what this spat was about - to see if it's worth reading in full ?

I had a read earlier and got lost after about 4 posts

But then again it is me

[Cerbera100 0]

Is there an executive summary (no more than 20 words) of what this spat was about - to see if it's worth reading in full ?

Ski said something that Peck disagreed with, and both believe themselves to be right... Honours even after Round 1!

There...! 18 words and a number!

[£400 for a Penny ? 0]

Very good. Well perhaps I ought to look into the matter then....

[Cerbera100 0]

Its a hard slog with lots of bold and counter-bold - not quite to the level of the sign above of the door of Room 101, but getting close!

[£400 for a Penny ? 0]

Hells teeth.

I've come in after a trying day baling straw in the mid summer deluge and i've launched into the thread with a glass of red and a salami platter to hand.

My face slipped off the front of my head after about 6 posts. I can't follow that. I was issued with a fully functioning new brain at birth, but I have mis-used it and it no longer can cope with such circuitous gobbledegook.

I need to know two things;

Was this a collision of well meaning pedants, If so, who won ?

Can I drill holes in my pennies or not ?

[Cerbera100 0]

Hells teeth.

I've come in after a trying day baling straw in the mid summer deluge and i've launched into the thread with a glass of red and a salami platter to hand.

My face slipped off the front of my head after about 6 posts. I can't follow that. I was issued with a fully functioning new brain at birth, but I have mis-used it and it no longer can cope with such circuitous gobbledegook.

I need to know two things;

Was this a collision of well meaning pedants, If so, who won ?

Can I drill holes in my pennies or not ?

You got as far as 6?! That deserves congratulations if nothing else!

In answer to your questions in turn - Yes, I didnt get far enough to find out, and I think so in that you are not 'breaking' it!

Though in my view, if putting a stamp on an envelope upside-down is treasonous, surely drilling a hole in Queenie's head should be as well?!