I think it's important to internalize that stamps are like a form of currency[0]. Like you stick it on the envelope to pay the shipping fee. There are tax stamps/revenue stamps which are used to pay for things in a way that is hard for the fee collector themselves to steal.
I applied for a visa-related thing a month or so ago. The fee was 6000 yen, so I stuck 2 3000 yen stamps on the application form. I had paid the application fee, the money can't be stolen by the public servant taking the application form (well, not easily, at least, I'm sure there are sleight of hands), and the purchasing of the stamp happens at a trusted third party that could commit fraud but is heavily incentivized not to (on account of me being able to directly cite where I bought it, and the agency knowing who I am).
[0]: Pedants who want to say it isn't or that it's _exactly_ a form of currency: please go away
>I think it's important to internalize that stamps are like a form of currency[0].
So much so that the original Ponzi scheme involved arbitraging the price of stamps via international reply coupons (and then promptly got way out of hand).
I doubt they ever prosecute anyone for counterfeiting a stamp, but if the law only forbid counterfeiting 100 stamps a counterfeiter would do 99 at a time.
They hire someone to take each batch from them. So at best, you can only ever prosecute a fall guy, not the skilled counterfeiter.
In essence, it's easier to make any counterfeiting illegal, and then not prosecute the person who once prints a picture of a stamp and tapes it to a letter. Trying to make counterfeiting legal in certain situations can be abusable.
And so they get prosecuted for incitement, conspiracy and organized crime.
Seriously, as a rule of thumb, none of those extremely simple loopholes you can come up in five seconds of thinking work: there people were before you, and they too could think (even though in case of lawmakers it can sometimes be hard to imagine that they can actually think).
If selling 99 stamps is legal, I'm not inciting them to crime, I'm selling them the maximum allowable amount that isn't a crime. Similar with conspiracy and organized crime.
And yeah, these loopholes don't work because people tried them and now counterfeiting one stamp is illegal. That's my point.
My other post makes my actual point, this is just for fun.
Imagine I own a setup that allows me to produce counterfeit stamps. Every fifteen minutes I make 99 and then place them for sale. I sell them, then make 99 new counterfeit stamps and repeat the process.
All the risk is offloaded to anyone that buys more than 99 stamps, while the person capable of making them is safe barring some sort of mistake. All their money comes from a legal sale, meaning they're under no obligation to make sure their customer isn't reselling the stamps. So if the middle men gets arrested, the operation can continue immediately.
Yes, I can think of issues too, like eventually they stake out your location (though they'd probably need warrants of some sort.) I still think it shows that allowing someone to counterfeit 99 stamps opens loopholes the current law stops.
Oh, and from your other post, there are $9 and $30 stamps, meaning this method could counterfeit over $10,000 an hour.
So ignoring that you're the only one that suggested smaller batches would be entirely legal:
All a prosecutor needs to do is show that you made two batches. If you make a batch every 15 minutes, how do you expect not to get caught?
If they catch the middleman delivering two batches, and the middleman snitches, you're done. Or even if they have one batch, but they get offered a reward to say where they got it. Then the authorities only need to get evidence you made 1 more stamp.
And don't tell me you're going to sell to a brand new middleman every 15 minutes.
No, my entire thing has always been based on possession being the crime. The current law is written to outlaw creation too, but I don't see how that could stay if creating 99 counterfeits is legal, as proving this was the 100th counterfeit you made would be a challenge.
Even if the middleman flipped, unless you made them in front of them you could say you got them from someone else.
Yes, they may eventually be able to pin it on you, but under the current system they can instantly charge anyone that is a serious counterfeiter and ignore someone who counterfeit one stamp. They don't need to bother making someone flip then somehow proving you've made at least 100 stamps.
I will say, this explains most of our disagreement, with a bit more coming from my opinion that making this a misdemeanor would still allow some abuse, depending on the punishments.
And I'm done, I no longer find this fun. I don't think the current law is being used to unjustly punish people, and that's good enough for me.
> No, my entire thing has always been based on possession being the crime.
Then why did you say "if the law only forbid counterfeiting 100 stamps"??
I'm done too, because my entire argument was based on what you actually said, not what you secretly meant and never clarified.
Also the "unless you made them in front of them" excuse about proof could be applied to making even 1. You're grasping at straws to make conviction sound more difficult than it is.
This may shock you, but I spent about twenty seconds on my original comment. I certainly didn't have an editor go over it to ensure my actual point of view was getting across. Hell, you can see the edit I made showing when I realized we may be talking past eachother with possess/create.
>Even after that, you were still insisting there were loopholes.
After clarifying my position, I figured you'd either reply with "yes, we were on different wavelengths" or you'd accept we were talking about possession. So when you continued, I assumed you were talking about possession too. My mistake.
Yes, the parents question is meant as "where did the idea that doing 99 'at a time' would somehow bypass a law about >= 100 being illegal comes from?".
How would having 99 counterfeit stamps violate that law?
I think you/the other person (assuming that's what their question meant) took it as "each page printed only has 99, but they're still printing multiple pages per run" while I meant "each run has 99 stamps, then they distribute them."
edit or you think the law could be based on how many counterfeit stamps they had made, not possession. Dunno, we're really spending too much time attacking my bullshit hypothetical that was meant to say "make it hard for the law to have a loophole."
> each run has 99 stamps, then they distribute them
In that case they're not making much money per batch and they have to only ever get caught once in their life, so it's not much difference to them, it only makes a significant difference to someone that isn't mass-producing stamps.
> Dunno, we're really spending too much time attacking my bullshit hypothetical that was meant to say "make it hard for the law to have a loophole."
Well I don't think the original had any loopholes, which is why I'm pushing back on your attempt to say that by pointing out a loophole.
The original or real law considers counterfeiting one stamp a crime, which I think is fine.
I took issue with somebody criticizing that law by saying only counterfeiting one stamp shouldn't be a crime. So I pointed out that if you made some arbitrary non-one number the breaking point you're opening up loopholes. I'm not trying to introduce loopholes, the law is what it is to prevent loopholes.
And the ridiculousness of counterfeiting one stamp being a felony is avoided by not prosecuting anyone who only counterfeits one stamp.
there are countries where it’s not a serious crime to counterfeit postage? I think the penalty is double (up to 10 years) in the United Kingdom for example.
For counterfeiting _A_ stamp? I guess in the US even breathing the wrong way is probably a serious federal felony.
Land of the free, and all that...